Prior knowledge is often useful, for example, when trying to understand the vocabulary of the other party. The situation is different from, say, scholarly papers, which are usually reviewed anonymously with something very similar to what you called a one-time nickname. In a science (as in: a branch of science), people tend to agree about terms before they start writing papers. In other contexts, it is rarely so.
I think that the inconvenience of having to state one's definitions is outweighed by the benefits: 1. This forces one to examine the definitions 2. This allows one to learn new ways of looking at things that seemed obvious The drawbacks of former knowledge are that it may contaminate debate with emotions, either positive or negative and may cause one to make incorrect assumptions about the opponent's meaning.
Emotions are inevitable. And anyhow, most of LJ is not a scientific discussion, but small talk, leisurely perusal of words and their combinations. Personality is then as important as the contents of the message.
Most of LJ is small talk, but you will notice that I consistently speak about debate and argument, which is a form of sport. One would no more want emotions towards an opponent to influence a debate than a chess game.
Let's try 28. (Sorry, English is easier for me at work, unless you prefer translit). Conditions: lines can be from anywhere. If they are made up by the player they must rhyme (that means more than one line) and scan. Every player must answer the "where's that from?" if asked.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
This was just one point against anonymity.
no subject
1. This forces one to examine the definitions
2. This allows one to learn new ways of looking at things that seemed obvious
The drawbacks of former knowledge are that it may contaminate debate with emotions, either positive or negative and may cause one to make incorrect assumptions about the opponent's meaning.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Или номер 49?
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject