Letter: Discussion must be led without anonymity to have impact

It is a reflection of our society that the questions raised in Mr. Warhover’s article are thought, spoken or considered of any value.

Question 1: “Is a newspaper a place to dispense information or create a community?” This is a comment that makes no sense, because how are the two concepts irreconcilable?

Question 2: “...I think it is not a good policy to post people’s names with their comments.” This manner of reasoning is baffling to me. It is easy to spit at someone from behind a mask, but it takes courage to speak a dissonant opinion while facing one’s peers or community. To seek anonymity in public commentary is to encourage the least noble aspects of human endeavor. To be praised and encouraged by like-minded individuals is easy and self promoting. It takes strength of personality that is unusual to stand firmly on principle in front of opponents.

“Opinions” are worthless. What matters are statements that impact others in a manner that is productive and universal. A neighborhood community will operate on concepts that impact that particular neighborhood. A country will operate on concepts that impact all the citizens of the country. A great thinker is someone who can impact the entire world with concepts that are inclusive or contain creative forces for every person in every country. For such thinkers, on all those levels, who would wish for anonymity? Reasonable discussions and debates tend to be discussed without anonymity because who should be ashamed of his or her statements stemming from a desire to benefit the public?