For the record, I was inquiring on Facebook about the identity of a poster who used a pseudonym here. I'm not sure how that would have endangered him. It's not like I was going to drive to Chicago and hunt him down. I don't believe in cancel culture so i wasn't going to try to rat him out to his employer for anything. I was curious as to his worldview, his influences, his motivation, what made him as hostile as he was. I'm aware of why certain known quantities (people whose identities I know) dislike me. This was just for my own knowledge.
And my haters obviously missed my posts from years earlier when I was trying to discern the identity of the person we later found out was known to MTR as "SPUI" (and is occasionally referred to by that name here).
So, in fact, there was an attempt to sanction me because of things I did away from this forum.
There are still a number of users here whose real identities I'd like to know. I'm curious about their backgrounds, how they've gleaned their knowledge, etc. -- not just ones who have been overly hostile. They present intriguing ideas, offer interesting and informed opinions, and it would be instructive to know who they are.
I know there are people here with whom I've interacted on Facebook and probably didn't know their user name here. Others, like someone who shares a name with a famous lead singer of a band whose guitarist recently died, was pretty easy to figure out.
I was long a fan of using actual identities instead of any made-up name that gives no clue to who a participant really is long before the sausage king came along.
Some of the identities here are well-established -- mine is a variation of my name and is the part in front of the @ in my email address, for example. Others used the names by which they were known on MTR but often with signatures that disclosed their name and other contact info.
Calling an idea "buffoonish" is on thin ice because the person who posted that idea may take that as you calling them buffoonish. The better thing to do is to illustrate the facts of the matter in such a way that anyone reading your post would come to the conclusion themselves that the idea is buffoonish.
One is not responsible for the inferences others make.
And don't call anybody one of those building features that exist between stories. That would be less cool than pooing.
Ceilings? Floors? Joists? Beams? Wiring conduits? Help a non-architect out here.