I'd argue in every case where you aren't completely gullible to everything you read or hear.
Anonymous speech is nothing more than rumour. It has little to no positive value.
If you require the identity of a person you would give money to, why then to you not require the same standards of the person who's thought you would entertain?
I'd argue in every case where you aren't completely gullible to everything you read or hear.
Anonymous speech is nothing more than rumour. It has little to no positive value.
If you require the identity of a person you would give money to, why then to you not require the same standards of the person who's thought you would entertain?