Signature on Messages

Kelvin Kean (kkean@ix.netcom.com)
Thu, 1 May 1997 21:12:21 -0500 (CDT)

Ron Springer makes a very good point. I've been disappointed in the
many people, something more than half of those who post messages to the
genealogy lists to which I subscribe, who omit their name entirely or
use at most something like "Joe." I know there are exceptions, (Esther
from Southern Tier and the GripMason are two who come to mind whose
contributions are almost always of value) but I generally view
anonymous messages as ones that should be read with skepticism. In
general the practice strongly discourages dialogue, the very opposite
of what the mail list is for.

Since I don't believe in anonymity, I've always signed my full name,
although I've never made a practice of adding my current home town as
Ron has suggested, but I think his suggestion is a good one and will
adopt it. I would encourage others to do the same.
If most adopt it, we can only add to the civility we all desire, and
probably increase the throughput of sound advice and information. An
interesting corrollary is that there is probably not a newspaper in
North America who will print a letter in the "Reader's Write" column
without knowing the person's name and address. A signed letter is more
likely to be reasoned and rational than an anonymous one. The same
probably applies to signed postings.

Kelvin Kean
Elverson, Pennsylvania

Search billions of records on Ancestry.com