Request that anonymous postings be disabled

When you submit for critique, don't enable the anonymous option. Presto.

Hi Matt,

I'm aware of the options, and of the options in My Workspace to set those flags globally.

However, eliminating the possibility would reduce the number of options, some of which might not be understood by the members.

Since anonymous posting accomplishes nothing, and cannot be justified by any convoluted misapplication of logic, there's no reason for it to exist. It just p*SSes off the members.

Forgive me for challenging the powers that be.

If this were a free site, I'd say by all means, do whatever you wish. It's not.

- Leigh

Leigh,

That isn't going to happen.

The options that are on the table are the ones that are on the table. You are not forced to accept anonymous critique, if you choose to, you have made that choice yourself. Ratings are not going to get more public. That has been tried and is not likely to be tried again. There was nothing useful about the harassment, childish attacks, and vulgar emails that came from normally sane members of the site when they thought they were "wronged" by a low rating.

If that doesn't suit you, I am sorry to hear it. But it suits other people just fine. Particularly those who wish to choose anonymous critique and those who do not wish to be harassed or insulted just for giving ratings to a photographer who had requested ratings.

And photo.net IS a free site. Virtually everything you can do as a paying member you can do as a free member. We just give a few more benefits to our subscribing members. But nobody is forced to pay for anything around here.

Actually, I think that Josh has spelled out some very compelling reasons for being able to choose - or not - to accept them.

Agree with Josh. Users have a choice and that works for me.

they are counter-productive and serve no useful purpose whatsoever.

So a carefully-considered, thoughtful, detailed critique of an image is worthless if it doesn't have a name attached, but a "Nice shot!" comment is very helpful if it does have a name attached? I thought that the content of critique is what makes it useful.

convoluted misapplication of logic

Oh, the irony.

Leigh, I'll ask a few of the same questions I often ask when this issue comes up (as it has many times over the years).

1. What are your goals when you submit a photo for numerical ratings?
2. Do any of those goals for receiving numerical ratings duplicate or overlap with the function of a written critique?
3. How, specifically, would knowing the names of the photo.net members who offer numerical ratings help you achieve those goals?

Again, I'm referring specifically and solely to ratings here, not written comments/critiques.

Oh John, God bless you (and I mean that from the bottom of my cold atheist heart)!

I wanted to write what you wrote but lacked the temerity.