I've worked for Don a number of times, and he is the most decent, unassuming guy in the the business. He's never a jerk to underlings, always fair and cheerful. The balloons must have driven him wild. Why CNN let him keep going is a mystery to me, but CNN is staffed by people who can't get work elsewhere.

CNN should have their act together to meet with something as stupid as some obsessive compulsive control freak jackass who forgets his meds prior to his big balloon moment.

"Obsessive compulsive control freak jackass who forgets his meds"? Clearly, the anonymous self-proclaimed psychiatric expert "R" has never been near a TV control room on a live show, where the stress level is a bit higher than that of a ladies' tea party.

I don't know Mischer, but what's the a big deal about a few unintentionally broadcast flying fucks? The guy says he regretted them, and he apologized. He was just trying to put on a good live show. It's just a lucky thing that the nannies at the FCC can't go after him or CNN for it. Enough is enough already in that department. And the same goes for anonymous weenies going on the attack here.

PS How zen-calm perfectly do you produce or direct live national TV shows, whomever you "R"?

Interesting logic there, Amy. Since you're implying that you'd be just as shrill a producer, it must follow that all of us would be so.

I hate to tell you, Amy, but yelling at underlings in the heat of a technical glitch does not a great producer make.

We're talking about balloons stuck in a net here, not the battle of the bulge.

The time for Don to be yelling about balloons, if at all, would be in pre-production. If the balloons were that important to him, he should have micro-managed the preliminary setup, so he wouldn't be caught cussing and screeching like a drunk homecoming queen during a live, nationally televised event.

Certainly, his behavior was in context insofar as it was the democratic national convention. Perhaps we should have ratings for their events, so viewers can be forewarned that something wildly inappropriate from the democrats arena might occur, redundant as that may sound, so at least it acknowledges what a viewer should expect.

Don was unprofessional, he embarrassed (presumably) CNN and the democratic party. This is what occurs when someone has risen past the level of their competence in their profession.

Don failed to learn that screaming and cussing during a live national event, surrounded by live microphones, is considered unprofessional... by most professionals.

Speaking on behalf of a major portion of the VRWC and the SoCal WingNuts Commission, this is nothing. It is funny though. Go balloons!

The balloons apparently weren't stuck in preproduction. I don't think "fuck" heard on the air is the end of western civilization. In fact, I'm sure "fuck" pales by comparison to what your children are saying to their friends right now. PS We're not discussing my potential second career as a live newscast producer, but if I were a live newscast producer, I'm sure I'd say fuck a fucking lot.

Amy, that is why you aren't a live newscast producer. You lack the ability to control your emotions when the pressure is mounting.

Not everyone can do it, Amy. That's why good television producers and technical directors make the big bucks, but please don't make the false assumption that because you couldn't do it, it can't be done.

The fact that the balloons failed to come down, and Don's following response, indicates that he did not manage the procedure appropriately, and/or competently.

Top producers make excellence a habit. Yelling and cussing during a broadcast is not what most would call a producer striving for excellence.

You might even say that, ironically, Don's lack of sensitivity for excellence is what put him in the position he finds himself in now.

It's why the balloons failed, and it's why he responded the way he did when under pressure.

Amateurs and incompetents yell, piss, moan, and make excuses and apologies. Professionals get the job done sans the dramatic behavior. They take full responsibility. That's why we call them "professionals."

If the balloons didn't work, it's Don's fault. He oversaw the hiring of his technical crew. If the balloons falling at a precise moment was that important, he should have done more to make sure there were no glitches. Once the live production is in full swing, it's out of his hands. Cussing won't change a... fucking thing.

btw, you may believe me or not, but a close relative of mine has handled national broadcasts that easily compare to the democratic national convention, and he has a little rule that he doesn't yell, curse at, or around, his employees before, during, or after a live nationally televised news event.

This may amaze you, but if he were to say any "balloons please" to any member of his staff during a live production, it would be just as, if not more effective, than saying "where's the fucking balloons."

I suppose in his world, doing so would be considered unprofessional, since his frustrations over technical matters should not be added to the event that he is being paid to produce efficiently. That is, the show was called "the national democratic convention," not "Don's Fucked Up Balloon Show."

Amy, since the dawn of television and radio, for many years, broadcasters and their producers and crew, managed to avoid flying titties and fucks when producing a national public broadcast. Much longer than what you are trying to assume is a new norm in public broadcasting.

The industry making an example of Don would be an effective, sobering alert. It is my opinion that the national broadcasting companies of this country should not allow Don to produce another fucking thing for quite a fucking while.

I've done camera on plenty of live sports trucks, with the TD or producer audio *not* on the air. The few that curse and scream are not well respected. It's pretty simple. As in most jobs in the world, I've noticed that technical crew enjoys working with non-hyper bosses. I don't think a high stress is level is reason to go off. Especially if he knew his audio was, or could be, on-air. I don't think I've ever heard of a heart-surgeon screaming Fuck Fuck! Where's my balloon(angio, that is)?!? Calm under pressure is a good thing.

Sure, calm under pressure is a good thing. And no, nobody wants to work with a screamer. But, if you listen to Kate (who says she's actually worked with Don), he sounds like a decent guy. R, in demanding that his head rolls, sounds like a washed-up wish-he-had-been -- how interesting that he doesn't put his name on his attacks.

For the record, I have been a producer. I found "sweet and calm" to be the best way to get the job done -- one which pays off in the crew being there for you when the chips are down like you never could have imagined.

One "naughty" word that slips out under pressure on live TV does not an asshole make. Sigh. What a humorless, Puritanical nation of insulted prissies we've become.

LEt's see--Don has done a number of Super Bowl half-times, two Olympic opening ceremonies, and umpteen award shows. Yes, I've hear him say the f word in the booth, but he's hardly alone in that regard. He's not a clipboard thrower, a chair basher, a coffee tosser or a hand pounder. He has a sterling rep, and if any of the above posters were really in TV, they would know that. But that would make for a pretty dull comments section.

I'm more intrigued that James Moll rather than Kerry's "film maker" daughter made the tribute video.

On the one hand, media were bitching about there not being any hard news at the convention. On the other hand, given the chance to report something, anything at all (Demo workshops, poll bounce, surprisingly liberal Kerry speech, etc.), they zero on on the fucking balloons. Amazing.

Calling to mind the opening sequence in Broadcast News, where Holly Hunter shows a clip of dominos to demonstrate how trivial the nightly news has become, but everyone in the audience snaps to abundant attention for the clip, fully riveted instead of filled with contempt.

"One "naughty" word that slips out under pressure on live TV does not an asshole make."

I don't recall saying "asshole," but I do recall using the word "unprofessional" quite a few times.
Maybe he wasn't saying it to his crew, maybe he was muttering to himself.

Whatever.

The fact remains that despite the fact that he may be a nice guy, good to his dog, and on and on, he behaved extremely unprofessionally, and should pay the price.

So he's done other things when he was younger. Perhaps he doesn't have the belly for it anymore. Setting professional standards, and not bending them simply because he was nice to one of you at some time past, is the way to keep our national broadcasts at a professional level.

"Sigh. What a humorless, Puritanical nation of insulted prissies we've become."

You like to paint in broad emotional strokes, Amy. You also seem to like to "broadcast" without "receiving," jumping all over the map with irrelevant accusations and presumptions.

Fair enough.

However, I just don't recommend that you produce a live national television event. It's just not you.

Calling to mind the opening sequence in Broadcast News..i>

Joseph,

What do you think the Devil is going to look like if he's around? Nobody is going to be taken in if he has a long, red, pointy tail. No. I'm semi-serious here. He will look attractive and he will be nice and helpful and he will get a job where he influences a great God-fearing nation and he will never do an evil thing... he will just bit by little bit lower standards where they are important.

LEt's see--Don has done a number of Super Bowl half-times, two Olympic opening ceremonies, and umpteen award shows. Yes, I've hear him say the f word in the booth, but he's hardly alone in that regard. He's not a clipboard thrower, a chair basher, a coffee tosser or a hand pounder. He has a sterling rep, and if any of the above posters were really in TV, they would know that. But that would make for a pretty dull comments section.

Kate, saying "fuck" or some variation thereof to one's crew, or accidentally broadcasting the phrase over a live national broadcast is a low-brow, unprofessional approach to producing.

Perhaps you're so brow-beaten, or so desperate for work, that this fact eludes your perception.

Or perhaps it's really just a matter of semantics.

That is, what you might call "supporting my nice boss who was being demonstrative under pressure" others might call "puckering up your lips and pressing it against their bosses buttocks and then *smooching*"

"Extremely unprofessionally"?

What I heard was, if anything, only very slightly to the unprofessional side. In a loud arena, where the apparent problem was being heard, he started calmly. Repeated himself. Again. Got louder. Repeated. More emphatic. More repeated instructions. Then, in utter frustration, used the f-word once if I'm recalling it correctly. He didn't use it on the air; he said it, and it went over the air, but nobody has said yet that he knew it or caused it to broadcast, that I've heard.

And for this, R's very first characterization is: "obsessive compulsive control freak jackass who forgets his meds..." Sounds like talk-radio level hyperbole to me.

The only objection I have to the whole thing is CNN letting it run on the air for so long.

And make that hackneyed hyperbole. If I hear one more person drag out that tired line about "forgetting meds," I think I'll go fucking apeshit. Wooo, she said "fucking." How "unprofessional." Luckily, my goal is writing well, not being a prim corporate soldier.

Oh, yeah: For the anony-weenie R's information, I have been an associate producer on a live international satellite telecast, and I got my way on that show and in everything I produced by being sweet and kind and wearing inappropriately tight tops that showed off my large hooters.

I predict that this campaign season is when the US population finally gets over acting like the word "fuck" is anything out of the norm. After all, it's good enough for the VP and the producer of the Dem Convention. Let's all just fucking admit we like to say fuck sometimes and move on.

Kevin,

"obsessive compulsive control freak jackass who forgets his meds..." may seem like an overstatement to some, but the fact is, all the repetitive babbling and cussing is not going to get those balloons down a moment faster, is not going to focus his crew any better, and leaves himself vulnerable to somehow having his extended harrangue played on the air.

That's extremely unprofessional.

Perhaps you think being extremely unprofessional would require him to pull out a flare gun and shoot a warning shot over the convention floor.

We'll just have to disagree over what line must be crossed to qualify for the term, I guess.

Maybe he was an excellent producer at one time. People get old. People lose their professional edge. They can no longer function appropriately under unyielding pressure.

That does not mitigate the sideshow he created on live national television, so the fact remains that he shouldn't be given any more opportunities to embarrass his employers, his crew, and himself, by allowing him to preside over live national television events.

And make that hackneyed hyperbole. If I hear one more person drag out that tired line about "forgetting meds," I think I'll go fucking apeshit. Wooo, she said "fucking." How "unprofessional." Luckily, my goal is writing well, not being a prim corporate soldier.

Amy,

To begin, let's watch the language, missy. You're not in a rented soho loft talking trash with your mannish girlfriends. This is a public forum, so show a little respect.

I believe that your goal of "writing well" is not "lucky" for you. That is lucky for Dorthy Parker. For you, it's probably a curse.

Oh, yeah: For the anony-weenie R's information, I have been an associate producer on a live international satellite telecast, and I got my way on that show and in everything I produced by being sweet and kind and wearing inappropriately tight tops that showed off my large hooters.

Don't forget your sensible shoes, and your well-rehearsed speech regarding why Rosie and Ellen are our most undervalued national treasures.

I don't have mannish girlfriends, thanks. In fact, I see it as my mission to undo the damage done by feminism to relationships (with women dressing like they're on their way to replace somebody's septic tank, and men behaving like neutered kittens). Maybe you didn't get the humor gene, but the random attempts at it are generally not as entertaining as those based in actual fact. I have many flaws. Try to use the actual stuff against me in the future, if you don't mind. I love being the butt of a good joke, as long as it seems to actually be about me. PS See my blog for fetching pictures of Cathy Seipp and Nancy Rommelmann, who had the French crashing cars at the sight of her when I saw her in Paris. Oh, and if Kevin tells me to "watch my language," I will. Luckily, he can see I was using those nasty words to prove a point.

Can you please explain the "lucky" for me bit? It appears untethered to actual meaning.

Rosie and Ellen? Huh?

What, exactly, do you do for a living? Just curious!

Amy,

I was not attempting to produce an accurate psychological profile at your expense, which is why I didn't say anything about self-involved new york man-chewing yentas.

I was only tossing out vague misinformed personal attacks to match yours, you see.

Normally, I'd describe your invitation to your blogsite, with your chronicled paris-stopping girlfriends as a non-sequitor in relation to the topic, but it's fairly apparent that invitations to your blogsite would be your primary objective, regardless of how clumsily it is applied.

Frankly, I don't see the exemplary merit of your girlfriends beauty supposedly creating car crashes in Paris. If you've been there, you know that Parisin men will fuck anything that resembles a vagina.

Truth be told, on some Parisian backstreets, you'll find french boys behind trash cans fucking strawberry crepes fresh off the stove, so don't make the mistake of qualifing french perversion as some kind of barometer for aesthetic qualification.

As for what I do for a living, I spend other people's money, and no, I won't show you how it's done.

The "lucky" business I think is tethered just fine, and requires no further explanation.

Hmmm, we seem to making quite a mountain out of a molehill here in this micro-blogo-sphere. Just like the real media did. Hmm, eerie parallel? All this commenting biz reminds me of something... Usenet? Or is it listserv? alt.la.media? alt.la.media.laobserved? Blog on!
Flame on!

Anon,

I think you misinterpreted the events of this thread. Let me sum it up for you.

I disagreed with a few people regarding the professionalism of a producer, and we hashed it out a little.

Amy, in her roundabout way, brought up the point that we were not talking enough about her, and proceeded to give us a small sample of what we were denying ourselves.

Except for us not talking enough about Amy, there were no big problems in this thread.

Maybe it's jsut me, but the anonymous "R" sounds a lot like the anonymous and now banished "Allen" of a few weeks, no?

Nice catch, Robert. Of course we'll never know if "R" actually is "Allen."

I get into a lot of arguments with people on this site (Hi Robert!!) but this one has to be hands down the dumbest one I've ever read.

..and I don't fault you Amy.

"If you've been there, you know that Parisin men will fuck anything that resembles a vagina."

Excuse me, Miss Manners, but hasn't your entire 5,000-word raison d'etre for posting here been to rail against the use of the word "fuck"!? You're very amusing, in your own huffy, wounded way.

Apparently, you've been used and abused by a few Parisian men. Poor dear. FYI, I believe Nancy Rommelmann has turned a few heads in Los Angeles as well. And yes, I do have a number of mannish friends -- all of whom are men. I'm flattered by your obsessive interest, as always...Allen. (Hat tip to clever Robert Parry, who's probably right.)

No, Amy. My contention, that has almost weaved it's way around your ADD, was that Don saying "fuck" during the broadcast of the democratic national convention, was unprofessional.

I never once stated that the word "fuck" should never be used in any other media. Where you got that from, God only knows, and FYI, nobody knows, or cares, about your aging friend Nancy Rommelman, and what heads she turns, or the real reason they turn them, so get down off your hind legs, you feral, menacing, new york yenta.

I am not afraid of you, nor the battery of older single jewish women with whom you would try to crush me.

That sounds like someone with mommie issues.

I think we need to stop using the term "hat tip" before it's too late

Joseph,

I have quickly reviewed your blogsite, and I feel I must take a stand here and now.

Joe, being an aimless, middle-aged, navel-gazing pussy is no way to proceed with the final chapters of your life.

Quit wasting time with your pointless harassment of me, put down that bottle, and try to make a man of yourself, before nobody cares.

You think money is unimportant? Take a casual cruise through the state health care machine.

If that doesn't get you off your ass, and looking for a job, nothing will.

Hmm, I think you guys are right. R is sounding more and more like Allen (or was it Allan?). Off the wall jabs at anyone who disagrees with him, not very smart, and obviously lacking the class to refrain from being unpleasant while under the cover of fake ID. Candidate for the Bozo filter, if only we had one.

Joe, being an aimless, middle-aged, navel-gazing pussy is no way to proceed with the final chapters of your life.

I like being all those things. But me, I'd rather be anything at all than anonymous. You want pure, raw, uncut pussydom, there it is.

Joseph, suddenly, I'm a fan.

fwiw, I rather enjoy a sprinkling of fuck now and then--especially when it's served by a production studio or (better yet) when it's hissed on the Senate floor by one of the most powerful men in the world. It's a passionate expletive, and sometimes no other word is as appropriate and as vehemently ridiculous.

I respect Mischer's contrite explanation, and I understand why it was necessary. I also respect the fact that Cheney didn't offer one.

Hey! How did MY name get dragged into this? I was taking a nap, fer chrissake!

OK, now that I'm awake, you know what I liked? How Amy decried "tired lines" and then said she was going "apeshit"

You think she was being ironic? Nah.

Jane,

The Vice President did not curse in front of a live microphone on the senate floor when it was in session, or televised, nor did he direct it at his employee, so your reference is irrelevant.

You, Jane, may like to hear "fuck" during a primetime nationally televised event, but the majority of people, whom you might prefer to reference as "the flyover states" DON'T enjoy hearing it.

btw, I doubt your name is "jane doe" but that doesn't matter to me, as long as you're trying to make a relevant point, instead of trying to provoke for it's own sake.

Kevin,

I don't think your assertion is a fair one.
I think there's a little blame to be given to some of the others who can't control themselves from making stupid remarks.

OK, now that I'm awake, you know what I liked? How Amy decried "tired lines" and then said she was going "apeshit"

You think she was being ironic? Nah.

Allan,

Amy missed high and wide on that one, since my remark was not rhetorical.

Using Amy's logic, if I saw a car stalled by the side of the road and said "the jackass ran out of gas" she'd accuse me of using a timeworn cliche.

"I swear, if I hear one more person use that old "ran out of gas" thing agian... don't even GO there!"

"R" said: "your reference is irrelevant."

I find that statement laughable given how this thread derailed (long ago) from Mischer-specific discussion. Besides, I'm not one to shy away from tangents--particularly when they point to patterns of behavior common to public figures of every political stripe. In any event, I thought Cheney and other "major league asshole"-type remarks were at least as relevant as some of the analytical drivel in this thread. Witness this, for example: "Don was unprofessional . . . This is what occurs when someone has risen past the level of their competence in their profession." Thank you for the penetrating insight.

"R" said: "...the majority of people"
I speak for myself on this forum; perhaps you don't. Nevertheless, it's good to know that the Majority has a spokesperson.

Yes, you may call me Jane because that is my name. Doe is not; it's a description. To you I shall remain jane doe.

Jane, give it up. You're over your head.

Your logic is exposed as be faulty, and so you reidentify it as "a tangent." That's not laughable, however. It's desperate and sad.

Your point was irrelevant. Get used to it.

"It doesn't matter that Don said "fuck" on a national TV broadcast. I've heard a dog catcher say "fuck" once, and he works for state government, and he wasn't fired, so you see, everybody in state government cusses on the job, and shouldn't be disiplined. And that goes for CNN too. That's my logic. Thank you."

"R" said: "...the majority of people"
I speak for myself on this forum; perhaps you don't. Nevertheless, it's good to know that the Majority has a spokesperson.

It's a very safe and qualified assumption that the majority of americans do not want to hear Don yelling "fuck" during a live national event, so your catty remark is specious.

Frankly, it's irrelevant as to whether you like to hear the word "fuck" on TV or not. The subject was the unprofessional behavior of Don on live national television.

btw, I like your name, but it's misspelled, I think.

It really should be "Jane D'oh!"

That was seriously funny, R (even if it was directed at me). I don't mind saying that it made me laugh harder than just about anything else in this forum.

(Well, except for the 'catty' description. Heaven forbid! If I say anything more that horrid man might call me 'shrill'! And then what? "Go fuck yourself bitch"? Oh, the shame!!)

Yes, R, somehow I thought that talking about the word "fuck" as used by public figures was somehow more relevant to the original Roderick post than, say, dozens of posts along the lines of "Joe, being an aimless, middle-aged, navel-gazing pussy is no way to proceed with the final chapters of your life." You will notice, after all, that my original post was partly an attempt to return (however tangentially) to the original topic. Ah, well, chalk it up to the folly of youth. Silly, silly me.

Perhaps someday I'll finish college (no, I'm not a journalist, and I want neither blog nor column. Does that mean I'm not welcome here? ). Yes, someday I'll graduate and I'll hone my intellect into a white-hot dagger of logic. I'll become a Crusader For The Truth, and I'll never stray from my objective: cleansing the internet of the Sad, The Desperate and the Pompous Ranting Many who seed chat rooms with inanity such as this: "CNN should have their act together to meet with something as stupid as some obsessive compulsive control freak jackass who forgets his meds prior to his big balloon moment."

That's how this all began, after all. I just thought it was worth a second read.

Jane D'oh,

In and effort to give this off-topic tangent an ending on a positive spin, I will say that you have a talent for not immediately laying down before what would seem to be an overwhelmingly persuasive argument.

Since I am a firm believer that one's writing and intellectual habits can inform one's social dexterity, this approach of yours gives me hope that, despite your lack of a college education, you may very well end up avoiding unwanted pregnancies as well as exotic parasites, tricky viruses, and rickets.

For this, I grudgingly commend you.

I ask everyone to note that I didn't engage in the observations I made regarding Joe without his prompting, via his girlish, personal attacks. I only included his lifestyle because he posts it on a blogsite he actively, publicly advertises. The same goes for Amy the annoying yenta, so I don't believe I'm using anonymity as some kind of advantage over them, nor would I.

One more thing... notice we're both anonymous, the sky is not falling, and both of us were able to somewhat communicate, and neither of us ran away, only to post occasional mutterings relating to nothing, unlike some non-anonymous participants who are girlish, and/or annoying yentas.

>> an overwhelmingly persuasive argument... See, contrary to all the signs you do have a sense of humor!

No, the sky hasn't fallen because we don't know you as other than just another Joe Blowhard wandering in off the Internet. But I do think your contributions would have been more interesting and worth thinking about with a little identity attached to them. And I feel certain you would have been less of an asshole if you thought your coworkers or friends might be watching.

In general, I guess I just prefer the personalities that posters use when they are putting something on the line. Personal preference.

Kevin,

I suppose the behavior you identify as that of an "asshole" I prefer to phrase as one who can sometimes exhibit the quality of "obnoxious exuberance."

But aside from personally favored semantics, I still feel a little superior to some of my unesteemed opponents in debate, since I will identify some remark as stupid, and explain why, while others prefer the first, at best, and rarely the latter.

I think that habit makes for more honest debate, rather than whether one is or is not anonymous.

I think using anonymity while saying "hey! guess what I heard, that nobody knows, about so-and-so?" is being an asshole at best, and I'd never do it.

Other than that, anonymity should be a valid choice a person makes, for obvious reasons, and shouldn't deter from the validity of an argument.

Finally, I don't maintain anonymity because I fear the judgement of my peers. I maintain it because I question the emotional stability of some people who use the internet.

There's your straight line. Have fun.

"Finally, I don't maintain anonymity because I fear the judgement of my peers. I maintain it because I question the emotional stability of some people who use the internet."

Oh, please. I'm with Kevin, first of all, that the tone of your remarks would be very different if people who knew you were watching. I use my name for that very reason -- and I stand behind everything I say.

Moreover, I think you take great, squishy pleasure in making little playground-level jabs at people, and couldn't take giving people the power to do the same to you (not that I would -- and I don't see that being done, really by anybody but you here). You seem to thrill at being able to put people in little boxes: I'm an "annoying yenta," for example...Joseph got the really low "pussy" remark from you. I think if you were standing next to me at a cocktail party you wouldn't be so quick to refer to me that way -- and the same goes for Joseph. Again, going to what Kevin said, one reason I use my name here is that I think the level of my discussion should never go beneath what I would say to somebody in public debate -- and it keeps me in check from doing that.

And I do have a lot of respect for Joseph now for the way he came back at you -- proving that he's the man in the "pussy" war you tried to start. I've disagreed with Joseph plenty in the past, and even found him annoying, but the disagreement never got personal -- beyond criticizing him for how he presented himself and his thoughts here.

I really don't want to talk about me in a discussion about Don Mischer-- I have a whole Web site for that, but you bring me into every discussion -- even one on architecture, about Disney Hall...in a derogatory way, and I feel compelled to address at least some of your attacks. I didn't jump in on the architecture one because I didn't want it to turn into another pissing match like this one.

You want to debate me on level ground, come out into the light. Otherwise, you can call me "annoying" and anything else you want, but keep the "yenta" and the "pussy" and the like to yourself until we know who you are.

R wrote “I ask everyone to note that I didn't engage in the observations I made regarding Joe without his prompting, via his girlish, personal attacks. I only included his lifestyle because he posts it on a blogsite he actively, publicly advertises.”

Don’t blame your reaction on someone else. Just as easily you could have chosen silence. No one but you is responsible for your words and your capacity to be distracted.

Kevin wrote “And I feel certain you would have been less of an asshole if you thought your coworkers or friends might be watching.”

Thanks, Kevin. Really—that’s one of the most succinctly compelling statements on disclosure and civility I’ve read online. I’ll try to take it to heart—even if I use a nick.

Fwiw, I’ve spent a fair amount of time in chat rooms and IRC. Perhaps I’m deluded, but I always thought it was possible for alts to be as interesting, authoritative & civil as strangers using real names. Unfortunately, this is the Internet—it’s not a cocktail party where everyone is visible and accountable. It strikes me as overly simplistic to suggest a civil poster remains anonymous because she is craven. (I’m talking about decent folks—not the name-callers, and I admire your community goal, Kevin.)

Triple Threat, Anonymouse & Robert Chang (among others) provided some interesting arguments in favor of anonymity. There are other reasons as well. I have many excuses. On other boards, my friends and I have been subject to bizarre behavior—including sexually violent threats—sometimes by lurkers we hadn’t even communicated with. This was typically precipitated by our voicing politically unpopular opinions. Again, LAObserved is not Orkut; it’s not a closed community. For every level-headed Roderick or Alkon-Goddess-Made-Manifest there are probably a dozen or a hundred creeps lurking in the electronic shadows. It’s creepier still to think that this is a geographically specific community, and that OldStalkerWeirdo@aol.com types at a computer only a few blocks away, sitting naked and greased in spam jello.

Ok, I admit it: I lack trust and maybe I deceive myself and it’s all a form of cowardice. But until you people prove otherwise it seems the alternative is rash, unnecessary and even stupid.

Sorry for bogarting this thread. I’ll say no more on the subject. In the future (if I post here), I’ll stay on topic and above all I’ll remain civil.

Ciao.

Amy, I just bring you in as you relate to my contention that some people pop off here, and don't follow up on their irrational rants, because they can't.

Reread the thread, and you'll find my answer to every one of your remarks. This way, I spare everyone from my repeating myself.

Except for your silly remarks about me, that was very well said, Jane.

Particularly if I were female, I would not be posting my name on an LA centric blog if I lived in LA, with all the aspiring rapists and professional freaks milling about.

I'm sure this doesn't affect Amy, since all she'd have to do is start... talking.

"I'll let you go! Please! Just... stop... talking about France, and that... little CAAAAAR!!!"