Do you believe it is ok for active service members to degrade the POTUS on RP?

No.

SMSgt Lawrence McCarter SrA Christopher Wright Sgt Randy Wilber SGT Gregory Lawritson Cpl (Join to see) Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth LTC (Join to see) MSG Frederick Otero SFC Pete Kain SSG David Andrews SCPO Morris Ramsey SPC Margaret Higgins SGT Jim Arnold PO1 William "Chip" Nagel SGT Charles H. Hawes CPL Dave Hoover TSgt Joe C. MSG Dan Walther Maj Bill Smith, Ph.D. Maj William W. 'Bill' Price

No. I don't.

No... and when I was an Active Duty member of the military, I was doubly sure to monitor the things I posted online because I knew they were a reflection of me and my service. As a member of the Veteran community, I may be a bit more vocal of my personal stances, but I make sure that I am representing only myself and I give no impression that I am speaking on behalf of the Marine Corps itself.

That is a very good question COL (Join to see) . All of us signed up to serve to protect not an office or a man, nor a piece of cloth, but the freedoms and way of life of our country. I feel that this site is more of a networking site, and should probably have a little more protection than a full blown social media site such as Facebook, but we have to remember (at least those of us still on active duty) that we are bound by the UCMJ. I am not going to call out someone for disagreeing with a decision made, but I would probably say something if they crossed the line (too far anyway).

It can definitely get them in serious trouble!

Not good for AD and rules apply.

Neither for President Obama nor President Trump. Not while active and while they are in office.

It's unprofessional.

This issue is the flip side of those who say that they don't believe RP users should be allowed to remain anonymous. If you want to hear the unfiltered opinions of active duty military, then you really need to allow anonymous users. IMO rather than having just "CPT anonymous" showing up, it would be better to allow RP members to choose a user name. That way, people can recognize who is who, and a poster can establish a record and be recognized without having to reveal their real identity.

I don't agree with those who think that there is something cowardly about not using your real name on the internet. There are very valid reasons for military members (or civilians in many jobs) to not want to broadcast their political views to the world where it could adversely impact their employment. Ideally the emphasis should be on responding to the ideas stated, and not the name. Old guys like me are at a point where I don't need to worry about that stuff, but if I were on active duty, or employed in a civilian job, I would never use social media with my real name. There is too much potential downside and little upside.

But as we are configured now on RP, I wouldn't suggest any active duty personnel to participate in any but the most benign topics. And I would NOT trust the RP security system to protect my name. For example, I would see a response to a post of mine where it would say "CPT Anonymous" as the name. But I would get an email notification that would say "CPT Michael Smith" has responded to your post. I really think RP should continue to validate a person, but allow a specific username to go with that verification. Perhaps certain things could be shown, like rank, as in CPT Wonderful where the CPT is the verified rank, but the name is a user name. And perhaps status like retired, vet or active.

But no one should ever believe that any site is a safe space where you have any expectation of privacy. Anybody can copy your post and post it anywhere on the net, including with your name. Many civilians have lost their jobs because a so called "friend" on a site disagreed with something and then sent a copy to the poster's employer, even though the employer can't access the site themselves.

COL (Join to see) Sad thing is a lot of the negative comments come from senior officers and enlisted