Reblog: Ten Reasons For The Anonymity Of Catholic Bloggers

In the last days, objections have been made to the fact that many of those who write about Catholic matters do so anonymously. As always, there is no scarcity of people who indulge in easy accusations of what they don’t like, and can’t control. Let us examine what this is all about and the many valid reasons for anonymity on the internet.

1) Anonymity is freedom. Unless one lives on Planet Pollyanna, there is no denying (not even by its detractors) that the protection afforded by anonymity allows information to be exchanged and discussed that otherwise would have never reached a wider public. This makes our societies (and more specifically the religious discussion) more free. This is important, as freedom of expression is an extremely important pillar of every democratic society.

2) Anonymity encourages criticisms of what doesn’t work within the Church. As Catholics, we have the duty to react to scandals and abuses we see around us, but we don’t have the duty to seek martyrdom (I mean here in a broader sense, as persecution or discrimination because of our convictions) if we don’t have to. Anonymity on the internet makes therefore not only democratic societies more free, but provides a better system of control for the abuses within the Church. If a Bishop tells you that he feels scrutinised by the anonymous internet bloggers, it’s because he is. This is good for Catholicism, and potentially vital for the salvation of the relevant Bishop’s soul.

3) The accusations of it being “coward” to hide behind anonymity are the most cowardly acts themselves. Repressive political systems are those who try to repress anonymity the hardest. The people asking bloggers to reveal their identity are not much different than, say, Saddam Hussein calling his opponents cowards because they stay hidden. There’s a reason why people hide behind anonymity and only stupid people, or people in utter bad faith, pretend not to understand them.

4) If you look attentively, you noticed that anonymity is one of the most powerful engines of progress. Whistleblowing sites could never exist without the protection afforded by anonymity, and they are a most powerful engine of correct behaviour and have now possibly become the most implacable weapon against criminal behaviour within corporations and public bodies. Why anonymity would be acceptable for them but unacceptable for misbehaviour within the Church (which, notabene, can include child abuse and the like) is beyond me.

5) The accusation of it being very easy to slander people from behind anonymity does not really stand scrutiny. It being very easy to slander from behind a wall of anonymity, the relevant information is heavily discounted. People have always written anonymously on walls, but this has never made what they wrote believed just because it was written. On the contrary, an accusation made from an anonymous person will need to be substantiated to even begin to carry any real credibility. This is exactly what happens on the Internet. Criticism of clergy is accompanied with facts and evidence, or it is easily discarded. This is another of the beauties of the Internet. If, say, a Bishop gives scandal by participating to the “ordination” of a “bishopess” or some Protestant ecclesial community, the information will be there with the facts: day, people present, photos, videos, the whole enchilada. It is obvious to the meanest intelligence what counts here is the fact, the provenance being fully irrelevant in the economy of the scandal.

6) It is undeniable, though, that insisted, repeated slander may – even if unsubstantiated – have some effect in the long-term on the person affected. Voltaire used to say something on the lines of “keep on slandering: something will stick”. There you are, you will say, but the best protection against such slander is, once again, anonymity! Every non addetto ai lavori (as journalist, or priest) who willingly renounces to his own anonymity when he writes on the internet is allowing his ego to play him the most dangerous of tricks. Be assured that there will be a price to pay, as recently seen in the case of a “commenterer” known to many of us.

7) It has always been known to people with some salt in their brains – a minority, I sometimes think – that a wise man picks up his own fights. It is utterly illogical (nay: it is outright stupid) to think that what we write will not have an impact on our future – allowing for countless forms of covert discrimination, never to be proved and impossible to trace or fight against – for decades to come. It is the very freedom of our societies which makes this unavoidable.

This may not be a problem for a journalist (who makes of it his profession, and for whom his own name is a brand and professional tool), but can be a huge problem for everyone else. A wise man will prudently decide himself if and when and under which conditions to face a conflict because of his religious convictions, but a moron will gladly expose himself to every kind of retaliation of which he might even never become aware (lost work opportunities, or business opportunities, or both).

8 ) Even anti-discrimination legislation wisely chooses the same way as Internet bloggers. Information about health, age, religion cannot be asked by a potential employer. There is a reason why, and it is that such information opens huge doors to discrimination. How stupid would it be to legislate against such form of discrimination, whilst demanding that bloggers voluntarily expose themselves to it, irrevocably, for all time to come. Make no mistake, religion is – and always will be – the biggest cause of hatred and conflict. It’s just the way it is and he who doesn’t see it is in serious need of waking up.

9) Stupid commenters were never considered less stupid because they are not anonymous. Intelligent commenters were never considered less intelligent because they are. I – and everyone else – will pick my sites and blogs according to the validity of their content, not according to the degree of anonymity of their writers. Just to make an example, “Splintered Sunrise” is an excellent blog. Is anyone concerned that it is anonymous? Not I.

10) We have recently had another example of how beautiful anonymity is. I do not know whether priests are allowed to blog anonymously (albeit, by definition if they really wanted they’d be able to do it anyway), but had Fr. Mildew written an anonymous blog, he’d have been much more relaxed against the bullying of Mgr. Basil Loftus. His blog is now closed. QED.

This is of course not meant to be a justification of my being strictly anonymous, for which there is no need. Rather a caveat to all those who still haven’t understood the potentially devastating influence of a sustained, prolonged Internet presence with their own names, particularly when the subject matter is not neutral (like photography, dogs, or gardening) but serious, highly emotional issues like politics and, most importantly, religion.

Wake up to the reality of the Internet. The immense freedom it harbours also hides dangers for your own professional future; dangers the more devastating because subtle and able to damage you whilst keeping you fully unaware of what is happening. And if you think that this problem only concerns people with extreme views or roaming the internet with illegal purposes ask everyone who works for reference checking firms, and think again.

Mundabor

Father Nemo Needs A Notebook

I was talking to Father Nemo, and I must now pass the ball to you.

Father Nemo needs a notebook. He will use it for exclusive blog use, so that no information about it is saved anywhere in it. Not even the password and name of his blog. Not even the email he used to set the blog up, or the photos he has posted on his blog. Nothing at all that might trace the blog back to him.

Father does, therefore, not need storage. Everything he needs will be on his blog, and a separate USB key will be aplenty for blog backups if he really wants to (he might not want to). What Father wants is something preferably not expensive, practical in use, and allowing him to go on the Internet exclusively for his blog purposes. He will, though, need a VPN service, so that the two questions might be interconnected.

Looking around, Father has found that Internet suitable devices (“suitable” means cheap, but with proper, full-size keyboard) do not come all with Windows. There are also, at the very least, Android devices, and the strange Chromebook ones. There is also Apple, but that’s expensive, sodomitical and utterly Christianophobic, so it doesn’t count.

Father has noticed these strange web-based Chromebooks. They are well cheap, but he still wonders. Will Google start asking information for him? With email verification perhaps? Will he, in other words, be anonymous for Google? How can this be, if apps can only be downloaded through the “store”, like Apple? Is it wise for him to purchase a device and trust to Google a lot on information about him? Father will, of course, not store any document on the little “cloud” at his disposal – this wouldn’t make sense, because if Inunderstand correctly everything he puts there will have his own name on it – but he does not care, as everything would be on the WordPress blog he opened fully anonymously, with an anonymous email – a big difference with other services, who asked for email verification -. If he puts nothing of himself on the cloud, where’s the danger? Well, in his having a cloud account with nothing but his name on it, perhaps? Or in Google knowing – if I understand correctly – every blogging or Catholic app he ever bought for the purpose of blogging?

Chromebooks are, apparently, very fast to be fired up. But is this so important? He would only use the device to post – VPN-protected – posts on his WordPress site, and WordPress do not know, nor do they ask to know, who he is. Why would Google? And do they in the first place? Or is the cloud thingy an optional? But then, what if one wants to buy an app? Does he have to give Google unique identification information, like his mobile phone?

I told Father when I started the blog I chose WordPress over Blogspot because the latter wanted to know who I am (through verification of email). Why on earth? How is it that WordPress, operating in the same legal environment, has no need for it? I find the attitude of Google between somewhat creepy and utterly disturbing. Put all my documents where *you* (or the NSA; or the Gaystapo) can read them? Seriously?

Then there is another Google-dominated system: android. Some cheap devices are available with this system, but it seems to him (Father) that this is no better than Chromebbok. An Android device needs to be registered to download even the most banal application. Is this really anonymous? Not the device, or the user. The use, perhaps. But only if no data on Father is anywhere on the cloud, on his account.

Linux does not come into question. Father has heard this needs some work and technical knowledge he does not want to acquire unless it is strictly necessary for his purposes. He can put time and effort to tweak his blog site, not to learn to do something other OS will do for him. Father is a priest, not a computer geek.

Lastly, there is – unless there are other ways Father doesn’t know – the bad old Windows-based laptop. Costs are now at Chromebook level, that is: very low. It has all the usual problems of Windows, but the availability of everything – from VPN services to meme-creating software – is there, very probably free if he so wishes,mor at a cheap price if he wants the added security and comfort of the “premium” account. The device can be operated in a fully anonymous way. Nowhere would there be his name. The device would be used exclusively for Catholic news to be linked to, images to be put on the blog posts, and the blog posts themselves. Some Catholic apps if practicable (but is it?). That’s it.

Father told me VPN should be dealt with separately; but clearly, how well VPN can be efficiently and anonymously organised will play a role in his decision. This is, though, for another post.

If VPN is viable, then, Father asks what device you would suggests that he buys:

1 Chromebook?

2 Android?

3 Windows?

4 Something else?

Let the game begin. If will be fun and instructive at the same time.

Father thanks in advance. All of them.

M

Demand That Google Stops Banning Pro-Life Ads

The page is here, together with a suggested text for your message. 

Google would not allow the Google rules of bidding for keywords to apply to pro-lifers who want to save human lives.

Only one word: Faggots.

Mundabor

 

FagGoogle

Google in pictures

“The practice of sport is a human right. Every individual must have the possibility of practicing sport, without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play.” –Olympic Charter

This is the oh so moving statement which appeared this morning on my screen as I happened to use – which I do every time I forget to use duckduckgo – the Google service. The link with the Winter Olympics might, methinks, not be entirely casual.

Now, this statement could make half sense – and we would have to discuss about that, too; very much so – if the Russian Government had declared that any known and openly homosexual athlete will be stopped at the frontier and not allowed to take part to the games. Last time I looked, though, nothing of the sort had happened, and the terrible crime of the Russian government is merely to ban homosexual propaganda to minors; which is still far milder than, say, Christianity all over Europe only two generations ago, where sodomising faggotry was pretty much everywhere a criminal offence.

Now, our little queens at Google do not make an explicit statement concerning this. They avoid directly angering the Russian Government, whilst sending a message pleasing enough to the secular masses in the West. It is as if hundreds of millions of people would wake up every morning with a keen desire to “feel good” in some way or other, and Google – who are every bit as rotten as the UN – were only too happy to oblige with sugary good-ism that doesn't even make a real statement, but allows the popolo bue – ah, you should learn Italian! – to swallow another pill of self-validation.

Obviously, Google will not be alone in this kind of exercise. Expect a real festival of sugary statements from politicians everywhere in the West. They pander not only to the very tiny minority of perverts – be assured they don't care for them; and would let them fall like hot potatoes if it was politically expedient – but to the masses of people who decided to make of this tiny minority their favourite pet, at least for the time being.

I know it's difficult to avoid Google. I lapse myself, as Google is now so omnipresent at home and at work that one forgets to avoid them; particularly considering DuckDuckGo isn't really good at image search, which I need for this blog anyway, so I kept falling back to them as a matter of course. Still, we could do worse than putting an extra effort to avoid Google, or at least to avoid it more often. Difficult, I know; but every little helps, at least as a small signal that, if not noticed at Google's headquarters, will be noticed in Heaven.

May I suggest, for this day, three Hail Marys for Mr Putin. I know he is not Catholic, but it seems to me in many things he is more Catholic than, well, the Bishop of Rome, and the former certainly takes his duty to defend Christian values far more seriously than the latter.

Long live Mr Putin, then, and may the Lord inspire him to a more and more incisive action in defence of Christian values.

Mundabor

 

Looking For Alternatives To Google

Google has always been good to me, and besides bringing me the most traffic among the search engines (obviously) is the search engine that gives most relevance to my site when you, well, google me.

Still, Google actively supports perversion, so it will have to go from my life at least as far as it is practicable. 

Browsing around, it appears Duck Duck Go (yes, this is the name of the firm) is not compromised with an anti-Christian attitude at least for  now. They are also very good in that they do not store any information from your browser, other than Google and many others.

I am not entirely satisfied, though, as the image search isn’t as practical as Google’s to me. Still, one can live with a couple of clicks more to get to the images he wants. The image above was found through the bing engine, which again is Microsoft, which again isn’t good. 

Still, I would suggest to my reader that they consider giving it a try to see how they fare with it. I did, and again, whilst it does not work as well as Google for my purposes, I’d say it works well enough for most purposes of most people.

If any reader known of alternative search engines not compromised with the modern sodomadness and with which he is satisfied, I am grateful for a line explaining what they like in the search engine they are presenting.

I am not one of those “fight big Corporate” guys, but when I see that a position of absolute dominance is abused to fight against Christian values I say it is time to look for alternatives, and as I have already done for Boots (the perverted Chemist’s) , Google is now next on the line. 

Mundabor

Political Correctness Gone Mad: Google’s Gender Madness.

 

 

If you want a new email with Google, you must answer a question about your “gender”.

Choices: male, female, and “other”.

Mind, it doesn’t say “prefer not to say” (my gender is, in the end, none of Google’s business). It says “other”.

I have tried to select “other” to see if it worked. It did.

Alas, I’ll take my new email address from another provider.

Mundabor

 

 

Catholic Blogging In 17.5 Easy Steps

"Deus le volt" without the blood.

I don’t like talking about my blog, which is the reason why I never write blog posts like “this is my 300th post” and the like.

Still, I have been blogging for almost one year now and have, I think, learned one thing or two about what – at least in my case – goes and what not.

As I have written a couple of times in the recent past about Catholic blogging, I thought that I may write here a couple of suggestions that might be obvious to the already experienced blogger, but not so obvious to the person thinking of starting a Catholic blog for the first time.

If you were to ask me for advice about how to start a conservative Catholic blog, I would – based exclusively on my personal experience; your mileage may vary – suggest the following steps. Others will, no doubt, have different opinions. Still, here we are:

1) anonymity. It is pure illusion to think that future employers – or people relevant to one’s business – will not trace all your activity whether you want it or not; and this without you having any control about the matter and without you ever knowing what damage this has done to you. If you are like me you’ll seek wisdom, not martyrdom.

2) No public stat counter. To have a public stat counter means to make an emotional investment in how many page views you get, in front of all your readers. This can easily lead – human nature being what it is – to a perversion of the scope of the blog and you might end up writing what you think might bring more page views, rather than what you think is more deserving of a blog post. Do your own thing. It’s not an exercise in popularity.

3) Activate comments. People like to comment and yes, you will like to answer to them. It doesn’t take much time. Only a very tiny minority of readers comments, but many more enjoy to read the comments. Comments also help to clarify and expand the blog post material. In time, you’ll receive many useful hints about further posts, too.

4) Moderate comments before they are posted. It is astonishing how every blog is visited by people whose only apparent scope in life is to annoy others. Don’t be a Pollyanna, it’s full of rubbish-spitting trolls out there.  You will have a “trash” button. Use it.

5) Variety. Blog about a mixture of news and general issues. A blog is very useful for themes of general Catholicism because, contrarily to what you may think, your blog posts do not get buried. See below about this, point 7). Use your blog to propagate Catholic devotions. Particularly the Rosary. And Fatima. Ah, and Padre Pio. Oh, and Pius XII. You get the drift……. 😉

6) Post just a few blog links. Too many links is the same as no links. Have just a limited number of links that work as a real endorsement and whose profile well complements your own blog. Escape the temptation of the “I link to you if you link to me”-mentality. It doesn’t even work, because being buried among 200 links against your burying others among your 200 links is, I think, not going to help much. I would also opine that Google is, very probably, smarter than that. Ah, and don’t be an ass: link to the right blogs even if they don’t link to you. You are trying to give a service to your readers, not to wage a link war….

7) Be patient. A blog must grow like a tree, with the slow accumulation of concentric circles of blog posts. The accumulation of good, serious content is at least as important as the issue of the day. A blog slowly builds on the foundation of a growing number of posts your readers will love to browse around. I see this on my own (hidden to you 😉 ) statistics, with a surprising percentage of page views daily devoted to old posts. This I hadn’t expected. A blog doesn’t work – as I thought initially – like a pile of magazines, with the older ones being buried under a ton of newer material; rather, it works more like an electronic archive always accessible – and continuously accessed – through individual clicking and search engines. You’ll do well to link to older posts within new ones anyway, as it shows to your new readers that there is a lot to read around.

8 ) Method. A blog can’t eat your life, because if you do you’ll soon abandon the effort after the first enthusiasms. Rather, the decision to devote so and so much time to the blog every week – something reasonable, but “visible” and half way constant – will help you to make of this a long-term project. Those who start a blog for the stat counter – and those who think that the world has been waiting for what they have to say – will be disappointed and will soon stop blogging.

9) Honesty. Make every blog post something uniquely yours. If you link to external material, write your own thoughts about it. If you take the habit of merely posting external documents that hey can easily google you don’t give anything unique to the reader. Readers don’t visit your blog for the text of, say, “Universae Ecclesiae”, but for your take on it. The first can be had everywhere, the second from you only.

10) Images. Post images whenever you have time. Make the image relevant and striking; or use it to bring some irony, or a joke, or even to administer some cod liver oil when appropriate. Pay attention that you do not infringe about other people’s copyrights. Still, don’t be a slave to the pleasant layout: if there’s no time, it’s better to post good content with a simple layout than no content at all.

11) Tags. Post all tags you think relevant to the post. Don’t neglect this part because tags are an important part of your ability to be reached through internet searches. Whenever I saw a sudden decrease of pageviews the reason was, without a single exception, my forgetting to write the tags.

12) Technology. Make your readers as comfortable as your technical savvy allows. Post on twitter and facebook, allow internal post search, etc. Similarly, use the technology available to you. The “timer” function – allowing you to write when you have time, and to publish when you think it’s right – is a very useful tool.

13) Bite. Make your blog unique, not just another “let us get along” product. Give it assertiveness, substance, chuzpah. Write an opinion, not merely a fact. Tell clearly what you want to say. Don’t be afraid of being harsh with people who deserve to be treated harshly. You are blogging, not having afternoon tea, so stop being so English 😉 and take inspiration from the chap in the photo above 😉

13b) Bite part II, or political incorrectness. Don’t be afraid of exercising your rights. Tell it as it is. For example, don’t say “gay” unless you mean “happy”. Use “homosexual” or “sodomite” instead. You may want to sprinkle with “faggot” and “poof” whenever a harsher reproach sounds appropriate, but that’s up to you. Don’t be pussyfooting around. You have an agenda that must be said loud and clear, not whispered. Show your readers that you eat meat, not tofu. Ridicule the enemy, as this has always been an extremely effective weapon. Una risata li seppellira’ (“a laugh will bury them”).

14) Blog profile. Do your own thing. Don’t ask your readers how they’d like your blog to be, and don’t try to fathom how they would best like it. This is nonsensical; tot capita, tot sententiae. Write your blog as you like it, and other people will like it too. There’s no blog which, when properly cared for and written from the heart, doesn’t attract the readership congenial to it. Even sedevacantist sites, when properly made, attract readers! It is better to have a product with a real, individualised character, that one which tries to be all things to all people. The first gives a very good service to a limited few, but the second no added value to anyone.

15) Keep your ego outside as much as practicable. Blog anonymously and if you can (no spouse around, say) don’t tell anyone you’re blogging. Train yourself to think that you write to fight the good fight, not for human recognition. Your service is twofold: a) to God, who sees you even if no one else knows, and b) to your readers, to whom you give a service if you give a unique and instructive product instead of a copycat, or a collection of common places. This is also useful for point 1) above.

16) Accuracy. Write your blog posts in correct, proper English. If you don’t know the difference between “their”, “there” and “they’re”, “its” and “it’s”, “Popes” and “Pope’s” and the like, do not expect to be taken seriously. If you are, like me, a foreigner, do make an extra effort. “He who [writes] badly, thinks badly” (Nanni Moretti).

17) Seek remuneration. The thing with the free meal, and all that. You put a lot of work in your blog and give your readers a service which some of them will find valuable. Don’t be a wimp, and ask for your readers’ prayers (I suggest the “about the author” page for that; we don’t want to be a nuisance; or perhaps we should be a nuisance?). With the years, think of how many they might become. One day, this will be a very useful currency, and certainly worth every minute of your time, and the best compensation for your effort you may desire. Most people are honest folks: when they see added value, they are glad to give back for it; and don’t think you don’t need prayers because, if you are any similar to me, you most certainly do.

Mundabor

Ten Reasons For The Anonymity Of Catholic Bloggers

Big Brother Is Googling You…

In the last days, objections have been made to the fact that many of those who write about Catholic matters do so anonymously. As always, there is no scarcity of people who indulge in easy accusations of what they don’t like, and can’t control. Let us examine what this is all about and the many valid reasons for anonymity on the internet.

1) Anonymity is freedom. Unless one lives on Planet Pollyanna, there is no denying (not even by its detractors) that the protection afforded by anonymity allows information to be exchanged and discussed that otherwise would have never reached a wider public. This makes our societies (and more specifically the religious discussion) more free. This is important, as freedom of expression is an extremely important pillar of every democratic society.

2) Anonymity encourages criticisms of what doesn’t work within the Church. As Catholics, we have the duty to react to scandals and abuses we see around us, but we don’t have the duty to seek martyrdom (I mean here in a broader sense, as persecution or discrimination because of our convictions) if we don’t have to. Anonymity on the internet makes therefore not only democratic societies more free, but provides a better system of control for the abuses within the Church. If a Bishop tells you that he feels scrutinised by the anonymous internet bloggers, it’s because he is. This is good for Catholicism, and potentially vital for the salvation of the relevant Bishop’s soul.

3) The accusations of it being “coward” to hide behind anonymity are the most cowardly acts themselves. Repressive political systems are those who try to repress anonymity the hardest. The people asking bloggers to reveal their identity are not much different than, say, Saddam Hussein calling his opponents cowards because they stay hidden. There’s a reason why people hide behind anonymity and only stupid people, or people in utter bad faith, pretend not to understand them.

4) If you look attentively, you noticed that anonymity is one of the most powerful engines of progress. Whistleblowing sites could never exist without the protection afforded by anonymity, and they are a most powerful engine of correct behaviour and have now possibly become the most implacable weapon against criminal behaviour within corporations and public bodies. Why anonymity would be acceptable for them but unacceptable for misbehaviour within the Church (which, notabene, can include child abuse and the like) is beyond me.

5) The accusation of it being very easy to slander people from behind anonymity does not really stand scrutiny. It being very easy to slander from behind a wall of anonymity, the relevant information is heavily discounted. People have always written anonymously on walls, but this has never made what they wrote believed just because it was written. On the contrary, an accusation made from an anonymous person will need to be substantiated to even begin to carry any real credibility. This is exactly what happens on the Internet. Criticism of clergy is accompanied with facts and evidence, or it is easily discarded. This is another of the beauties of the Internet. If, say, a Bishop gives scandal by participating to the “ordination” of a “bishopess” or some Protestant ecclesial community, the information will be there with the facts: day, people present, photos, videos, the whole enchilada. It is obvious to the meanest intelligence what counts here is the fact, the provenance being fully irrelevant in the economy of the scandal.

6) It is undeniable, though, that insisted, repeated slander may – even if unsubstantiated – have some effect in the long-term on the person affected. Voltaire used to say something on the lines of “keep on slandering: something will stick”. There you are, you will say, but the best protection against such slander is, once again, anonymity! Every non addetto ai lavori (as journalist, or priest) who willingly renounces to his own anonymity when he writes on the internet is allowing his ego to play him the most dangerous of tricks. Be assured that there will be a price to pay, as recently seen in the case of a “commenterer” known to many of us.

7) It has always been known to people with some salt in their brains – a minority, I sometimes think – that a wise man picks up his own fights. It is utterly illogical (nay: it is outright stupid) to think that what we write will not have an impact on our future – allowing for countless forms of covert discrimination, never to be proved and impossible to trace or fight against – for decades to come. It is the very freedom of our societies which makes this unavoidable.
This may not be a problem for a journalist (who makes of it his profession, and for whom his own name is a brand and professional tool), but can be a huge problem for everyone else. A wise man will prudently decide himself if and when and under which conditions to face a conflict because of his religious convictions, but a moron will gladly expose himself to every kind of retaliation of which he might even never become aware (lost work opportunities, or business opportunities, or both).

8 ) Even anti-discrimination legislation wisely chooses the same way as Internet bloggers. Information about health, age, religion cannot be asked by a potential employer. There is a reason why, and it is that such information opens huge doors to discrimination. How stupid would it be to legislate against such form of discrimination, whilst demanding that bloggers voluntarily expose themselves to it, irrevocably, for all time to come. Make no mistake, religion is – and always will be – the biggest cause of hatred and conflict. It’s just the way it is and he who doesn’t see it is in serious need of waking up.

9) Stupid commenters were never considered less stupid because they are not anonymous. Intelligent commenters were never considered less intelligent because they are. I – and everyone else – will pick my sites and blogs according to the validity of their content, not according to the degree of anonymity of their writers. Just to make an example, “Splintered Sunrise” is an excellent blog. Is anyone concerned that it is anonymous? Not I.

10) We have recently had another example of how beautiful anonymity is. I do not know whether priests are allowed to blog anonymously (albeit, by definition if they really wanted they’d be able to do it anyway), but had Fr. Mildew written an anonymous blog, he’d have been much more relaxed against the bullying of Mgr. Basil Loftus. His blog is now closed. QED.

This is of course not meant to be a justification of my being strictly anonymous, for which there is no need. Rather a caveat to all those who still haven’t understood the potentially devastating influence of a sustained, prolonged Internet presence with their own names, particularly when the subject matter is not neutral (like photography, dogs, or gardening) but serious, highly emotional issues like politics and, most importantly, religion.

Wake up to the reality of the Internet. The immense freedom it harbours also hides dangers for your own professional future; dangers the more devastating because subtle and able to damage you whilst keeping you fully unaware of what is happening. And if you think that this problem only concerns people with extreme views or roaming the internet with illegal purposes ask everyone who works for reference checking firms, and think again.

Mundabor