Verbal destruction comes in many forms, but nothing focuses our attention like "bad" language. Why? I know gentle people who use the word "fuck" so much you wouldn't even understand what they were saying if you deleted the word. I also know evil people who wear their sanctimonious verbal rightousness like an umbrella while they verbally accost and eviscerate the unworthy. Mean is mean - particular words are irrelevant. When, as a society, are we going to outgrow our over-simple visceral judgements about about so-called "swear" words? The fucking words don't mean shit, it's the way you use them, asshat.

Point two. Alec Baldwin made a mistake. Alec Baldwin said "I'm sorry." The hypocrites who think that anything less than perfection deserves their scorn should reap what they sow. Shame. I don't know Alec Baldwin, but I'm an imperfect father myself, and I can tell you this: when I screw up - and I do - I feel awful. But I nevertheless reserve the right to be human, to be endowed with imperfections and small foibles. If anyone would care to rub my face in it, I'd be happy to exhibit a foible right up their ass.

I'll tell you this: I'm a lot more concerned about the deleterious affect Puritans and Puritanism have had on this country than I am about George Carlin, Mel Gibson, or Alec Baldwin. Tell the mother of the dead baby in Iraq that a little collateral damage in the service of our chief asshat's upstanding principals is a worthy sacrifice and then let's judge the temper of her response.

I can't respect anyone who says things like "it's about art vs. science". People who can't reconcile art and science should be receiving therapy, not attempting to dole it out. But back on topic...

I know someone who's home birth quackery resulted in serious complications during her delivery - complications that would have been dismissed handily by a doctor in a well equipped hospital. Giving birth is a serious business - lives are at stake. I'm happy everything has turned out so well for Lake and friends. It doesn't always. It's truly unfortunate that a film like this was made, because it will encourage more women to let emotional responses outweigh statistics, and thereby put their baby's lives at risk.

Yeah, Deep Throat is a porno flick, which many may find disgusting. Deep Throat was also a pseudonym for one of our country's most important anonymous cowards.

Anonymity serves an important social function: anonymity allows people to speak truth to power, as they say.

I don't think Salon needs pure anonymity, though. Salon needs pseudonymity. What you have is just right. Only registered users can post, but they can elect to hide their registered name. Salon, however, can always trace any post to its source, should the need arise. And when might that need arise? When a post falls afoul of society's legal strictures.

Don't reinvent the law. Don't reinvent government by the people for the people. So far, as a society, we've generally managed to avoid ensconcing the vagaries of taste into law (not entirely, but that's unfortunate). Don't bow to sensitive plants in the name of page views. Sure, you'll end up with trolls and their ilk. This is nothing new. They've been online much longer than Salon, and somehow, they have failed to derail our online connect fest.

People will continue to harangue and harass each other no matter what you do. Don't throw out a very valuable mode of communication in a futile attempt to promote civility. Civility is in the mind of the beholder; but obstructing a road to truth damages all of us.

OK, here's a topical news item produced by Fox News [1] about the online "gang" known as "anonymous". Scarrrrryyyyy!!!

Did you see those vans blow up!! Ban anonymous!

Does Salon want to make the same leaps of logic as Fox News? I hope not.

I picked this up on Slashdot [2], which Joan somewhat chidingly refers to in her post. Salon might learn a thing or two by reading Slashdot from time to time.

[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNO6G4ApJQY

[2] http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/07/07/28/1145204.shtml

If I continuously post under a pseudonym, I may very well at some point disclose enough information that anyone who cared to sift through my posts could figure out who I am. What if, at some point, however, there's something I'd like to say that I wouldn't like to associate with my name. It might be something that should be said, but which would cause me a great deal of personal grief if I were exposed. That wouldn't be good, would it?

Again, if you at Salon have the wherewithall to reveal an anonymous poster's identity to the authorities if something truly untoward occurs, then what specific benefit does eliminating anonymous posts confer?

Best regards.