No. Sort of. I thought the policy of the old board was simply perfect. Good concept and good execution. You can be anonymous and happily read and post and do whatever you want in total privacy, until you decide you want to post something controversial or inflammatory.
That means that anonymity is completely within the control of the member. Want to be anonymous forever? You can. But not if you want to be confrontational. I think that's a fair tradeoff.
One of the big knocks on chat boards is that anyone can be brave from behind a keyboard. Having to put your name down is just one small thing that says you have to be willing to stand by your controversial or slamming comments. I don't think that's too much to ask. It's kind of a way of life for me.
And it is so easy to defeat search engines, I can't see how that can be a factor at all. Jo@nn K!ine. As to the very good point about OTHER people using your name in inflammatory posts, that would be easily addressed by a board rule - simple to understand and enforce - that says you cannot use a first and last name in a post. Or at least not without the engine-defeating mechanisms.
I think the registration process that requires valid info is a good improvement in terms of overall security. But I also think the board lost something when that became enough.
So ... how do I vote? Not quite 'no'. Not quite OK to put info in Profile area - why can't someone that posts only non-controversially have the option to stay completely anonymous?
Guess I'll vote 'no' as my closest choice.
J.o.a.n.n
|