Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Weep for the Poor Persecuted IDiots

 
The Intelligent Design Creationists at Evolution News & Views and Uncommon Descent have been pushing the idea that acceptance of evolution is associated with moral decay and the rise of Adolph Hitler. Recently, an IDiot going by the pseudonym of "kairosfocus" posted a similar attack on his blog: Visually exposing the Anti-Christ spirit of Nazism (and correcting the New Atheist "Hitler was a Christian" smear often used in retort to exposing* the Social Darwinist history of ideas roots of Hitler's thought.

The goal, obviously, is to link the scientific fact of evolution to the evils of social Darwinism and eugenics.

Somebody posted as comment on that blog (or a related blog) saying ...
xxx, the religious wacko who owns and runs this site, blames all the world’s ills, including Hitler and the nazis, on Darwin, atheists, and material evolutionists.

To see the truth about Hitler and the nazis, see these XXXXXXX:

XXXXXX is a LYING, arrogant, bloviating, sanctimonious, ignorant, uneducated, abusive, delusional god zombie.

See this site for a lot more about XXXXX:
The comment has been removed.

Now "kairosfocus" has complained on Uncommon Descent that such "vandalism" is outrageous and misguided [FOR RECORD: What we are dealing with . . . an example of web stalking and vandalism].
Now, this vandalism of a site wholly unrelated to the matters debated at UD (and tied onwards to a hate site that exploits Google’s freedom of comment policies), was evidently in response to my having posted here at UD, matters linked to the well-known history of ideas roots of Hitler’s thought. I therefore suggest that onlookers examine the Weikart lecture and a discussion of a key clip from Mein Kampf that demonstrated the Darwinist-Haeckelian frame of thought, that beyond reasonable doubt strongly shaped Hitler’s thinking, speech and behaviour. (Those needing documentation on Hitler’s actual attitude to and intentions for the Christian Churches, can look at the recently released Nuremberg investigatory documents here. If after seeing these documents and the like, someone still insists on trying to claim Hitler was a Christian etc etc, s/he is delusional and/or willfully deceitful.)
Furthermore, the behavior of this "vandal" is exactly what "kairosfocus" expects.
As they say, a tree is known by its fruits, and draws sustenance from its roots . . .

(In addition, a note on “blaming the world’s ills.” The likes of this hate-driven commenter will not appreciate or accept that a Bible-believing Christian will hold that much of what ails our world traces to our common challenge of being finite, fallible, morally fallen and too often ill-willed. Hence, our common need for recognition of our moral plight, repentance, forgiveness and moral-spiritual transformation through the gospel. Slander-laced strawmen and scapegoats are ever so much more easy to set up and ignite through irresponsible rhetoric that then clouds, polarises and poisons the atmosphere.)

That refusal to be responsible over a moral hazard closely tied to the Darwinist, evolutionary materialist frame of thought, and that refusal to acknowledge well-established historical facts that are inconvenient to the new atheist agenda are tellingly informative.

The pattern of obsessive, self-justifying, nihilistic hate, stalking, slander, Internet vandalism and abuse is even more informative about an unfortunately significant subset of the New Atheist movement and the danger its patent extremism poses. (After this sort of web vandalism, and worse, can any reasonable person doubt why moderation is necessary to maintain a reasonable tone at UD and elsewhere?)

Ironically, the very conscience benumbed self-justifying by smearing scapegoats that this sort of behaviour demonstrates on the small scale, is what — when such attitudes attained state power — led to the utter breakdown of morality on the grand scale that over 100 million ghosts from the past century tell us never to forget.

Can any reasonable person doubt that had a commentator like the above the power to do as he wished and get away with it, he would do me and my family further harm?

It is time for the New Atheist advocates of evolutionary materialism to take a serious look at what they have been enabling by their intemperate writings and attitudes.
Every atheist blogger gets far worse comments from Christians on a regular basis. Most of us get harassing emails every single day and the authors usually identify themselves as devout Christians doing God's work. These same Christians don't hesitate to send threatening messages to our colleagues and family members in an effort to silence us. Some of the Christian kooks are so dangerous that they have been arrested by police and are currently under forcible confinement in a mental health institution.

Don't weep for the IDiots. They need to examine their own beliefs since it's the creationists who are the biggest threat on these blogs. There must be something wrong with Christianity if that's the kind of activity it promotes. It is time for the Christian opponents of science to take a serious look at what they have been enabling by their intemperate writings and attitudes.


43 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for letting me know the identify of kairosfocus.

      Delete
    2. Hey! Like the new commetns / reply feature! Good choice.

      Delete
    3. Who would have thought - another computer tech of some sort...

      Delete
  2. So, Nazis persecuted Christian Churches. And this is of course proof, that Darwin and atheist are responsible for Hitler's atrocities.

    IIRC Christians persecuted other Christians (and non-christians) many times throughout history.

    It was written many times about connection of Hitler and christianity.
    But was christianity responsible for Nazism and its crimes?
    Well, maybe. But the point is - and was - that it is not atheism, darwinism or materialism which was responsible for killing people to make world a better place.

    But they don't understand that. They are too indoctrinated to read, not to mention thinking.
    This is why they're called idiots.

    They[IDiots] need to examine their own beliefs...

    Futile hope.

    ReplyDelete
  3. If you're referring to Mabus, he also harassed Christians, like Wesley Elsberry.

    ReplyDelete
  4. You'll find a good summary upon Hitler, evolution and christianity at Coel Hellier's blog:

    http://coelsblog.wordpress.com/2011/11/08/nazi-racial-ideology-was-religious-creationist-and-opposed-to-darwinism/

    Unfortunately Karrosfocus aka Gordon E. Mullings of Montserrat will ignore it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sparc, the coelsblog site is one of the ones I linked to that gordon mullings Xed out in his recent tirade on UD.

      My original comments (that he calls vandalism, etc.) were like this:

      gordon elliott mullings, the religious wacko who owns and runs this site, blames all the world’s ills, including Hitler and the nazis, on Darwin, atheists, and material evolutionists.

      To see the truth about Hitler and the nazis, see these:

      http://coelsblog.wordpress.com/2011/11/08/nazi-racial-ideology-was-religious-creationist-and-opposed-to-darwinism/ (And another link but I can't remember which one)

      gordon elliott mullings is a LYING, arrogant, bloviating, sanctimonious, ignorant, uneducated, abusive, delusional god zombie.

      See this site for a lot more about gordon elliott mullings:

      http://theidiotsofintelligentdesign.blogspot.com/

      --------------------------

      In his tirade, gordon Xed out his name, a couple of links, and a link to my site. I thought that you and the others here would like to know what I said in my comments that gordon got so worked up about. I figured that the coelsblog article about the nazis would make his blood boil. You've probably noticed that gordon is nowhere to be seen in the comments on that article. He obviously doesn't have a good argument against the article and doesn't want to be shown for the history distorting fool that he is in front of the author of it and the other people who have commented on it.

      Delete
  5. Ugh.

    Funny how these guys overlook the fact that Martin Luther, the godfather of the Protestant Reformation (and a GERMAN), was a raving antisemite who wrote a book late in his life advocating the persecution, isolation, imprisonment and execution of Jews.

    Maybe I'm talking crazy, but I'm pretty sure Martin Luther didn't know about Darwin. Christians doing horrible things to Jews wasn't a concept invented by Hitler.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dr Moran et al,for record, I note here. Your post and the comments are inadvertently, deeply sadly revealing. Please, think again and do better.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Kairos the asshole

    Would you care to go and examine those quotes both in the context of the book you cite and in its social context?

    Being an ass-hole is no excuse. Darwin did not invent the concept of "lower animals," this is a Christian concept. You imbeciles are the ones who decided that humans were superior and apart from animals. In Darwin's times it would be thus obvious to talk about animals other than humans as "lower."

    Then, the part about civilized races exterminating savages, the context is one for explaining why there is such a gap between humans and today's other great apes in terms, for instance, of intelligence. His explanation was that those populations and species with higher annihilation power eliminated the others leaving us with the current gap. As proof, he comments on what was happening by his times, "civilized races" eliminating the less civilized ones. But Darwin did not mean to say that the races were inferior and superior. Only that it was an inclination for some groups of humans to kill other groups of humans if they had the advantage. Read further and you will see that Darwin talks against discrimination by saying that despite appearances (another paragraph that you imbeciles isolate for racism effect), "savages" are just as intelligent as "civilized" people. Something his contemporaries might have missed if they see "savages" in their normal attires, versus seeing them dressed and conversing in the language of the "civilized" ones.

    It was normal in that society to talk about human races because we obviously display adaptations to different climates and situations. But overall, the message in Darwin's work was that we were still one species, all equally capable, that it was appearances only that made the "civilized" feel superior to others.

    Now please stop being such an ass-hole and read beyond your wishful ignorance.

    Of course, you will never admit error in this, right? It's in the instruction manual that Hitler left you. You said so yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  8. How surprising, none of my comments on his site have yet to see the light of day

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Impatience can be embarrassing ;-)

      Delete
  9. I think KF is best ignored. For a start his writing is so obtuse and convoluted it's impossible to read. In terms of being effective communication, it's utter dreck (which others have tried to patiently point out to him at UD, but to no avail).

    And why bother to give attention to somebody who is so paranoid they won't even use their real name, yet is so supercilious and holier-than-thou he expects everybody to worship at his feet and be in awe of his intellect. Not me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The convoluted and long writing has the purpose of appearing to be an expert of sorts. The more he writes the more the imbecilic public he addresses will think that he is very smart. It's part of his propaganda technique.

      Delete
  10. Regrettable. The vandalism cited is certainly odd behaviour for a supporter of evolution - a rogue element is inevitable, despite the strict edict from the High Council to conduct ourselves impeccably at all times. Playing right into the hands of the Unbelievers.

    The High Council must seek out and punish this individual for bringing darwinism (all hail its naturalistic constructive power!) into disrepute. We might have to look into this "Hitler" character as well; he may be a loose cannon.

    ReplyDelete
  11. GEM has a particularly annoying habit of generating postings with Comments Closed. Worse, terminating threads and editing his own views directly into others' comments, as the last word on the matter.

    He's free to moderate as he sees fit, of course, but allowing ideas to be critically examined would seem to be the high-ground position.

    That said, by and large, I would give UD credit for their moderation policy. And I think all vandalism inexcusable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. I quite like some of his turns of phrase. But ... I do start to become aware of my life passing by as I read on. And on. And ...

      Delete
  12. The rich man in his castle,
    The poor man at his gate,
    God made them high and lowly,
    And ordered their estate.


    All Things Bright and Beautiful at Wikipedia:

    "… inspiration may have come from William Paley's Natural Theology published in 1802 which sets out his argument for God as the designer of the Natural World. For example verse 2 makes reference to wings and verse 7 refers to eyes. Wings and eyes were two major examples of complexity of design that Paley used to support his famous analogy with a watch and God as the Divine Watchmaker."

    TomS

    ReplyDelete
  13. It's really quite amusing to see the IDiots attempting to blame Frankenberger and Stalin on Darwin.

    Just for the record, Frankenberger and the Nazi party rejected the central claim of Darwinian evolution, namely common descent.

    As for Stalin and the Communist government of the former Soviet Union, the concept of natural selection was specifically rejected by the authorities there, vis Lysenkoism. Geneticists who accepted natural selection were sent to the Gulag.

    However, it is entirely irrelevant whether Frankenberger and Stalin were influenced by Darwin. The truth or falsity of the Theory of Evolution rests on the evidence, not on whether the theory might have been misused by sociopaths. In fact, it matters not at all if it could be shown that Darwin was a racist. The contributions to physics of the German Nobel Prize winners Lenard and Stark were unrelated to their antisemitism and racism.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. SLC said: As for Stalin and the Communist government of the former Soviet Union, the concept of natural selection was specifically rejected by the authorities there, vis Lysenkoism. Geneticists who accepted natural selection were sent to the Gulag.

      This is a bit of an urban myth. Mendelian genetics was suppressed and Lysenko's quack views exalted. But officially the state endorsed evolution and natural selection. Common descent was taught in the schools as the official view, and pride was taken in new fossils found by Soviet paleontologists, for example. In that respect Soviet education was similar to what would be found in other European school systems of the time. Of course with Mendelian genetics banned, the Modern Synthesis could not be taught.

      Lysenko's views moved towards rejecting natural selection, but this view never made it into the schools by the time Lysenko fell from grace. The problem (for Lysenko and co.) was that Marx and Engels had specifically endorsed Darwin. Readers wanting to know more should look at David Joravsky's brilliant and scathing 1970 book "The Lysenko Affair".

      Delete
    2. It is my information that the official line of the party was that the concept of natural selection was not compatible with the official doctrine of dialectical materialism and the Lamarkian theory proposed by Lysenko was compatible because it implied that the improvements made by the efforts of each generation could be achieved via the efforts of that generation could be passed on to the descendents. It is a proven fact that a number of geneticists who argued for generation to generation change via random mutations and fitness selection were sent to the gulag (in particular, a man named Vavilov who died in prison in 1943).

      Delete
    3. It's not that simple. Mendelian geneticists were purged from universities and institutes and persecuted. Lysenkoists were in control. But the official ideology continued to agree with Marx and Engels who had endorsed Darwin. David Joravsky notes in his book


      That became the conventional wisdom of the Marxist movement, and millions of Soviet school children are still learning to repeat a simple form of it: Darwinism is the science of biological evolution, Marxism of social.


      Lysenko and his followers were moving towards ousting natural selection from the schools, but they never got there. By the way, calling Lysenko's muddled and mystical views "Lamarckian" is giving him way too much credit.

      Delete
    4. In everything that we know about Hitler, there is no evidence that he himself ever mentioned Darwin or is ideas, is there?

      Delete
  14. Gordon Mullings (kairosfocus) writes

    Dr Moran et al,for record, I note here. Your post and the comments are inadvertently, deeply sadly revealing. Please, think again and do better.

    Let me make myself perfectly clear.

    I'm accusing you of three things.

    1. Lying. You claim that atheism leads to moral decay and that scientists who accept the fact of evolution are sympathetic to Social Darwinism.

    2. Over-reacting. There are a few nasty comments by evolution supporters but these are trivial compared to what else is on the blogs; especially comments from creationists.

    3. Hypocrisy. You ask that atheists and science supporters accept responsibility for the bad behavior of everyone who shares their point of view but you do not accept responsibility for your fellow Christians who behave far worse.

    Please stop pretending that you and your fellow creationists hold the moral high ground in this debate. It's not true and it just makes you look like an IDiot.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL!

      Onlookers: I always enjoy a quality pwning.

      This is especially sweet as I know that ol' lying, overreacting, hypocritical Gordy will have no resort but to run away and post an unreadable, comments closed rebuttal on one of his IDiot blogs.

      BDW of the INTERNETZ

      Delete
  15. I'm the one who posted the comments gordon elliott mullings of Montserrat (kairosfocus) referred to, but I didn't use any Xs. I make absolutely NO apologies for anything I said on that site, my site, or any other site about gordon elliott mullings or any other IDiot.

    What I said on that site or anywhere else about gordon elliott mullings is the truth. He is a willfully dishonest, two-faced, cowardly, malignantly narcissistic lunatic with a massive god complex.

    He has been falsely accusing me of threatening him and his family "Mafioso style" for several months even though I made NO threats. I have repeatedly asked for and even demanded evidence of my alleged threats and he has never responded or shown any evidence whatsoever, because there is none. He made up the whole thing, just like he makes up all of his false accusations and other deranged blather. He has also falsely accused others of threatening him and his family even though he has never shown any evidence to back it up. He even considers it a threat when anyone uses his real name, even though he has posted his name and location at many places on the internet, including some of his own sites.
    How else would anyone know his real name and location?

    He, like other IDiots, loves to play the censored, persecuted victim card. He obviously sees himself as a clone of jesus; persecuted, threatened, stifled, molested, crucified, risen, and THE messiah. He preaches his insane bloviations and expects everyone to come running to worship him, and he will not tolerate ANY disagreement or disobedience with him or his dictatorial, Dominionist agenda.

    gordon elliott mullings of Montserrat is a willful, blatant, LIAR and a long list of other despicable things. His LIES, quote mining, false accusations, distortions of history, distortions of reality, cowardice, maniacal agenda, and constant attacks on "evolutionary materialists" and others are a profound example of his extreme mental derangement. If anyone is like Hitler, it's him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm the one who posted the comments

      Ah, that clear that up. It was presented as 'vandalism' - I read that as some kind of hack.

      Unfortunately - tell me to sod off if you wish - but 'angry evolutionist' is oxygen to these guys. Not that (largely) polite engagement has got me anywhere.

      Delete
    2. I had wondered why Gordon Elliott Mullings of Montserrat (kairosfocus) went into such a hissy fit over what looked like a comment being posted on his moderated blog.

      Although it was hard to tell from his stream of consciousness rambling on his blog and UD what had actually happened.

      I'd say keep calling it like you see it on your blog, I doubt if any form of engagement will change the minds of the IDiots but there is a large audience of the uncommitted out there.

      Delete
    3. I doubt if any form of engagement will change the minds of the IDiots but there is a large audience of the uncommitted out there.

      I would love to meet just one! I used to do a lot of posting at talk.origins, but had to stop as I was finding myself sucked into a vortex. Same at UD. The problem is that the people one actually deals with are simply not interested in the science, or having their misunderstandings cleared up. Not getting it is good for the immortal soul, and if they can persuade you to not get it too, so much the better.

      Engagement is an exercise at best - one's own conceptions/misconceptions could probably do with a prod from time to time, and writing can be fun - but there is one big gulf somewhere between my powers of exposition and theirs of comprehension.

      Delete
  16. Hi Allan, from the very first time I got involved in the ID versus evolution debate I thought about the various ways in which I or anyone else could (or should) respond to the ID pushers. Before I ever said a word to anyone I read a lot of the stuff said by both 'sides'. I saw a lot of people on the evolution 'side' trying very hard to be nice (or at least tolerant), and trying to patiently educate the ID pushers about evolution and other aspects of science. I still see that, although many on the evolution 'side' have run out of patience and are throwing back what has been thrown at them for a very long time.

    From what I've seen, the most vicious, malicious, insidious, dishonest, unwarranted attacks are perpetrated by the ID pushers, and gordon e mullings (kairosfocus) is one of the most despicable and hypocritical of the bunch.

    It's clear to me that the IDiots are only interested in one thing; dominating the world with their religious and political agenda. Many religious people are content with getting along, and keeping their beliefs to themselves or at least in their church. Many also have no problem with science conducting itself as it sees fit. The IDiots, on the other hand, want to modify or replace science with their religious beliefs and either sneak or force their crazy beliefs into public schools and public policy. They are card carrying members of the religious lunatic fringe and are as unreasonable and unreachable as anyone with any other maniacal agenda.

    I realize that my approach may not be acceptable to everyone who supports science but I think that there's a place for it in the 'war' that IDiots are waging against science and reason. As you said, my approach is oxygen to some or all IDiots but I haven't seen any indication that any other approach has any positive effect on them. For instance, Elizabeth Liddle and many others have tried to patiently educate the IDiots over at UD and on many other sites but what they get in return is ridicule, insults, dictatorial sermons, lies, false accusations, blocking of comments, banning, endless demonizing tirades against anyone who questions or opposes the IDiots' beliefs and agenda, and incredibly stubborn refusal to accept reality, and responsibility for their own deplorable behavior.

    As Steve pointed out, there are uncommitted people out there who are reading a variety of approaches to the IDiots, and mine may get some of the uncommitted to see just how screwed up the IDiots are, and especially how screwed up the most prominent, outspoken, and obnoxious IDiots are. Besides, it feels good to throw their poo back at them. :)

    Maybe a variety of approaches will have a positive effect on some of the uncommitted. One can hope.

    And yes, the only "vandalism" I did was post some comments on a site that gordon e mullings (kairosfocus) operates. Anything said against him is a "threat", "stalking", "slander", and "vandalism" to him. He's a malignantly narcissistic, cowardly tyrant, and I have never encountered anyone who is more guilty of the things he accuses others of. The guy is a menace to society. I hate to think of what the world would be like if he were in charge.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Twt,

      Thanks for the response. My initial, jocular comment was prompted by KF's approach on UD, where he described it as 'vandalism'. I was mocking their "evolution is a religion/conspiracy" stance. "Who controls the British pound, who keeps the metric system down - we do! we do!". Without delving any deeper, I (like, I suspect, most UD-sympathisers) read it as a hack, and that reflects badly on KF, not you. As I've noted elsewhere, summarily closing a thread that was getting a bit too hot to handle, then editing final comments directly into opponents' posts, is a pretty low tactic. And those posts! The horror, the horror!

      Each to their own, as regards style. There is no political movement or common agenda that 'evos' must follow. It helps to get the science right, I suppose! Beyond that, internettery is just discussion, good and bad, heated or cool, right or wrong. I do admire Elizabeth's patience and good nature in the face of provocation. And that's the tactic, for many. Provocation, then whining to the "onlookers" when a darwinist (sic) blows their top, is pure politics. I have posted at various ID locales in intermittent bursts. And it is driving me slowly, steadily insane!

      PS My favourite comment was from a guy who'd created a blog in order to mess with Doug Dobney. Someone chastised him for immaturity. His response: "I created a blog just to f*** with someone on the internet. Do you really think maturity is my strong suit?".

      Delete
  17. I saw Christopher Hitchens refer to the fact that the Catholic Church, historically, had supported Nazism, Communism and Fascism and had close ties to many of the important figures of those regimes.

    I wonder if someone could recommend a book or two that specifically address the Catholic Churches relationship to these regimes.

    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Communism?
      Are you sure about that? I don't recall Hitchens mentioning this in the videos I watched.
      If yes, could you give a link?

      AFAIK Catholic Church was opposed to Communism (Communism was atheistic and antireligious). IIRC Hitchens said only that Communism itself was religious in its core.

      Delete
    2. kilo papa, have you seen these?

      http://www.evilbible.com/hitler_was_christian.htm

      http://coelsblog.wordpress.com/2011/11/08/nazi-racial-ideology-was-religious-creationist-and-opposed-to-darwinism/

      Delete
    3. Something to consider in the 'blame Darwin and evolutionary materialism for Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot' baloney is that MANY other tyrants lived BEFORE Darwin. Is Darwin to blame for them too? And were any or all of those tyrants evolutionary materialists?

      Delete
  18. gordon elliott mullings, the religious wacko who owns and runs this site, blames all the world’s ills, including Hitler and the nazis, on Darwin, atheists, and material evolutionists.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Are you sure about that? I don't recall Hitchens mentioning this in the videos I watched.

    ReplyDelete
  20. If anyone would like to see kairosfocus (gordon e mullings) in action, this thread is a pretty good example:

    http://www.uncommondescent.com/atheism/church-burning-video-used-to-promote-atheist-event/

    ReplyDelete
  21. Mr Moran:

    With all due respect, web harassment is bullying (and I see you are harbouring one of the chief offenders in my case . . . [and TWT, I stand by my point that Aiden's lyrics are inexcusable and Mr Dawkins should never have stood on a stage in an event where they were featured]).

    Kindly, let the record show this.

    Next, the truth on Hitler -- contrary to commonly asserted claims on sites that irresponsibly say "Hitler was a Christian" -- is that Nazism was anti-Christian. This, I have documented here, and it would be useful to consult Karl Barth et al, in the Barmen Declaration for more.

    I would also note to you, that social darwinism, eugenics and scientific racism were significant science in society issues connected to the rise of Darwinism, and a responsible position on the ethics connected to science will need to frankly face and respond to it.

    Just as, physics has to face the implications of what happened to Japan in 1945.

    Finally, TWT knows full well that I have asked that my name not be used on the web because of spam issues.

    Good day.

    KF

    ReplyDelete
  22. Mullings:

    1. It's far too late - anyone with rudimentary googling skills will find your pseudonym and real name linked all over the internet.
    2. This IS the internet - you throw faeces into it, it will be thrown right back, with interest
    3.There are excellent spam filters freely available - get one
    4. Please keep posting - not only are your tirades peculiarly entertaining, I cannot imagine anything else more likely to induce thoughtful young people to reject religion and ID

    ReplyDelete
  23. Finally, TWT knows full well that I have asked that my name not be used on the web because of spam issues.

    Come off it. Ask people not to use your name, fair enough. But, spam issues? I never use anything but my own name on the web these days (as do many others) and it makes not one iota of difference. Maybe if your email address were published, that might generate you some spam but just your name? That's preposterous!

    ReplyDelete