Thoughts on the PrawfsBlawg Angsting Thread

5
667
Posted by Elli Olson, community karma 667
Professor Nancy Leong at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law shared some thoughts on the PrawfsBlawg Angsting Thread and timing law review submissions. What's your opinion?

Here's a link to the full post: http://www.nancyleong.com/miscellaneous/my-thoughts-on-the-prawfsblawg-angsting-thread/ 

1 Comment

3
137752
Brian Cody, community karma 137752

Here's a similar post from 2012 by Dave Hoffman at Concurring Opinions that also takes a critical look at the idea of anonymity and how it impacts "being transparent about obscure process[es]."

There has been a backlash on anonymous comments and on even allowing the ability to comment at all on sites across the Internet. You may have noticed that many news sites don't show comments by default and instead force users to click to read them. The interesting thing, to me, about the Angsting Thread example is that the reason for being anonymous is so easily relatable: "I'm submitting to these law reviews, I don't want to say something that could negatively impact my ability to get published." I think this is a bit of a different situation than, say, someone who doesn't want to leave their name on a news site. At the same time, there's no reason why people have to get negative.

Those against anonymity online often point to trolls who post really mean content. Of course, we also find that on the Angsting Thread (screenshot). As online anonymity in comment threads is often linked to negativity, naming a thread after 'angsting' seems like a perfect recipe for it.

over 7 years ago
login to leave comment