[1eyedjack]

csdenmark, on May 24 2004, 03:08 AM, said:

Jack here a thread to one of the former discussions about identy in ID.

http://bridgebase.lunarpages.com/~bridge2/...owtopic=620&hl=
(As it is a thread from the former BBO Forum - the layout is a bit different)

You will here see Fred has still the same position - but hard contested he has committed himself to modify the information. As far as I can see this has not taken place as "Rules for these sites"(I think only place with such kind of information) still is: It is not necessary for players to include their actual names, e-mail adresses, or countries in their user profiles, but we encourage our members to do so. On the other hand his position in the rules is different to what he stated in the thread you mentioned.

This will be my last post here regarding name and flag. I don't like de-railing threads. If sombody wants to continue those topics I will be ready - but please then open a separate thread for that.

Claus, a valid argument does not require special emphasis, nor does it require selectively quoting text whilst omitting sections from the same passage that do not suit your position. Immediately following the passage that you quote is the sentence

Quote

This information may be kept private by making sure the "Allow others to see this information box in the profile window is unchecked.

The entire tenor of this section of the rules of the site and other public statements is that whatever the "recommended" treatment there is absolutely nothing wrong in an individual deciding not to follow that recommendation, and if he does fill in the personal information there is absolutely nothing wrong in his concealing the entirety of that information from other members (if perhaps not from management).

Claus, it is clear that you have a very strong conviction on this matter. There is nothing wrong with strong convictions, and you are welcome to them. However I suggest that you are out of touch with the groundswell of opinion that makes up what is regarded as courteous conduct. The comments in your site lack balance, ascribe to those who conceal their identities less than honourable motives, without any justification, utterly fail to acknowledge an alternative point of view and present as axiomatic a code of conduct of which you present a small minority view.

[csdenmark]

Jack I have made my final statement to the subjects name and flag in this thread about skill level. If you want my comments to those subjects - please open a thread aimed for that.

This is only to repeat: My web-sites are NOT for debate on a BBO platform. BBO web-sites are NOT for debate on my web-sites. So it has to be in a free world of information. The views expressed at each of the places are certainly for debate - that is a main reason for all web-sites.

About quoting. I normally quote all I find of importance and then I add a link for the full text so that all can see what I mean and have an easy access to make their own, maybe different, judgement from that. The problem here is the text is not available as web-site.

[slothy]

Ummmm Guys Calm Down!!!!!!

Or neither of you will get a lollipop!!