|This account will be, or has already been, disabled|
|While this account is going to be disabled due to the nature of the account name, the person who was using this account is absolutely welcome (and encouraged) to edit the wiki. Please close this account yourself by clicking "settings" in the upper right hand corner, scroll down to the bottom, and use the "Disable Forever" option. That will allow you to use the same email address to signup under your name. For further information please read Welcome to the Wiki.|
|If you have questions about this you can ask for help.|
I'm Maggie S, Group Rep for the Davis Al-Anon Family Group ACOA meetings and member of the DavisAFG service group handling outreach.
This DavisAFG signon allows us to update/modify information about meetings without breaking anonymity. I'm new at this and welcome advice or suggestions on how to improve these efforts.
Note: You must be logged in to add comments
Welcome to the Wiki! Thanks for updating the AA meetings, that's great information to keep current. —TomGarberson
There is no real need for being anonymous, especially since you are self professed group rep...
besides we frown upon organizational accounts (the few ruined it for the many)
deactivate this, and participate with the wiki considering the importance of using your realname
2011-10-23 14:02:07 you could probably get away with an being an anonymous user, but organization accounts have already had the precedent set... —StevenDaubert
2011-10-25 09:15:01 There is a need for being anonymous; anonymity is the spiritual foundation of our program. I don't understand why this is suddenly a problem. We have a good history here.
As for not using a pseudonym: the wiki Introduction doesn't address it, the Welcome merely says that the importance cannot be underestimated, even the section stating When Use of Real Name Matters reads: “Other users who choose to use a pseudonym to remain anonymous manage to establish their credibility through making a history of providing many valuable contributions to the wiki. (For example, by creating and editing pages on a Davis related subject that the site is currently lacking. The anonymous AlphaDog did this with the Town Flora section.)…”.
If there is a new RULE, then perhaps the Intro, Welcome and Guide should all be updated to state that YOUR USERNAME WILL BE DELETED. Then dishonest people can use fake names instead.
2011-10-25 09:16:34 that last comment sounds rude, wasn't meant to. Just trying to make the point. —DavisAFG perhaps you didn't click Wiki Community/Organizational accounts and look at the vast discussion/happenings that predate all of this. You miss my point, you can be anonymous, your anonymous organization can't. Funny isn't it? Daubert
2011-10-25 15:06:38 Does anyone have any objections to allowing DavisAFG to just keep using this account? It seems like the simplest option? —PhilipNeustrom
Well, there was a long, drawn out discussion, and the consensus was to disallow organizational accounts. So, someone could decide to unilaterally override that consensus, or we could re-open the discussion. Or, I would advocate that we treat this case as we treated the others and close the account, since I've yet to hear why it should be treated differently. —CovertProfessor
2011-10-25 16:48:50 Once again, Welcome to the Wiki!
As Daubert said, the problem here isn't anonymity; it's the exceptional voice inherent in using an organizational account. Using an individual pseudonym means you're an individual interacting with other individuals—something the Wiki has embraced as a goal. Using an organizational account means you're ostensibly speaking to other individuals from a position of authority, speaking on behalf of something, etc. For better or for worse, that's a model of interaction that's been rejected here.
This doesn't strike me as one of the more problematic examples, but for the sake of consistency, I'd tend to agree with others here. Your edits, Maggie, have been just fine. The problem is what happens when someone comes along using an organizational account and starts abusing that position, pointing to this as an argument for why (s)he shouldn't have to change anything. There have been some genuinely abusive org accounts, unfortunately.
So, by all means, feel free to use a pseudonym. Just not an organizational one. —TomGarberson