you know what's really funny? Back in the 18th century it was thought that by writing under a pen name, you could enter the public sphere and discuss ideas without fear of your reputation influencing the way people read your work. The theory also held that those who entered the public sphere must also ignore their personal interests and put the needs of the community first. It didn't work of course, in either case, everyone knew who was writing what and the writers were obviously protecting and trying to further their own interests, but even the big names wrote psuedanonomously. Comments weren't less nasty back then than we see today, they just used more creative language!

.A. Mades | 2016-01-05 07:06:58

"We understand that speaking out publically can be intimidating in this day of political correctness." - uh, no, and please spare us the use of the trite and useless phrase "political correctness". What we suffer from is not too much PC, but too much incivility. I think people may be intimidated speaking out if anyone - under the guise of anonymity - can attack and even belittle their thoughts. So, I think this is a good change (or, if not a change, a reaffirmation of an existing but inconsistently applied editorial standard). I am not sure how you will enforce this. Can you share your thoughts on that?

Patrick Bolger | 2016-01-03 16:01:06

Censorship? Group think? Come on folks! Have the conviction to stand up for what you believe and identify yourself. As for Franklin, Madison, etc., they all openly stated their beliefs under their own names, and used pseudonyms merely as a tool to state their cases(or,for humor in Franklin's case).

Art Winters | 2016-01-03 04:41:10

I agree that comments and opinions published in open media should show their authors. I am aware that most of the comments I have seen in the Reporter over several years, whether signed or not, were reasonable, constructive, and inoffensive. Holliston is a civilized town, responses to articles are themselves civil, so anonymous responses to articles and comments have neither been obnoxious nor offensive. Still, I believe that anyone who wishes to be heard should be willing to take responsibility for what he or she makes public. That is only accomplished when authors have the courage to stand behind what they think or believe. Personally, I know all the staff of Holliston Reporter well enough to assure readers that they do not have an agenda, are not interested in limiting or censoring opposing opinions. They have, in fact, given equal space to opinions with which some of them do not agree. We are lucky to have an objective source of community news, and I think it is appropriate that they require members of the community to identify themselves as a part of a public dialogue. I believe their mission is to inform rather than just entertain us. John Losch

john Losch | 2016-01-02 19:17:36

I have published a few comments we have received under fake names and email addresses just to prove that there are two sides to every question. We understand that speaking out publically can be intimidating in this day of political correctness. What we want to avoid is the personal attacks on people who volunteer their time by people who don't help but are all too eager to criticize, often with little knowledge of the facts. They in turn get lambasted by others and soon by we have blog going. We try to present the facts as we see them and almost never respond to comments posted. The recent pedestrian fatality and the comments that article generated caused us to reaffirm a policy which we always had but loosely enforced. I don't believe that HR has ever not published a comment submitted with a real name and email address. Censoring becomes a problem when we publish some comments with fictitious names and not others. We recognize the problem this policy creates for some but we believe that everyone can give their opinion here in a civil manner and be respected for it.

Paul Saulnier | 2016-01-02 18:29:29

I welcome the change. I for one have had comments replied to me, sometimes quite rudely, I might add, from fake names and aliases.

Stan Coffin | 2016-01-02 18:15:57

We applaud the Reporter for this long-needed change. We've been appalled at times by our fellow citizens willingness to make accusations and frankly nasty comments while hiding behind the convenient veil of anonymity. Let's start the New Year by openly taking ownership of our opinions. Bravo, Holliston Reporter! Keep up the good work.

Nancy Baron and Neil Osterweil | 2016-01-02 10:51:52

I've enjoyed reading the anonymous comments and this change in policy sounds to me like veiled censorship by the Reporter.

Jean Greendale | 2016-01-02 07:09:55

Hmmm, I may stop commenting here. See, there's something special about speaking your mind, especially when it might not agree with conventional wisdom or the majority opinion. But at the same time, I prefer not to piss off my neighbors, or make enemies because I might choose words that are misinterpreted or I took an unpopular stand. This is a local news site, not Town Meeting, which has legal ramifications. Also, as far as I know, Facebook doesn't require your legal name, just a name that looks like a real name. So I could use Phineas Blastmore, but not Hungry Hippo as my Facebook id (hint, I'm not on facebook). I would urge you to reconsider this stance, as freedom of speech sometimes is easier when you're anonymous.

Hungry Hippo | 2016-01-01 16:00:43