Slog - Comments on I, Ex-Anonymous

Comment by ecce homo

ecce homo — Sat, 23 Jun 2007 14:48:29 -0800

Oh, Angela,

Are you sure you weren't in any of the pictures?

Comment by The CHZA

The CHZA — Sat, 23 Jun 2007 16:21:09 -0800

This is a rare simple moment of internet awesome

Comment by Kristi in Kitsap

Kristi in Kitsap — Sat, 23 Jun 2007 16:30:19 -0800

Maybe she can clarify for us: In I, Anonymous she wrote, "Though it's not as if any of us believe for a second that he actually had those thoughts in the first place." In her blog she wrote, "Everyone has crazy ideas that they don't act on, he just happened to get caught."

Uh, what?

Comment by keshmeshi

keshmeshi — Sat, 23 Jun 2007 17:05:29 -0800

So she was talking about this?

Possessing child pornography is in itself a crime. Perhaps Sheehan wasn't planning on acting on his perversion, but what about the welfare of the boys who were likely forced, or at least manipulated, to participate in creating that porn?

Someone should give that ex-girlfriend a medal.

Comment by apttitle

apttitle — Sat, 23 Jun 2007 17:28:25 -0800

My dearest Dan, how you have once again misused and abused the power you call editor. I know that it seems crazy for this kid to cast about on her own blog about this stuff, but did you really have to go and publish/bring attention to this for what must certainly be a much wider audience than the her myspace page ever intended? I mean seriously sir, do you understand Anonymity and its intent in regards to your publication?

Comment by otla

otla — Sat, 23 Jun 2007 19:03:50 -0800

Uh, sorry, but once you publish yourself on the internets, you're no longer "anonymous", sir, or maam. Someone's going to find it, whether it's blow job videos or a low rent blog entry saying "oh look, The Stranger published my I Anonymous submission!".

Comment by myspace police

myspace police — Sat, 23 Jun 2007 20:13:17 -0800

she might be fake, but Dan's vanity google alert is real.

Comment by apttitle

apttitle — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 10:49:24 -0800

6: I agree with you completely and acknowledge as much, however a myspace post (whether actual or not) has a significantly smaller intended audience than say the slog, or the stranger. It is merely Dan's obligation as editor to respect that intention as it was submitted to the paper. Particularly because this is a student. But clearly neither you nor Dan seem to care about that.

Comment by clover

clover — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 11:46:56 -0800

pwned.

Comment by JME

JME — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 15:55:26 -0800

that's just fuckin' awesome

Comment by Life is good

Life is good — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 20:36:46 -0800

Number 8 got it right. He understands that Dan doesn't give a shit about anyone other than himself and advancing his career as America's favorite gay man. That's why he is always ready with a witty quip when he is criticized for helping Bush promote his Dan Savage/George Bush war on the people in Iraq. More suffering, more destruction, more maimed bodies, more dead children, women and men, soldier and civilian. Ahhhhhhhhh, Dan Savage will tell you, but what a glorious war it is. Freedom is on the march. We're fighting them over there so we don't have to fight 'em over here. Dan has blood on his hands as much as the most die-hard evangelical supporter of George W. bush does.

Comment by Shelb

Shelb — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 20:46:09 -0800

Boy, number 11, you really went on a tangent.. and a seriously delusional one.

The Internet is public grounds, and this is a blog.. NOT a printed/distributed publication.

Also, the girl's blog statements are a complete paradox of her 'I, Anonymous' submission, so in the very least, Dan's exposed her hypocrisy in beliefs.

And 11, be quiet and watch your O'Reilly.

Comment by life is good

life is good — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 21:05:47 -0800

#11 are you saying that Dan Savage could use his forum in a newspaper to enthusiastically support an illegal war and not be responsible for the resulting
war crimes, death and suffering and destruction? Oh, as a Stranger reader would say: Fuck YOU!

Comment by David Wright

David Wright — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 23:40:45 -0800

When it comes to outing gay men, Dan recognizes all sorts of subtle gradations of anonymity (from "uses callboys" to "picks up in bars, but doesn't tell friends" to "tells friends, but not parents", etc.). The morality of the outing then depends on a careful weighing of the implied hypocracy of his anonymity against end achieved by the outing. And Dan is willing to endlessly debate the finer points of the principals involved.

When it comes to outing a naive, confused high school girl, though, there is just a simplistic binary choice between complete anonymity and a full-on public figure. And to prove this, an outing is always justified, even if the only end achieved is that Dan gets to publicly fuck with someone's head.

Good job, Dan. You really showed everyone with whom you are able to empathize.

Comment by exelizabeth

exelizabeth — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 12:00:50 -0800

MySpace blogs can be published so they are viewable to friends only. That blog was not. Hence, it's public, even if it's "intended audience" was small.

Comment by scvzdog ahwgubs

scvzdog ahwgubs — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 18:43:34 -0800

erly oqly nqdayo mqcabr pkoevr ngxcz psklaz

Comment by scvzdog ahwgubs

scvzdog ahwgubs — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 18:45:57 -0800

erly oqly nqdayo mqcabr pkoevr ngxcz psklaz

Comment by scvzdog ahwgubs

scvzdog ahwgubs — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 18:46:40 -0800

erly oqly nqdayo mqcabr pkoevr ngxcz psklaz