The answer is community moderation

The author of this letter seems very confused, thinking that the only way for people to be accountable for their online comments is to strip away the anonymity afforded by the web.

I would recommend that those who wish to participate in news forums have to register and provide a contact number which has to be verified before access is granted. Unlike club forums, local news forums have a responsibility to the public. Even a pen name has to have a real person behind it.

This will help instill integrity in the replies posted as the posters will ultimately be responsible for their comments. This will also weed out "flamers" who regularly post profane replies or are unconstructively sarcastic.

First, a nit-pick. An anonymous post or comment does have a real person behind it, just like a pen name the writer cited. Unless Skynet just went live.

The writer ignores the positive aspects of anonymity and chose to focus on the negative, and proposes a draconian and privacy-busting registration method to control feedback. This accomplishes a few things:

• It will reduce the number of willing participants, as many are loathe compromising their privacy just to participate in online discussion
• It gives the forum owner (in this case, the press) a massive contact database, and no one knows how securely that database is guarded.
• The quality of online discussion drops, due to fewer willing participants, further choking off alternative viewpoints.

That "cloak of anonymity" is a convenient excuse, but let's not forget that many people would feel more comfortable, and be more forthright, about their views if they can keep that separate from their professional lives. I would rather live with a higher noise-to-signal ratio than have to choke off access and discussion.

I do, however, acknowledge that a higher signal-to-noise ratio is necessary for constructive debate, and that flames and offensive, violence-inciting comments to be deleted. For that to happen I would depend on the community. A registration system should be set up, but should not be made mandatory, nor should it ask for sensitive information such as phone numbers. Those who register are given the right to rate comments up (+1) or down (-1), effectively implementing a marketplace of ideas.

If you use YouTube, you will understand what I mean. I personally prefer the Slashdot version of community moderation and meta-moderation, used with a more restrictive filter. It significantly improves the signal-to-noise ratio, and is more robust against manipulation.

That is your answer, community moderation. Forum owners, bloggers and anyone who create online content knows that comments are the lifeblood, and that moderation is key. If you want to have a forum and not moderate, don't allow comments to be posted; slowly see your audience disappear. That is the price to pay.

To implement what Yeo Shuan Chee said would asphyxiate active participation and engagement, turning any forum into an echo chamber, which defeats the purpose of a forum. People would do well to understand that.

Comments

[Offshore Outsourcing]

While the concern over anonymous comments is valid, we have to understand that one of the things people like best about the Internet is the anonymity--it allows them to participate and still retain their privacy at the same time. Besides, moderation is there to police any comments.