I am off to Puerto Vallarta for a week.  Those of you who request the
email from Ann O that I recd. will have to wait till I return.  Thus far,
I have had six requests but I am sure there will be more.
 
As far as BIG's "rules" or "guidelines" (these are not quotes from him)
for posting anonymously, several of you agreed with me.  We are mostly
adults on this forum, and should take responsibility for what we post.
Allowing someone to post anon, just because they are posting something
"embarassing", etc...should not be part of the guidelines (my opinion).
Of course, BIG is the moderator so his opinions on what to allow
anonymously and what to decline anonymously, are solely up to his
opinions.  I emailed him to find out why that hateful post was allowed
to be "anonymous" and he has not responded as to the reason.  I strongly
believe that if someone is going to post something that is possibly going
to generate controversy, that is NO reason to allow anonymity.  All that
does is allow certain people to post nastiness and then hide behind it.
 
In addition, BIG states that the post this Anne O sent me was not bad.
I must disagree and I am sure all of you that see the message will.
Swearing about a ferret (calling it a f*****g ferret) and then making
references to "slapping my face" are both above and beyond what is called
for.  How BIG could actually express her message to me as being ok, really
amazes me.
 
I also must question when BIG says he knows this person.  Does this mean
you have been to their place where their ferrets are kept?  It happens
all the time, people think they know someone because they converse on the
Internet, but we all know that Internet personas are often not reality.
So, I guess what I am asking is how BIG knows these ferrets in her care
(especially Ferret X) are being taken care of in a good manner.  I am
also questioning, again, why this person was allowed to post anonymously.
If you do for one, you must do for all.  I recall wanting to post
"anonymously" one time, and BIG declined it.  The post was not a bash of
ferrets (no way!) or of anything other then me posting and requesting
information from others who may have recd threats of physical violence.  I
was told that it would not be approved anonymously or otherwise.  It also
bothers me that BIG gets rid of headers from messages.  What happens if
there were a police investigation?  Then what?
 
I understand that some people will open a hotmail account and then post
and never post again.  Why anyone would go to the trouble or time, is
beyond me, but I am sure it may happen from time-to-time.  Then again, at
least they are put out, going through the process, and not BIG allowing
them to simply email under "anonymous" which would be much easier and less
time-consuming.
 
In a nutshell, I disagree with the "rules" for anon posts.  That is a
privledge that should be reserved for those who are in "illegal" areas.
Some of you have emailed me with the same thoughts.  I ask that you appeal
to BIG over this issue and site some examples of what you feel have
over-stepped the "rules" for anonymity.  I have tried to no avail.
 
BIG, please respond to my email asking you why the Ann O post was allowed
to be anonymous.  I bet it is because she expected "heat" and rightfully
so.  I also question the aspect of favoring one FMLer over another.  Do
for one, do for all, no discrepencies.  Yes, moderating is not an easy
task, but I am seeing inequalities here.
 
I like the FML and have gained plenty from it.  However, there are some
things that I just cannot understand.  This is just one of those things.
Perhaps if there was an explanation as to why that was allowed
anonymously, I might understand?
 
Respectfully and NOT a bash on BIG.  Just a question.
 
[Moderator's note: Not taken as a bash at all -- thanks for your comments.
 
No, I do not know this person other then via previous posts, the long time
on the FML and the typical occasional off-list communication.  And yes, I
do think that is sufficient to give me a better sense of the person than
most people received by reading one post.  For all I know this poster is
an expert at fooling us and could be eating ferrets for dinner.  But I
think not.  I guess I could make those same statements about Danielle, or
about almost anyone else on the FML I haven't personally visited.  And
even about some I have (are those shelter cages or snake food holders?).
Granted, nothing in life is certain.  I use my best judgement and it
usually works.
 
As to why the anon post was allowed: because it made sense to me.  We're
talking about an upset person who doesn't seem to act at all like the post
insinuated.  The venting had a purpose and a message and it sparked some
excellent and constructive debate too.  I'd call that the right decision.
 
I haven't heard directly from many people about this issue.  One person
commented on-list that he doesn't agree with anon posts at all.  Three
wrote to me privately supporting my decision.  I just don't see it as
an issue at all as long as I use reasonable care.  If I hear from many
more subscribers who offer differing opinions then I can revisit the
issue.  For NOW, this discussion is not productive is not likely to alter
my future anonymous posting desicions.  BIG]
[Posted in FML issue 3590]