blogger's anonymity vs posting photos

sufi

lala
you know i still have that photo from: here... i think i sent all those reticent bloggers a copy, whose gonna post it?
 

Woebot

Well-known member
sufi said:
you know i still have that photo from: here... i think i sent all those reticent bloggers a copy, whose gonna post it?

i did't think it was fair to post an image of other people like that without getting everyone else to ok it. and if i'd asked people they'd probably have felt duty-bound to consent along the lines of "oh yeah i'm cool with that" when secretly they'd rather not......

plus i look fat in it ;)
 

sufi

lala
i think you look rather groovy actually...
it's a feckin funny photo
should we not out luka, fatty :p ?
 

sufi

lala
Loki is dat you?

loki.jpg
 

john eden

male pale and stale
WOEBOT said:
eden you charlatan! this was the photo john sent me when we met up first (was it?) the summer before last. some fucking use it was!!! post a proper photo!

:p

shake_the_foundations_1.sized.jpg


Better?
 

martin

----
Here's a fun game. Let's imagine what bloggers look like. I've only met one (J.Eden) tho in fairness, he didn't look anything like what I'd pre-supposed (ie - he didn't have a cape)


Woebot - very tall, pained expression, black hair with grey flecks, Jamie Oliver accent

Kid Shirt - dayglo shirts, spikey hair, neat facial scar

Loki - dreads, bumfluff, thin as a rake, sneer, old anarcho tattoo (left forearm)

Paul Meme -olive skin, glasses, really violent glare, Mexican bandit moustache

Psychbloke - a bit like Stewart Home

Infinite Thought - blonde in a ponytail, tiny nose, 5 ft 5, furry boots

Love Ecstasy Crime - wirey black hair, pierced nose, Antisect T-shirt, bit short

Dubversion - (actually I've seen a pic but it wasn't very clear - glasses and hat? Drinks Baileys?)

Beyond the Implode - Mr Potato Head

Marcello Carlin - curly black afro, Jimmy Nesbitt face

K-Punk - stubble, short hair, ear ring, Fred Perry

Glueboot - short pink hair, hooded eyes, knowing look, husky voice

DISCLAIMER - I am not to be physically manhandled for my guesses
 
you've definitely been spying on me, tho I'm 5ft 4, and my nose isn't that small. Couldn't be more wrong about Glueboot, however....

I reckon you look a bit like Thom Yorke with darker hair and slightly less wonky eyes. Am I right?
 
Last edited:

satanmcnugget

Well-known member
laffs!!!!!

well, im not tall or short...im about 5ft 8/9, 190 lbs...kinda husky (to be polite)

also, im the one with the neat-o facial scars

and, yeah, ya nailed me with the kinky hair cuz im Metis...the punk (???) t-shirt is a no-go...im middle-aged, so.....................................
 

Loki

Well-known member
martin said:
Kid Shirt - dayglo shirts, spikey hair, neat facial scar

Loki - dreads, bumfluff, thin as a rake, sneer, old anarcho tattoo (left forearm)

Psychbloke - a bit like Stewart Home

Well, you have the others JUST RIGHT but i don't have dreads, just dirty hair.
 

Ness Rowlah

Norwegian Wood
the chief blogger himself at kottke.org has a pic of himself in the top right corner.
very small though (he looks quite "generic" anyway).

I guess that's a good compromise between "I am nice, this is me and this is a friendly place;
but don't expect to recognise me on the streets".
 

Melchior

Taking History Too Far
There's a heavily cropped picture of me in my blogger profile. I think it's sort of useful to have a visual sense of what people look like. Helps with a sense of identity which is appealing with blogs.

My work in annarchist publishing back home means thiat I have a real sennse of these sort of debates. If you're talking politics etc I actually think it's useful to have some identifiable contact point unless of course you're talking shit on very heavy people (ie. Cobat 18 or something).
But even then it's a useful thing.

I'm of the opinion that if you're going to be talking about serious issues you should have a reason not to stand up behind your words. There was an election blog recently in NZ which was anonymous. And while they claimed to have good reasons for it, as far as I could tell the real reason was because they were a ill disguised front for the Labour Party.

Sorry to get all serious...
 

satanmcnugget

Well-known member
i just like the more personal feel of peeps knowing what i look like

and the fact that i look like a complete loon 9which iam) shld prevent them from taking me too seriously :)
 

blissblogger

Well-known member
ah see, cos when i saw the thread title i didn't think of visual anonymity, i thought of the fact that there's interlocutors on here i'll argue with and not know anything about -- who they are, etc -- which is weird when you think about it. quite a lot of dissensians, it's known they have blogs, they have a set of positions they've taken, you know where they're coming from, and in some cases i'll have met them, be friends or whatever ... .... but then there's others you don't (applies to any message board or net forum obviously) and in some ways arguing with someone on that basis is.... odd. seems like there's an imbalance there.
 

Peak

Member
I think there's all sorts of imbalances at work. I'm struck by my sense on this thread of an implied community within a community - 'we' are the bloggers, many or most of whom 'we' know/have met elsewhere, in real or virtual life, so that we know what they look like OR can make knowing/jokey guesses at what they look like...

I'm not a blogger, not particularly a net-head, but I like the cluster of enthusiasms and the tone of discussion/debate around here. I also like the anonymity (in blissbloggers sense) which seems quite democratic to me - I can respond to arguments & the way they're expressed without my sense of who is speaking (and whether I usually agree/disagree/value what they say) interfering. I can also use the anonymity to try out ideas and ways of putting them (which could otherwise be a bit scarey, some of you being proper writers n'all).

I guess my sense of 'democratic space' was a bit naive. Naturally there are heirarchies within the Dissensus community, people who know who they are talking to, whose voices they are interested in hearing, some who know they are insiders and some who aren't. I'm not complaining, or criticising people for not being inclusive, its probably inevitable on any forum. Its actually quite interesting - working out what the hierarchies are, who the implied audiences are - another reason for tuning in..... (anonymously...)
 
Top