Usernames puzzle me

Sometimes our opinions are quite different from the rest of the community and a person feels safer voicing those opinions without a huge backlash. It's easier to say things with a "pen name." However, I do agree that we need to be careful how we phrase our opinions and make sure that we say what we mean rather than write something in anger and with malice. I look forward to reading your posts. You have a wonderful way with words!

I am not sure I like the anonymity of user names but it is so easy for these things to get out of hand that I can see the value to an unknown user-name.

Those of you who know me, know that I try to be moderate in my responses, but even then, I have had some misunderstandings with people and they got nasty quick.

I do not want my internet business to suffer because of it, so a username works just fine. In fact, some eBay members have created an account just for use on the boards. Of course, as soon as it gets nasty, I move on anyway, but they could easily do damage.

If I were speaking with authority as you,Steve and Michael do,I'd use my real name.

But,as one of the masses,I prefer to let my posts stand on their own without being colored by perceptions of my offline persona.

(Nor do I want all and sundry to relate to my "secret identity" as they might quantumcat.)

Anonymity has served great minds like Ben Franklin and the folks who spraypaint expletives on water towers.

I figure my words fall somewhere in between.

I know that,in my case,I'm being cowardly but I've seen cyberstalking at close range and would just as soon leave the knowledge of my real name to the people who were clever enough to figure out who I am even before I had a pseudonym.

The T-G and several readers know who's behind my posts.

The rest could find out if ever I needed to be investigated.

Until then,folks out there can speculate just as I do when reading the work of other pen names.

The online alter-egos (or alter-ids?) may seem like false fronts but that secrecy could be the only thing that allows us to disclose our true thoughts.

I strongly feel you should have the courage of your conviction, especially when it comes to dinegrating ones who have such courage when you seek to publish your comments. Your publication nor any others I know publishes any letters or commentary in print without identifing and checking the source.

It is totally unfair to honestly espouse a position on issues and have others cowardly cast stones from the bushes. Almost unanimously attacking the messenger rather that discuss the issues raised.

Memyselfi - your comments are what I was trying to say.

i stick with a user-name out of consideration for my employer.

altho i make every effort to carry on civilized discourse and refrain from entering into any discussion related directly to my job, sometimes people demonstrate anger in their responses, and it would be unfair if someone's antipathy towards me was manifested against my employer (who, by the way, does not share my opinions on a good number of these issues). then again, i am not sure anyone agrees with me on many of these issues. however, everyone needs their wicked little pleasures, and posting on here with all the other loonies seems like a pretty small indiscretion. at least that is what i keep telling myself.

I'd love to use my real name and would'nt mind doing so. However, just as soon as I do, my opinions on various issues will be associated with the agency at which I am employed. My opinions are mine and mine alone, and though having the courage of my convictions, a user name allows me the personal independence of voicing them without such association.

With all due respect! It is your job to be open and straight forward in your occupational area. Do I feel you or the paper you represent follow this precept. No, at least, that is my belief. So, why should responders be forthcoming?

The authors of blog sites do have goal oriented statements, and should be willing to listen to other statements/opinions on thier subject. If not, then, they should not put them out for comment.

The readers and responders on the other hand do not have an agenda. Thier objective is to state thier own opinion, right or wrong, but do not wish to become embroiled in the philosophy behind the authors statements. Nor do they wish to become stigmatized for thier personal opinions.

Leave it alone, if you don't want generalized opinions then don't write an opinion of your own.

Anonymity, is a freedom that "pen names" allow those who wish to express an opinion, without being held hostage by the statements general implications.

Darrick - Don't worry, people look at me funny all the time anyway...though usually it has nothing to do with these blogs.

I agree with the mail-forwarding. That would be a great idea. Even those of us with differing opinions could still have debates without certain elements chiming in and making it even worse (and I know that, at times, I'm that "certain element"). It would be nice to be able to talk to some people on here though in a slightly less public forum.

Personally, I like to use my name on here. It kind of keeps me in check. Could you imagine some of the stuff that I would post on here if I weren't so reserved?

I do prefer that people use their own names though rather than hiding behind some anonymous moniker when they're attacking someone because of their beliefs, ideas, political affiliation (or lack of). I try to be a bit more level-headed on here until some just go overboard, although occasionally I fail miserably at that whole "level-headed" thing.

Kent,

You also have to mindful to the fact that it can be harmful and possibly damaging to expose your views using your real name especially on subjects that are hot religous topics todays such as homosexuality.

A study group I participate in recently brought up the fact of the growing number of policeman and even judges that belong to those categories of sinful lives and deal retribution to those who are vocal with their Bible based opinions that bring forth the reality of their eternal punishment for their unrepentant sin.

Perhaps the pennames are understandably preferred.

Blogs are a great way to let your voice (or rather you typewriter) be heard. The fact that you use a pen name is not a matter of fear of being known or even protection of others, its more a matter of exceptance and freedom to me. Without a name or face there are no preconceived ideas, just a voice. Some of you out there have great singing voices and don't mind doing solos, others of us only croke. But that doesn't mean we don't enjoy being part of the choir.

I realize this is late-coming, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who has wanted to add a comment (or so) to it:

My screenname on T-G is not the one I use everywhere else on the Internet, for the simple reason I don't want to be spammed on my FB, MS, or WordPress accounts. I posted a link to one site on spirituality, but it was coincidentally abandoned by the owner that same weekend. I used to post on Topix, as well. I chose this one because it describes from where I endeavor to write - an analytical mindset. This doesn't mean that my reasoning is always correct - just that I try to be objective, reasonable and respectful.

On some topics I lose objectivity; people that read the related two news stories and their comments will know that topic; I don't need to explore it here as well.

Mark Twain / Samuel Clemmens - pen names have been used for a long time; the issue is whether the identity that is assumed is consistent, can be identified if needed (which mine can, by the T-G), and has proven itself to be trustworthy on the merits of its own written contributions.

A family friend of ours is Brother David Stendl-Rast, a renowned Benedictan monk, and part of what is commonly referred to as the Zen-Catholic movement. He has been compared to Gandhi, has a PhD in Psychology from a university in Austria, is a friend of the Dalai Lama, and been invited to the Hopi Reservation. He also writes under a pen name from time to time (which I will not state), as some of his thoughts would be considered too controversial for a representative of the Catholic Church, and its official stance on some positions.

Other reasons could be having an unusual name, being someone youthful (anonymity means their opinion is not pared down for being from a high school teen, by example), being a business owner, or a homeowner. In the latter two cases, nobody wants anybody to discover where they work or live, and voice their dissent with a well placed rock through a window; just for voicing thoughts on a topic.

Ironically, by an anonymous person making a non-vocal "statement" with said rock.

What befuddles me is the names that some people on here choose for themselves: "Malicious Intent" and "Unique-Lies" come immediately to mind... how do you take someone seriously whose own screen name implies a slant towards deception...?

And as "Blessed Assurance" so aptly demonstrates, I'm frankly GLAD that most people use a screen name - if I know you, I might have to reconsider that acquaintance in light of your comments, as to me they are just the height or ignorance and a poor education system... and if said in my presence, I likely would go out of my way to avoid talking to you for a while... :p

Sadly, though, writing styles tend to be something hard for us to mask in ourselves; they are reflections of our personality, upbringing and education. And mine has some distinctive characteristics to it.

Enough so that my father, who lives on the West Coast and was following an article concerning one of my friends, called me up to discuss some of the statements that I had made. :p