First, CY is asking the question of whether this is the right thing to do, which has provoked a worthwhile discussion. That is definitely okay.

Second, freedom of speech is freedom of speech. I'm not going to tell any mu.nu blogger what they can or can't say, so long as they are honest - honest in their opinion, honest in their approach to fact - and I've never had a problem there.

That brings us to the third point: Using anonymity as a cover for dishonesty. That's the key question that CY has raised, since this is what AP and "Jamil Hussein" seem to be doing. Yes, in this crazy world of ours we do value whatever privacy we can retain, but the other thing about freedom of speech is that it does not equate to freedom from consequences. You can say whatever you want, but you are responsible for what you say. (Though you are not necessarily responsible for how other people decide to react to what you say. Honesty comes into it again.)

We were, as you said, banned in South Korea for a time. Some mu.nu blogs were banned in India as well. I'm perfectly happy with that. Not with South Korea or India banning opinions, of course, but that mu.nu is open to those opinions. (We also provoked so much ire among certain groups in Turkey that they spent an entire month trying to bring down our servers. In the end I blocked the country at our firewall; their loss.)

I don't agree with everything written at mu.nu, obviously. I mean, some of you don't even like anime... But my role in all of this is to enable the discussion, not to stifle it, and even acting as a moderator is something I want to do as little as possible. That makes it something of a free-for-all, yes, and there are differences of opinion, sometimes deep differences.

But that, I think, is the way it should be.

Something else I think you may have misunderstood is that "Jamil" isn't a blogger, he is supposedly a public figure who freely gave information to a news reporter.

Now there is some question about the accuracy of the information provided, and if deliberately wrong it would explain the use of a false name.

In any event, I think that the comments at that link are providing a lively and thoughtful debate about the reasons for and consequences of an "outing".

Agree or disagree, he's laying his reasoning out there out there for all to see and discuss, and you can't say that he's thoughtlessly taking this action (if he decides to go ahead with it).

Fine, so he can ask the question about outing someone on his blog. And if he outs someone, and their repurcussions? Is this place going to be ok with that, or is there a point in which we agree that some things are not ok?

If someone at mu.nu outs another blogger - a private individual expressing their personal opinion - I'd very likely disagree with that. That doesn't mean I'd prevent them from doing so, but if they asked my advice I'd suggest that they refrain. (Though even in this case that depends on what the other blogger is doing and what is being revealed, the Glenn Greenwald sock-puppet case being an example of an outing that would not worry me overmuch.)

On the other hand, if someone here outs a supposedly public figure who is using his position to promote falsehoods while hiding behind a screen of anonymity - and they present facts to support all this - I'd consider that good investigative reporting and support it fully.

Jamil Hussein is not blogger to hide his identity from family, friends, employer or whatever. He is an propagandist for the other side in the war on terror. He obvuisly understands the ricks involved or he wouldn't be hiding and there would be no need to out him.

Further, he gaven proven false information to the AP about events in Huirya and was the single source in many other AP stories on eventgs in Iraq. Stories that were decidely negative toward the coalition or the Iraqi government. His identity and credibility bear direclty on the integrity and credibility of the Associated Press.

If he can be outed with certainty I would say do it.

Sorry, dude, but I think you are way off here.

You have the alleged source of several wire service stories that are loaded with inaccuracies. The public has the right to know who is putting out the inaccurate information that is intended to deceive the American people into opposing the war in Iraq.

Frankly, what he is discussing is more akin to the debunking of the fake Bush ANG memos than outing another blogger.

That's "dudette".

I've always wondered about the need for anonymity in blogging, I've never done it, and though I can certainly understand why others do (jobs, position in an organization etc.)

Jamil is not a blogger however. While I'm generally against any form of "outing" I'm not sure this is an "outing" question. As the inestimable Pixy hath said, it may be just damn good investigative journalism. Imagine if you will, someone in the DNC telling falsehoods about a republican to the NYT (geeze, ya think?) would you be against that person being "outed?" Or someone in the RNC outing a Democrat would you be against that "outing?"

I suspect that one of the reasons CY put it out there is to garner traffic, and that is often the name of the game in blogging anyway. I have been with mu.nu for about a year after you good folks invited me in because of my battle with cancer. If I had been anonymous, would it have been ok to out me? Sure, but I might have tracked you down and punched you in the nose. And then I might have been arrested for assault and spent a month or two in jail and paid a heavy fine. It is called "consequences."

One of the things I like best about Pixy's Munuviana, is that it attracts rational people who have good conversations. CY has to make the final decision and live with the consequences of that decision, even if he has asked for our advice. We've given it and the ball is now in his court.

CY tried to take it upon himself to write me and "spell things out" for me. It really convinced me even more what a farce a lot of this is. I remain unconvinced that this is acceptable in any way, but whatever-I'll remain a personal blogger and understand that this platform hosts a number of inflammatory bloggers.

PS CY-I didn't try to have your site shut down, you Muppet. I don't do that. I tried to highlight that I personally wondered where mu.nu was going.