ARRSE Avatar ID - Good or Bad?

Discussion in 'ARRSE: Site Issues' started by skintboymike, Feb 27, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Over the last couple of years I have noticed journalists coming on to this site fishing for controversial stories or views, most of whom (but not all) doing so without first stating their intentions for fear of abuse from regular ARRSEers. This has now come to the point where most people with genuine questions or problems are instantly labelled as 'Journos' and treated with similar contempt, regardless of how sensitive the issue may be.

    I fully appreciate that ARRSE is an anonymous site, and I enjoy being able to gob off as much as the next man. My only gripe is that most times it's hard to tell who I'm gobbing off to, or who's mouthing off at me. My suggestion is this: All ARRSE members register their details with the site, who then place a symbol next to the individual's avatar which annotates whether they're Regulars, Territorial Army, Royal Air Force, Navy, Journalist, Student, Cadet, Civilian or Civil Servant.

    Would you all welcome the change, or would this be too intrusive?
     
  2. Nah, sounds like a pain in the arrse, normally reading their previous posts is enough to illuminate their character, profession and service record.

    Journo's would still try it on, and we'd still rip into them... its practically an arrse sport these days.

    TB
     
  3. Journos and civvies wear the badge of not knowing the vernacular used by service persons and asking really bone questions that nobody normal would ever ask.

    As for fishing for controversial stories, if you maintain your PERSEC / OPSEC / Common sense, then you won't be getting yourself into trouble.
     
  4. Sixty

    Sixty LE Moderator Book Reviewer
    1. ARRSE Cyclists and Triathletes

    Doesn't make a lot of sense mate. The CO's know who I am and I'm more than happy to provide my service number to others but 20k members? Logistical nightmare.
     
  5. I reckon a combination of service designators like you suggest and the details of previous posts would provide too much information to the MoD thought Gestapo. The Service community is woefully small these days, and there are a limited number of postholders who would know those things it's important for us to air.

    In self-preservation, people would restrict their topics and we would get a lot less of the valuble input we get from those who are rteally on the inside track.

    I personally value the inside knowledge and expert opinion that gets aired on this site. Anonymity is the best guarantee of PERSEC, unfortunately this includes walts, journos and the rest.
     
  6. I suppose, but I read a thread recently where a mother was concerned about her son in Deepcut with regards to bullying, and ended up getting the usual 'Journo' accusations levelled at her. Ithought a system like the one suggested would go some way to help. (And if a journo tells you he's in the army and gets caught out, it'd be that bit funnier :pounce: ).

    By the way, any Mods who think it's too much like hard work, feel free to tell me to wind my neck in. I only make suggestions like this because there's no further work on my part!
     
  7. Would you also like to know colour, creed, marital status, income etc?

    Also if you want to pre-select who views your comments or interacts with your opinion, you give the impression you wouldn't stand by anything you have to say, at least not out in the open.

    A civvy/serving distinction is usually visable anyway after being in chat or reading posts?

    Double accounts are where the cowards usually hide anyway.
     
  8. been suggested before. cant be bothered to find the threads.

    Ski.
     
  9. Only just read last two posts, sorry. I guess you could be right, if it ain't broke don't fix it.
     
  10. Fugly

    Fugly LE DirtyBAT

    Hmmm. Agree and disagree.

    Its potentially a good idea, but open to abuse as well. I imagine some Arrsers would not want their forces connection so prominantly displayed, but it depends which forums they inhabit.

    Having a confirmation of service "combat indicator" would certainly give some posts more credibility, but again this could be open to abuse by journo's who would be more likely to quote "an MOD source" when they are in fact quoting an Arrser.

    I agree it would make a lot of constant "are/ have you ever served" arguments redundant when a debate is going on.

    I personally wouldn't mind registering my regimental number and displaying that I am serving, but I can fully understand why others wouldn't.
     
  11. Sorry, forgot to put a 'sitting on the fence' option on the poll.
     
  12. I think the easiest way round the journo problem was as someone suggested somewhere before and to have a forum just for the journos to put their questions in and see if anyone wants to respond to them. I know they can still try and slip under the net before it gives them somewhere to sit and vegetate.
     
  13. And who'se going to put time and effort into verifying whether people are who they claim to be? Not practical, apart from anything else.
     
  14. I would suggest that if there were to be such a place, there needs to be "walt police" checking on the answers so the reptiles don't start going off on one, or more probably, posting inflamatory responces themselves under a different ID so the can quote "military sources"!

    edited to add - Its not that i have a poor view of the british journo, i just think they would lie, cheat, steal, start wars, incite racial hatred .... if it would get some good copy.
     
  15. We could call the Forum "Really Bone Questions!" perhaps. And no wahs permitted.... Then I could post without discovering too late that some experienced ARRSEr has just wahhed me!

    Litotes