And Jill did the first real "outing" by posting the blog on SoWal and using his youcarenow name. At this point he lost all anonymity since the same blog was already posted on the Walton Sun website using his real name.
That is just not true. I posted a commentary I received via Google Alerts by an author with the screen name
yucarenow. I did not know who that was. Someone here - I believe TFT? - was the first of several who put his real name into the discussion.
My whole point is that I don't think it's right that his identity was given as I don't remember yet this ever happening before. Please correct me if I'm wrong but I don't remember personally seeing it before. When I post something, people respond to Indigo Jill, not Jill Gaupin. And yes, it's easy to find out who I am - I put links to my website/businesses here) - but that is
my perogative, my choice. This message board operates on anonymity unless soemone chooses otherwise. Unless someone chooses to put their real name, it's not right IMO for others to take it upon themselves to do so, especially if it is in response to a post someone doesn't agree with.
Either the board needs to stay anonymous
for everyone and the rules need to be followed to protect that (i.e. no one exposes the identity of another)
OR the board needs to operate as a non-anonymous board and everyone must expose their true identity to participate. Rules can't be bent "just a little" one way or the other IMO or the integrity of the board is lost.
My last point on this - I promise

- is that it is also just not true the this board isn't as anonymous as most would think. Maybe for many of the core posters that is true but even for someone like me, who checks in several times a day, I don't know who 99% of the posters really are!
And BTW- the people that are unhappy with the signs are not the kind of people that vandalize things. I don't think the 30A Scenic Corridor people or those of us that went to the meeting, wrote letters, and sent e-mails appreciate being characterized that way..
Collectively, you don't know that and I don't know that with certainty. You know the character of only those you know personally who are unhappy with the signs and are taking the right course to address it properly - through the proper channels - and of course, they wouldn't do this. I get that.
But even if it was in jest, it has been alluded to in this thread and if I am right in my interpretation of the conversation, I believe someone mentioned that the sign coming in to SoWal on 331 looked to have been ran into with a vehicle. Intentional or accident? Who knows? But it was mentioned as something to possibly do with the signs until this is resolved (again in jest, I get that too) on this board but you never know, with all the lurkers, who would take it to that level. So absolutely not, we don't know if every single person who is unhappy with the new signage are not the kind of people that vandalize things.
This is a long thread and I am participating in a discussion that is taking it off it's intended path. I will now step down - baacck away from the podium
