Re^2: Having our anonymous cake and eating it too

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Having our anonymous cake and eating it too by tobyink (Canon) on Jan 23, 2014 at 13:56 UTC
That's just a question of granularity. My point is that it wouldn't stop Anonymous Monk from replying to anybody's messages (they could just post a new top-level node), but it would just stop them from being threaded in the correct place. `use Moops; class Cow :rw { has name => (default => 'Ermintrude') }; say Cow->new->name`	[reply]
Re^4: Having our anonymous cake and eating it too by ww (Archbishop) on Jan 23, 2014 at 14:01 UTC
True, but would making snide comments (or giving good advice/insights/code) in a node at the head of a new thread -- ie, a new OP, if I understand you correctly) offer AM the same gratification. I suspect that the workaround you've pointed out would NOT be attractive to the trolls... and less than useful to those who post valuable information, anonymously. Update: Amusingly, I got a 'tough beans' message when I tried to "Create" -- maybe the Monastery would be better off if whatever glitch caused that occured more often. Come, let us reason together: Spirit of the Monastery	[reply]
Re^3: Having our anonymous cake and eating it too by choroba (Cardinal) on Jan 23, 2014 at 13:42 UTC
Then the Anonymous Monk could reply to the owner of the thread in a different thread where he would not be the author... لսႽ† ᥲᥒ⚪⟊Ⴙᘓᖇ Ꮅᘓᖇ⎱ Ⴙᥲ𝇋ƙᘓᖇ	[reply]
Re^4: Having our anonymous cake and eating it too by ww (Archbishop) on Jan 23, 2014 at 13:52 UTC
I guess our understandings of the OP (and/or the meaning of "thread") vary. Come, let us reason together: Spirit of the Monastery	[reply]


There's more than one way to do things
	PerlMonks