*I do apologize, Chonak. I did read the terms of service when I signed up, but you're right--I did not read the For Newcomers etiquette guidelines about the disposable email address. (I do like that address.) Again, I apologize, and if there is any way to get unbanned, I would appreciate it. I have been reading the forum for a while so I didn't think about reading the For Newcomers information. But this time I remembered the asterisk! Aren't we supposed to put an asterisk on our first post?

Chonak, I gave up my superheroine moniker to use my real name. (Old-timers- Singing Mum lives, bringing Gregorian chant to all she encounters!)

But here I'm just plain Mary Ann again. Alas.

So I did notice, and I agree on the reasons you mentioned.

I agree with Adam. Not only could it get you fired, but just recently the post from David Andrew is another great point, where someone began to cyber stalk him. That seems to be when things could get a bit scary. Unfortunately, it seems to be the world we are now living in.

At the very least the forum Administrators should know who the person is. David Andrew's situation came immediately to mind for me as well.

On a personal level, I would prefer to know who I'm speaking to. If you aren't willing to own what you post...don't post it in the first place.

As usual YMMV.

I think at the very least you could add that users are only allowed one account/username.

While it sounds nice in theory, I don't think that there is a way to practically enforce the "real identity" thing. Leaving you in no better place than now - the troublemakers can still make fake accounts to cause trouble.

I personally think pseudonymns are useful at times. Different people are employed at different levels of professional freedom.

No one needs to know who I am. You don't need to know where I work. And no one using google needs to find things written by me on here so that they can "see where I stand," or find ammunition.

I'm a graduate student in organ at a well known conservatory and I have over15 years of experience in parishes and one cathedral as an organist, assistant and director of music.

That's all anyone needs to know. If that's not enough, than don't take anything I say seriously.

Adam and Paix, I sympathize. On the other hand, a few extreme cases stand out: we've had people using "sockpuppet" accounts to engage in trolling (posting provocative remarks to get a reaction). That's a dishonest practice.

Maybe it's premature for me to post about this problem when it's not clear where to draw the line.

Still my opinion (like all things I say, really):

Oh, Adam! How disappointing!

I have no problem with people knowing who I am or where I work; however, when I opened this account, I used a pseudonym because of the general 'liberality' (in a bad way) in my diocese. People in the area now, more or less, know where I stand on liturgical matters, and there has been no back-lash - so far. I have thought about switching to my real name on t' Forum, but just never got round to it. (Saying this, because I believe that chonak once mentioned being able to change user-names. Correct?)

Salieri,

If you do, I would start a thread about it, just so people don't get confused...

Agreed.

I think the forum works nicely as is (most can probably figure out who I am by my picture / screen name). Perhaps the moderator can just stop into any thread in which someone is posting back and forth with themselves and make note of it. Embarrassment can sometimes be the best medicine.

ALTERNATIVELY - Here's another idea - although I doubt it's practical because there are not enough staff/volunteers.

A law enforcement forum that I'm aware of has a process by which members "verify" that they are, in fact, police officers. They provide, to the admin, their real name, where they work, etc. The admin then calls and verifies with the person whose name was given as well as someone working in that agency that they are employed. There are sections of the forum that are "locked" and may only be viewed by "verified LEO's". This allows police to discuss tactics, sensitive information, and perhaps just air opinions that might be distasteful away from prying eyes.

IF we had the people to administrate it - and I doubt we do - it might be great to have a "verified music director" section. I'm not kidding - somewhere password protected, where the admin's know exactly who we really are and it's been verified that you aren't Joe Parishioner or Fr. Prying Eyes, and where we can go to discuss realities and situations without the ever present reality currently present of "I'm not going to post specifics because the wrong people could see."

Until that happens, I'm anonymous or I don't post at all.

I am Ignoto Montoya, you killed my Communion Meditation, prepare to die!

I'm sorry, mi amigo, I couldn't resist being silly, that's just me!
Of course we wilt accept thee. You could in real life be Screwtape, but "we" are commanded to believe you "are" the Christ at our door. So, hopefully you will "know we are Christians by our love, by our love!" (Ouch.)
I think your concern is nominal, or based upon nomenclature found in the documents and letters that comprise our "dictums." I think that we all go about helping or hurting each others' efforts to discern the intent of the specific contents of those documents by the extrapolation of meaning in our words of response, the stylized manner inwhich we construct our words and the manner in which our words are received and as to how others responded to them. Frankly, I think there's great wisdom in the perceived ambiguity present in documental items. We can't think of everything! "Oh Lord, to whom shall we go?"
But my way works for me and a handful of others, but drives a lot of folks here nuts! (Is RC lurking about?) But eventually one's intent becomes clear, and most folks will then make their call whether we're a "good witch or a bad witch." The late George Carlin and Jonathan Winters had radically different approaches to making folks laugh. And they're beloved figures of happy memory. But then you'll come across a Ricky Gervais or the late Lenny Bruce, and tho' their intent is the same, to bring joy and laughter, their manner of doing that clouds that same intent. Don't worry, be happy.
"Charlie"

It's a matter of etiquette, not rules. Melofluent is still here, chonak and I only have half of our names (or maybe it's Gavin Chonak, arguing with himself...), and others have plainly obvious aliases.

If you don't want to follow the etiquette, obviously you won't get kicked off. I don't see the need to rail against it or demand verification systems or whatever other weird direction this thread will turn. It's etiquette. I loosely follow it here. On the other hand, I also don't tip at Starbucks. I don't follow etiquette there. Do it or don't.

I think there are other music organizations that have something like what PaixGioiaAmor suggested. I think that could be useful for discussing issues and situations in a music director context, but I agree with CHGiffen--my impression is that this forum is much broader in scope and would be open to anyone who has a "special interest in music and liturgy." (Hence why I wanted to join, and that is the only forum in which I would want to be.) I think PaixGioiaAmor was actually suggesting a separate subset of this forum (not a replacement) for those who would be eligible. Good point about the private messages--thanks.