Porcine opinion polls, or revisiting the silk purse -- and identifying its likely source.

By definition, an opinion cannot emanate from an inanimate object, which rules out steel girders, mountains and glasses of beer as “opinionated” essences.

Similarly, dogs, cats, insects and amoeba, while living, are not the sources of opinions.

Rather, opinions come from people, and are inseparable from the source.

Opinions may derive from fact or superstition, from experience or fantasy, from accuracy or misconception, but the one thing all opinions have in common is that they are conceived, delivered and disseminated by living, breathing human beings, each one different, each one unique.

Opinions are like you-know-what, and everyone has an opinion.

As noted previously, an opinion is egalitarian in nature, but it mustn’t be forgotten that while you’re certainly entitled to your own opinions, you’re not entitled to your own facts, because facts and opinions are different.

Of course, the trick is recognizing the difference, which is where contributing factors like education, experience and respect for fair play are essential.

New Albany is stirring after a long, fitful sleep, and for some among us, this is a good thing. There’ll be peaks and valleys along the way, but we’re prepared to throw ourselves into the latest, greatest attempt to further the idea of a better life for all in our city of residence.

For countless others, change – even if only implied, and not yet, or perhaps maybe never, actualized – is the devil they don’t know, and accordingly, they’re threatened by it.

Such uneasiness is the ideal breeding ground for opinion, which mutates into dark rumor and dire conspiracy with unfathomable speed, especially when abetted by the pandering of the politician seeking a vote, or the philandering of a mock academic in search of an audience, or even the good intentions of a neighbor with an axe to grind that might date back to before you were born.

It’s the way it works in a city of this size, and it is this mistrustful inability and stubborn unwillingness to communicate effectively that poses the greatest threat to any sort of progress in New Albany, whether progress is defined by elevating the standard of living, repairing the streets, collecting the trash, or finding someone to open a coffee shop downtown and do it right for a new generation that would appreciate an alternative to Maxwell House and traveling to the Highlands to find it.

Communication is enhanced by transparency, and there can be no transparency in a culture of anonymity.

Today at Speak Out, the self-proclaimed voice of the “little people”, my friend Rick Carmickle has been accused of being on the “payroll” of the mayor, a pejorative connotation based on only one factor -- that Rick takes photos for the parks department.

The accuser is anonymous.

Rick isn’t.

It is the accuser’s opinion that this situation is somehow scurrilous, and the accuser remains anonymous, while Rick remains known.

Rick’s lived here his whole life. He wants to work toward a better future for New Albany, and to judge by the venom directed at Rick and others like him, there are those who disagree, to put it mildly.

Rick is known.

They are unknown.

Thinking human beings capable of empathy can see that it is indefensible to attack Rick Carmickle or anyone else anonymously, if for no other reason than the relevant fact that most people would not want to be attacked in such a manner, and would prefer to face their accusers, as in the courtroom.

Others defend anonymity, and sanction it, and glorify it, and say that it is necessary to avoid "reprisals."

Today, Rick is the victim of a reprisal, and the reprisal has originated from an anonymous poster, who maintains that he or she must be anonymous to avoid reprisals.

How is that right?

Defending anonymity so as to avoid reprisals? If you believe it’s true, then try justifying your view to the signers of the Declaration of Independence – and please, take the bag off your head while doing it, out of respect for men with the genuine, palpable courage of their convictions.

Does it make me angry? No, not as much as it makes me sad.

After all, this didn’t start yesterday. I’ve been fighting against anonymity since the 1980’s, for the simple reason that there cannot be civilized discourse without full disclosure. Anything less is an assault not just on individuals, but on the American ideal. People elsewhere in the world where bags over their heads while attacking us. We shouldn't do it while attacking ourselves.

How anti-social behavior like this can be viewed as a solution to the problems faced by New Albany, when in fact it is the chief underlying problem in New Albany – is impossible to see.

Just as it is impossible to see the faces contorted with hate and rage.

Just like in those other places in the world.

See also: Divided We Fall, from the Diggin’ in the Dirt blog.