Welcome to Codidact Meta!
Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.
Post History
Allowing anonymous posting because one is too lazy to sign in or doesn't want to be kept signed in (as is the case here) when already signed up is not a good idea in my opinion, because all the dow...
Answer
#2: Post edited
by
Trilarion
·
2022-02-07T13:57:37Z (about 2 years ago)
some typos
Allowing anonymous posting because one is too lazy to sign in or doesn't want to be kept signed in (as is this case here) when already signed up is not a good idea in my opinion, because all the downsides mentioned in other answers (higher risk of spam) apply without many upsides. One can try though to make the sign in process as easy as possible if that is not already the case.- The Q&A model works better when signed up and in, because then we can keep track of the behavior and assign abilities/privileges according to this behavior. For taking part here, being signed in should actually be strongly recommended. From a content license perspective it's not needed however.
- There might be some legitimate reasons to want to allow anonymous posting. They might include:
- 1. Lower barrier to entry, just wanting to try out this service without the hassle to sign up
- 2. Not wanting to reveal the identity or being connected to a post
- For the first, one could allow anonymous posting but would need to have another reviewing step in order to filter out spam/low quality posts.
- For the latter, one could have an option during post creation to ask for immediate dissociation with the content.
Both would rather be very low priority at the moment in my opinion. And additionally to maybe gathering a bit more of useful content, it might also be misused (to spread hate for example). Therefore it's unclear if this would every pay off the effort. I would not volunteer to implement it.
- Allowing anonymous posting because one is too lazy to sign in or doesn't want to be kept signed in (as is the case here) when already signed up is not a good idea in my opinion, because all the downsides mentioned in other answers (higher risk of spam) apply without many upsides. One can try though to make the sign in process as convenient as possible if that is not already the case.
- The Q&A model works better when signed up and in, because then we can keep track of the behavior and assign abilities/privileges according to this behavior. For taking part here, being signed in should actually be strongly recommended. From a content license perspective it's not needed however.
- There might be some legitimate reasons to want to allow anonymous posting. They might include:
- 1. Lower barrier to entry, just wanting to try out this service without the hassle to sign up
- 2. Not wanting to reveal the identity or being connected to a post
- For the first, one could allow anonymous posting but would need to have another reviewing step in order to filter out spam/low quality posts.
- For the latter, one could have an option during post creation to ask for immediate dissociation with the content.
- Both would rather be very low priority at the moment in my opinion. And additionally to maybe gathering a bit more of useful content, it might also be misused (to spread hate for example). Therefore it's unclear if this would ever pay off the effort. I would not volunteer to implement it.
#1: Initial revision
by
Trilarion
·
2022-02-07T12:03:06Z (about 2 years ago)
Allowing anonymous posting because one is too lazy to sign in or doesn't want to be kept signed in (as is this case here) when already signed up is not a good idea in my opinion, because all the downsides mentioned in other answers (higher risk of spam) apply without many upsides. One can try though to make the sign in process as easy as possible if that is not already the case. The Q&A model works better when signed up and in, because then we can keep track of the behavior and assign abilities/privileges according to this behavior. For taking part here, being signed in should actually be strongly recommended. From a content license perspective it's not needed however. There might be some legitimate reasons to want to allow anonymous posting. They might include: 1. Lower barrier to entry, just wanting to try out this service without the hassle to sign up 2. Not wanting to reveal the identity or being connected to a post For the first, one could allow anonymous posting but would need to have another reviewing step in order to filter out spam/low quality posts. For the latter, one could have an option during post creation to ask for immediate dissociation with the content. Both would rather be very low priority at the moment in my opinion. And additionally to maybe gathering a bit more of useful content, it might also be misused (to spread hate for example). Therefore it's unclear if this would every pay off the effort. I would not volunteer to implement it.