[MD] Inorganic, organic, social, intellectual,.... virtual

[Krimel]

Ron:
I have nothing against avatars or pseudonyms but
using a fictitious character to wash ones hands of 
any kind of Credibility just seems sort of dishonest
on an intellectual level don't you think?

Krimel?, or should I say,
Mr. Hat?

[Krimel]
And I have nothing against ephemeral meat creatures, limited though they may
be. One's Credibility on an online forum derives entirely from what one
types into virtual pages. It is eternally encoded in the archives of the
forum.

I would say it is more dishonest to assume that that one has enhanced the
illusion of reality by clinging to some sense of self and personal identity
in a format where neither are the least bit meaningful. 

If you were making lame attempt to irritate me with veiled aspersions on my
sexual preferences I can only say that virtual sex is overrated. My user's
sexual issues were resolved long ago and he generally does what he does and
doesn't give a crap what anyone but his wife thinks about it. 

Here is a bit on Freud that you might find helpful though:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latent_homosexuality

You seem to think I have some objection to the use of Wiki. I do not. What I
have objected to in the past is posting long extracts from it in this forum.
The link suffices for anyone interested in pursuing it. At least on the wiki
page we are treated to Arial and a picture. Quoting Wiki is fine to
highlight a point but when the quotes aren't quoted but just copied and
pasted it provides the illusion that they are the words of the person
posting them. I do consider that dishonest and I find it detracts from the
Credibility of the author, whether real or virtual.