In the days of yore, angry readers would write genuine letters to the editor. Having read something provocative in the newspaper, one would write, seal, stamp and mail their thoughts to publications. Generally, the tedium of this process and the cost of stamps encouraged readers to think over their thoughts and to keep their letters to a minimum.

If you get much of your news online, you can probably testify that times have changed. Website message boards, not mailboxes, reign supreme. While this new culture of online posting has brought much good, it has nevertheless severely damaged the quality of the feedback that publications receive. The response boards of newspapers and blogs are open to anyone wishing to contribute his or her feelings — from throwaway thoughts to rambling jeremiads. Often, the accumulation of postings takes on a life of its own, with each response commenting on the last rather than on the original article.

Here on campus, the process of commenting on a newspaper article or a blog posting is quite casual. Unfortunately, the ease of the whole process encourages responses that are especially absurd, snarky or even vicious. Student publications like this one receive plenty of thoughtful commentary, of course, but the bulk of the banter is much more foolish.

Indeed, these postings fall into several major categories.

First, there are the brief, often smarmy remarks. At their best, they offer pithy criticism of the article in question. At their worst, they equate to sticking out your tongue or "flipping the bird." Then there are the long, windy diatribes peppered with equally blustery quotations from long-dead thinkers. Some commentators truly go overboard, writing veritable treatises on why they agree or disagree with the article. Finally, a minority of responses consist of incisive, insightful criticism or praise. Regrettably, these are quite rare.

Even among the best responses, commentators seldom leave their name. The biggest problem with online feedback is that far too many response writers choose to hide behind anonymity. Frequently, these posters use their namelessness as a blank check to be as trite, groundless, or crude as they please. After all, why bother adhering to accuracy when your reputation is not tethered to your words? Without this pressure to remain factual and professional, the online dialogue degenerates and becomes almost meaningless.

Of course, there can be legitimate reasons to remain anonymous — safety, for instance. In most cases, though, if you hesitate to sign your name to a comment, it is probably not worth posting. Some would argue that aliases constitute an acceptable alternative. I disagree; as with anonymity, an alias allows one to abandon professionalism and accountability almost completely.

Surely the nastiness of response boards merely reflects the tone of the broader campus climate, and college students do love hyperbole. Still, if you choose to respond to an article or blog posting online, please take responsibility for your words. Have a backbone and sign your name. The writers of blogs or articles have attached their name to whatever piffle or wisdom they wrote. If you have a comment, you should do the same.

Frank Hennick ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in history and international studies.