The Pseudonymous Poll Trailer

I share my real name with a climate scientist at the UEA – it could be embarrassing for one of us.

My real name is Andy (or Andrew) and my last name starts with G, but is a very uncommon name and I could easily be located if I used it, so I prefer not to at this stage.
As to the extended questions..
I am 55, male from NSW Australia
I have a BSc (maths major) 1978, was a high school maths teacher for 20 years. Have recently completed a BEng(Civil, Hon-1), a MEng, and currently working on a PhD in Engineering.
My position on AGW is that I very much doubt that a small increase in a plant required trace gas is likely to have anything more than a VERY minor effect on climate, ESPECIALLY compared to natural climate fluctuation. In fact, I suspect that the increase in CO2 will actually prove to be very beneficial for mankind, so long as we don’t wreck the economy chasing red herrings … such as high cost inefficient wind energy.

I work for a city in California where I am required to publicly toe the line as it relates to climate change issues and reducing CO2 emissions, even though I think it to be a fool’s errand. Posting with my real name would be detrimental to my career and my family’s finances.

Wait, it wasn’t Andrew. It was John over at CA I believe. Not important just making the clarification lest Andrew get sidetracked.
John Also one I believe who held his true identity close for specific reasons.

I have found – particularly among socialists, environmentalists, religionists, and other viciously fascistic sons of bitches – a robust tendency to engage in real, material personal attacks designed to damage people who dare to voice positions contrary to their predatory designs.
Bear in mind that none of these people have any respect for human rights of any kind. They are by definition violent aggressors bent upon policies destruction of social comity. I would sooner squat naked over a tank filled with piranha than allow these people to learn my Real Name.

I am not a public sort of person and feel uncomfortable about being in the general public ‘s eye; some of the comments made to my online persona (for what I saw, and still see), as very ordinary and innocent questions made me very uneasy at that time and convinced my of the sanity of remaining relatively anonymous.
I have university qualifications, but don’t regard those as important as some of the most ignorant people I have met were keen to flash their various qualifications at me. Conversely, some of the most charming, humerous, intelligent and successful people I have met have no formal qualifications whatsoever!

If I might add my two penn’orth – and I have said this before – it’s sheer reticence that prompts me to limit my name. I don’t have any scientific qualifications to lend weight to my words, so they must stand or fall on their own; if I had I would want to put my name so you would know that I had some authority. I really am called Dave, my surname starts with F and Mr Watts and his team can easily figure out my surname and what I do for a living from my email address, so I’m not hiding from the people that run this blog. By just being DaveF people can figure out I’m just an ordinary bloke.

How about the THOUSANDS who read all the posts and articles and never post a comment themselves? I am a retired airline pilot but consider myself a science student. I am using a pseudonym because an eminent scientist has an identical name. Age 66, Male, England, Very very Skeptic.

from: Studentnigel. What about the (probably) THOUSANDS who read ever post but never post a comment themselves? I am a retired airline pilot and now consider myself a science student. Age 66, Male, England, Very very skeptic!

“There are a number of reasons why you should always blog anonymously and very few against it. There are some fanatics in the AGW debate whose activities go far beyond what would be termed acceptable behaviour both in the blogosphere or outside it. Indeed, if they were traced and they can be, they could end up in a court of law.”
http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2010/12/03/internet-security-1-lets-be-safe-out-there/
Pointman

@V for Vicarious
” who stand against profiteering and corporationsim but don’t believe this is a factor in CO2 +AGW”
but V…… profiteering is one of the big driving factors behind the mirage that is AGW.

I use a pseudonym because my real name is Hannibal Dahlmer-Manson. The few times I have posted under my real name I have received some very distasteful comments on sexual and other person appetites, unfairly I have thought.
The internet can be a very hateful place.

I used a nom de plume simply because at the time of my becoming aware of this site, I was high up in my local Institution’s committee, soon to be it’s regional Chairman in our Centenary year. I was aware of the official stance all professional institutions are taking on Climate Change, up to & including the ridiculous. My name is Alan, & I am British & English, & proud of it, although not of our guvment/political correct/ NGOs etc at times as I am sure many of you Colonials will be aware. My real name is Alan Hannaford, however I will continue under Alan the Brit as I do on other blogs.

Willis,
This will raise your eyebrows a little – Catallaxy Files just posted this statement:
“Three comments appeared at the Cat today by a person other than the identified poster. I’m not opposed to individuals modifying their pseudonym although I’m not in favour of individuals posting under multiple identities. It is not acceptable to appropriate the identity of an existing catallaxian, especially their real identity. The comments have been deleted, as will any other comments from the same person using that false identity.”
http://catallaxyfiles.com/2011/04/26/identity-theft/

Nice list, now to “compress” it to something manageable for a poll setup.
To add to my reason for using 2Hotel9 as my online identifier. It was a radio call sign I used in US Army. Originally a one time use call sign, I kept using it, as the unit I was in did a lot of support services for the Basic Training and other schools on the post we were on, and it just kinda stuck with me. After leaving service I used it on CB and work radios and hunting. I resisted the Computer Age until 2001(sorry, I refused to use the unfriendly crap that was available in the 1980s and ’90s) and when I did jump in I was already aware of the identity theft and privacy problems attendant with the interwebs. So, here I is. And within 30 days of coming online and using my call sign I was contacted by several people wanting to know if it was, in fact, me. And that is my tale of woe, or whatnot.

Oh and another reason for using a PSEUDONYM is to make it difficult for the UK Stasi.
The National Extremism Tactical Co-ordination Unit (NETCU) is a British police organization funded by, and reporting to, the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) that coordinates police action against groups in the United Kingdom it describes as extremist. Because the ACPO is not a public body but rather a private limited company, NETCU is exempt from freedom of information laws and other kinds of public accountability, even though they are funded by the Home Office and deploy police officers from regional forces.
http://www.netcu.org.uk/about/response.jsp

Every name is a PSEUDONYM and every PSEUDONYM is a name. Hummmm……

I’ve always used my real name even when public inter computer communications were not just the domain of the world wide web.
I found though that my name was often already taken when I decided to break away from the privately owned networks and started using the internet.
My moniker is just my name and initial without spaces. I’ve never cared about what people think of me and never will.

I stick to Polistra for two of the commonly given reasons: (1) I’m semi-retired but I sometimes do orogramming work for academics. (2) I’ve been blogging and commenting under the name for 6 years and it pretty much feels like my name now.

I post annonymously for the same reason I vote behind a curtain. While I tend to give my quiet respect to those with differing viewpoints, there seem to be many who do not. Specifically, I have a number of friends and acquaintances who are very vocal–almost militant–with their left-leaning thoughts and opinions.

My name really is Ian. My surname really does start with H. And Anthony has my real email address. I’m not hiding who I am. Anyone with good reason to find out could do so. Some people who know me might guess. But I prefer not to proclaim my identity.
Apart from anything else, I prefer to be judged on what I say. Who I am is or should be irrelevant. Given that the specifics of my identity are irrelevant I prefer not to provide more detailed identification.

Contributors to this blog have the courage and conviction to divulge their real names. My posting under my real name is a hat tip intended to be acknowledge your courage and send the message that you are not alone.

@Scottish Sceptic
My parents are actually also English, but we moved over here (Australia) when I was 5, so I count myself as an Aussie.
Oh and your right about how them Americans shure do butcher the English language 😉

@ Andy G – agreed indeed, I speak from the sense that ‘original sceptism’ is somehow ‘Shill’ originated. However, here and now, I agree we’ve seen this rather insidious embracement of ‘left’ into any ecomentalist ideology/technology. Perhaps akin to an orwellian (farm) anology in which the righteous misanthropic left are keen to find a new science to lean on where they can be seen to be ‘saving the world’ (AGW). Profiteering with a green rinse. Like the windmill, the air turbines muct be erected at any cost…!

An interesting question might be: Who inspired your interest in Science? As for pseudonyms, I am deep in the heart of Indian Territory trying to anchor commission decisions in common sense. I am always trying to get folks to consider the repercussions of having all of our eggs in one basket, if by chance conditions unexpectedly go in the opposite direction.

I never post on a forum or newsgroup without doing the best I can to hide anything that will identify me. In this case, I am sending this message through three proxy servers. Giving out personal information to the world is not my idea of rational behaviour.

Willis, I think you need to break the “general AGW” question down into categories. Sceptics are all over the map on the various aspects. A response that averages out these issues may not tell you much in the end. Sub-questions might deal with degree and type of anthropogenic influence, urgency of response (if any), type of response (from conservation to geo-engineering), etc. Yeah, that opens another can o’ worms, but why not do it right the first time?

Living here in the Peoples Republic of Kalifornia, as one of the productive private sector tax paying slaves I fear retaliation from my government masters.

My real name is fairly unique, and I don’t want something I wrote in the past to be dredged up to be used against me by some future business associate or person doing “due diligence” on me. In addition, search engines generally will not easily provide the full context of any comment at the time of a future inquiry, so my comments could be greatly misunderstood.

Purely privacy issues for me. I use ‘fake’ names and email addresses strictly while out and about the web. I can say without doubt that I get spam and plenty of other unwanted contact having only used a name somewhere. I suspect adding any/all of the free EM endings like ‘@yahoo’ is all the spammers need. I change them up once junkmail exceeds the free space allocated.
* Age
50
* Sex
M
* Country
Canada
* Career
General contractor, home renos/construction (Formerly in corporate commnications, and before that educational TV/animation)
* General AGW position
Skeptic.
Two things red flagged for me. ‘Now we know everything’ and the consensus that, ‘OK, NOW we know everything.’ My experience in edTV was that you could add 1 month to pre-production schedule for every expert on the vetting committee. Getting experts to agree – on anything – was a line by bloody line fight. As was agreement on what we could say, “for sure, for sure.”
Visually describing something like how this atom bonded with this one was torturous. Even with accepted science, every statement of ‘fact’ had to be couched with “what we know now” or “what we think (now) happens” or “what ‘many’ think happens is something like this . . .”
Never, and I mean never could you say something like ‘we know this’ or ‘all scientists agree’ or even ‘just the really smart ones’. To keep things on track you would often have only one expert for one specific area and another for this bit, and so on. That way you had more than 1 expert for the program as a whole but no 2 sat in on the same script meeting. My first experience with the, ‘now we know everything – not’ was back in the mid-80’s when the accepted science had a linear progression for man’s evolution. (Oh, and don’t get me started on using terms like, ‘man’. That thought just brought a shiver.) There was some theories out there about multiple branches, or shotgun evolution explosions in many directions but the general consensus (at that time) was monkey to man in a nice straight slope. Our series was in the can less than 6 months when proof positive, no doubt whatever, was found. A fundamentally less developed skull but unquestionably younger (by thousands of years) than the far more developed skulls of our ancestors. OK, NOW we know everything . . .
Global warming first came into our programs in the late 80’s. I was on board at the time as it seemed to make sense and the crazy/alarmist stuff hadn’t started or at least caught my attention. The ‘now we know everything’ and that some 2000+ experts were all in complete agreement as to what we know ‘for sure’ struck me as well, impossible. So I started to look into the science of what we ‘know for sure’ and the more I looked the less I found.
I’m still looking into it; and looking with an open mind – or so I think. I find it hard to believe that we can continually pump our waste into the atmosphere and water without any negative effect, however I find it equally hard to believe that the only solution is, “Shut ‘er down – RIGHT NOW!”
-barn

I only use my real name when I post on Oregon State University blogs. Oh, wait. Should I not be doing that??

I can’t risk the likely result that people professionally associated with me would lose their support. This was especially true at the time I started posting.

In the field of climate change my opinion is stratospherically unimportant.
Using my name might lead people to infer that i think otherwise.
Metrologist, aero industry, coventry, england ,male 48
The banjo handle? oh dear! It started something like this.
“Chris mate,(thats me) you REALLY can`t play the guitar! you sound like a cat trying to s**t a banjo!”….friends eh?

Willis, I generally sign my climate posts with my full name, city and state. I usually do the same for letters to the editor, etc. If I’m not willing to put my name on something that I write, I probably shouldn’t have written it.
For better or worse, someone can Google my name and see where I stand on a number of contentious issues. Hopefully I have never written something that I will have reason to be ashamed of later. I do think about that before I press send.
For some people, being able to post anonymously brings out the beast in them. They feel that they are free to attack someone personally thinking that they will never have to answer for it. For others, it brings out the troll.
Some folks may feel that they must remain anonymous. But if that’s the case, it might be wise to avoid commenting at all. With the Internet it is often possible to uncover real identities if someone is actively communicating.
Back in 2008, I had an exchange with Joshau Halpern AKA “Eli Rabett.” I thought that his attitude was contemptuous so I did a little detective work. I addressed him as Dr. Halpern in my reply. He hasn’t posted at ClimateChangeDebate since. You might say that he ran away like a scared “rabett.” 🙂 It didn’t take much to figure out that that Tamino is Grant Foster at that time either. Whenever Tamino is mentioned, I respond with Grant Foster AKA “Tamino.”
So those posting anonymously may not be as anonymous as they think they are.

My real name is Ben Hillicoss( there are three of us, Dad, Me and son), and there is NO ONE who has ever met me that does not know my opinions on AGW, or recycling, or democrat policys, or local politics, or Washington, or…well I guess I am one of those…I wear my mind on my sleave and wave it about alot.

There are a lot of crazy people online, and I don’t crazy people (both those who agree and disagree) stalking me.
I also don’t want my opinion, which doesn’t match the so-called “consensus view” to effect my career and employment. No, I don’t work in a weather- or climate-related field or a scientific field. But I don’t want to be blackballed for a position because somebody found my post using a Google search and disagreed with what I have to say.

DesertYote is as much my name as my given name. When I was in the service I had a nickname, everyone including my CO called me by it. But my wise First Sargent realized that I was not a Wolf but a Coyote. I had just been raised by wolves. So when I left the Service, I changed my name to be more accurate. I currently were the hat of a test engineer, accuracy is everything.

I hope the section requesting information on professions is robust enough to deal with someone like me who has done a great many things in widely desperate fields.
I am knowledgeable of Ichthyology, freshwater ecology, Carnivore biology, Software Engineering, systems engineering, Semiconductor Manufacturing, Test and Measurement, and Mathematics. These are just the areas where I have worked professionally, not the area that I have an interest in and have studied extensively like history (most recently Japanese history up to the Meiji restoration).

Willis,
You may wish to consider asking about education (e.g. high school, some college, college degree, post-grad, doctorate). You may also want to ask on how many sites do they regularly leave comments. About 1/3 of my comments are left on climate sites, the rest are usually political sites.

Willis: One further reason for posting under one’s own name is the confidence one gets from seeing people who you admire and respect that share your views and are rational and authoritative in their declaration.
I work with brash young men and I try to mold their civility to make them better people, husbands, dads, and keep them on the narrow path to a better life and professional promotion. I lead strictly by example and the consequence is that these youngsters respect me as a person and as an authority. For these fellows to hear me express calmly, rationally and authoritatively, views which they hold themselves and have been ridiculed for, strengthens them. Just as hearing my views articulated by Anthony Watts, Willis Eschenbach. Tim Ball, Steve McIntyre, etc. etc., strengthens me. A little confidence is a powerful tool.
Thanks for mentoring me.

I am ecliptic all over the web – I only post with that name and I’m the only ecliptic out of 6.6 billion ( which I think is kinda cool ). We are living in a nightmarish combination of Brave New World, 1984, and Terminator. “SkyNet” is literally about to go live. Big Nanny is not only watching and collecting Total Information Awareness about you, but using that information in predictive algorithms and vast data-mining schemes beyond anything George Orwell could have imagined. New computer software request-for-bid asks for software to allow one government-paid troll to become 50 trolls, complete with 50 back-stories all nicely organized:
http://cryptogon.com/?p=20609
I agree with Tucci78 – be wary of the “greenies” … they are little fascists deep down and if given the opportunity will take that fascism all the way to it’s inevitable “final solution”: re-education camps with funny little ovens located out back . . .

RE: DesertYote – self taught.
We just have to be clear that we mean education with a small e. What are you trained in. What have you learned, what you know – as opposed to what class you slept through.
I’ll confess, my list of seven above might not fit Tensor Calculus and other branches of mathematics well, but what do you USE them for? That will lead pretty quickly into Physical Sciences and possibly Engineering or Computer Sciences.
In my own case, Linear, Integer, and Geometric Programming are all mathematical optimization tools to be applied in an Engineering (and Business) domain.
Now it might behoove the stratification to be more “Climate Science” oriented as in your knowledge of Earth Science, Statistics, Computer Science, Environmental Science, Other. But I like the openness of the general list.

Here is one other stratification that will warm your heart, Willis.
The number of total years you studied or worked outdoors collecting data or earning a paycheck. This is obviously a mechanism to separate those know reality only from a computer screen or lecture hall.
“She’s television generation. She learned life from Bugs Bunny”. — Max Schumacher, Network 1976.

My nom de plume means little except to an Eng Lit student and even then it leads nowhere.
It carries no authority and makes no claims.
That means that whoever wants to respond to any argument I put or statement I make has to focus on that since there is nothing much else to go on.
I’m comfortable with that and if anyone else has an issue then that’s their problem and not mine.

I’m a professional scientist with affiliation to the University of Illinois and others. Needless to say, I’m a small fish in a tank full of sharks. Most don’t like when I argue against their positions with logic and good science, so I tend to hang back.
I’m not particularly adverse to revealing my identity, but WUWT is read by a wide audience, including the extremists on the warming side. I find that I can be quite a bit more uninhibited in what I say by being largely anonymous.
My political views tend to the right, and I’ve been an environmental science advisor to the GOP at the level of US Senate, House and State levels. However, I’m not at all in favor of the present “defund the EPA” since I remember when Lake Erie used to catch fire, and Lake Michigan contained lampreys, carp and little else.
When I feel like it is time, I’ll speak out more openly. Thank you, Willis.

An interesting question would be: Did you change sides? How long ago? What was the reason (AIT, Climategate, Failure/Success of a prediction…)?

some women use a masculine name to avoid getting hit on or just ‘regarded’ as a feminine entity.
try putting a Dr in front of a nick, too – watch how ppl talk much more carefully

In response to my earlier post to the effect that I would sooner squat naked over a tank filled with piranha than allow the warmist [i]fascisti[/i] to learn my Real Name, we’ve got [b]Jessie[/b] at 4:54 AM on 26 April posting: [blockquote]Yikes. That is too horrible a thought. I checked out your wish. However I would suggest that you squat over a well fed school and recently cleaned tank housing piranhas, if you have a choice. [/blockquote]
Not much of a choice. As an undergraduate in pursuit of a degree in Biology, one of the “Let George Do It” jobs with which I got stuck was the maintenance of various aquaria, both marine and freshwater, and in several of these volumes one instructor was maintaining schools of piranha.
My own projects ran toward the study of ascidians and sea urchins at the time, and I didn’t give a damn about the characidae, but unpleasant and unrewarding scutwork is supposed to be part of your “learning experience,” isn’t it?
Well, what I learned about piranha is that well-fed or hungry, they’re unpleasant, aggressive, vicious little bastids, nearly as treacherous as career politicians and MSM journalists.
Thanks for the suggestion, and in return may I suggest that [b][i]you[/i][/b] try it instead.
I’ll happily stand by with hemostats, Gelfoam, and plenty of dressing materials.

Dear Willis
I agreed with a number of the reasons listed above, certainly a social anthropologists gold mine. My real name is Crispin and I am easy enough to find on line, but not so easy as to attract knee-jerk (with the emphasis on ‘jerk’) responses from trolls because it would take a little actual work to locate a working address. I append my moniker with my location at the time.
I work in a hotly contested energy field filled primarily with enthusiasts, which is to say, those with an inaccurate and incomplete knowledge of partially understood truths. Because the sector deals with energy, warmists abound, especially those with intent to harvest the crop of Dollars available from carbon trading.
Having been energetically attacked for expressing (obvious) skeptical views on religious, environmental and professional fora it suits me to make the loonies work a little to earn a chance to stuff my spam folder.
I am one of the lucky ones who are little risk of being actually fired for not singing the CAGW tune, but professionally it has had consequences, moreso among the poorly read and programmatically empowered. There are real consequences and I begrudge no one the opportunity to contribute intelligently from behind the pillar.
The main antidote to CAGW is education and enlightenment. The CAGW bats fly best in the dark, hence all their raging against the light.

I didn’t respond to the poll because I didn’t know how to respond. The reason for that is that many of the reasons listed play a role. When there are a dozen factors that play a significant role (say 6-12% each), can you really say which one(s) are most important?

I thought that was a great post, very interesting. Posting anonymously strikes me as similar to MMORPG or even Avatar and the Matrix movies, and a whole host of William Gibson inspired cyber discourse, in so far as these fictions fundamentally depict role-playing behaviors in the digital realms.
Developing different gender characters on WOW or Second Life, for example, affords the user a whole host of advantages for the digital projection of oneself that transcends cultural norms in many respects. The internet, and by proxy, blogs, have also enabled us to create new digital selfs, insulated from much standard discrimination.
I post anonymously and in many ways there is a sense of liberty, freedom or un-shackledness in doing so: you are unconstrained by cultural norms and potential reactions to gender, qualifications, social standing, field of expertise, age and experience; the words that form your posts are the only means determining the make-up of who you are. This tends to focus a potential reply on those words, and not appeal to the authority of culturally established norms such as ‘I’m older, more qualified and more experienced etc., etc – so you’re wrong’.
I’m tempted to conclude that the use of pseudonymity is intrinsically a rejection of authority! Maybe it’s prevelance will lead it to become known as “pseudonyminism”…

I always post under my name because I really don’t care what other people think of my postings. I’m expressing my opinion and people should be happy to know: 1) someone else also thinks like them, or 2) someone holds a very different opinion and maybe their’s is wrong.

My handle is my old computer sign in since before Al Gore invented the internet. It’s still part of my email. I am Dan and my name last starts with Bo. Though I rarely post here. I post other locations more. When I use my full name I feel like I’m going incognito.
For others concerns. I’ve been following this since the ice age scare. I’m one who has had warmers try to track me. (Elsewhere) And I’m a small frye. There is a skeptic with the same last name. A rather unusual one. But brilliant warmers don’t know the difference between Dan and Don. My long lost cousin is a bright guy.
I have worked in an unrelated field and had to deal with agencies and grants. So I understand some people’s cautions. For all the warmers whinning. They are the ones who have gotten people fired.
With an advanced degree, and experience in research. And worse “retired”. Greenpeace. You know who I am and where I live.

Willis Eschenbach
“While those are assuredly true, my question is not whether someone has the right to a pseudonym. It is why they are asserting that right, both here on this blog and on the web in general.”
So, essentially, you want to know why people are exercising their legal rights? O_0
Did you know that, apparently, of the more common practices for companies, organizations, and government, on the internet is practicing open source intelligence by searching blogs, facebook, and what not, for information about the people that are applying for jobs. The discussion these days aren’t so much about if companies, organizations, and government, should practice this stupidity but rather how to get facebooker to have an actual image of themselves rather than their puny baskerville hell hounds, and their real names and address’ on their blogs, because it has become too annoyingly easy these days for the knob and tool parade to mix up people, since too many of the internetians, apparently, have the audacity to have the same god damn names. :p
Are the services you use from Apple, Microsoft, Google and Facebook, et al, worth giving up personal information, information that is your “blueprint” on the internet, for, at every twist and turn? Commercial services aren’t for free, never has been and never will be, even if your experience of using ’em [feels] like they are for free, and all other services are taxed one way or the other.
It’s the one that legally collects and stores your personal information that owns that database, and such databases are a plenty, but they’re all legal to sell or license on the open market.
Would you choose not to walk into a neo-nazi parlor wearing a pink skirt flaunting your personal information every which way, speaking up for the jewish gay community? Does the world need to know why you exercised you right to choose not to?

Assuming you are continuing your poll in this thread (and you may not be):
Age: Over 65
Sex: Male
Country: USA
Career: Engineering Science, Aerospace Engineering, NASA Project Scientist and/or Project Manager for Space Shuttle and Space Station Scientific Experiments, retired
General AGW position: Skeptic. Based on my own detailed calculations and consideration of many factors, I conclude AGW is not proved and evidence is weak. If it exists, AGW and CO2 emission are, at worst, not significant problems — more likely, they are a good thing.
All in all, AGW is settled for me — its not something governments should waste time on — unless its a “scam” to justify enactment taxes and “green” laws, which is reprehensible.
AGW absorbed me for hundreds of hours of study and calculation. “Case closed” for me. Now, I’m on to other things. But, I still check in from time to time.

@ John Whitman
John, we’ve been through this before. I know John Whitman and you are not him. So why do you hide behind you plurality? Why don’t you assume “John Whitman #1642” or something even more identifiable and stick with it so we can know who you really are?
I converse via e-mail with scientists over this world and they all know who lowercase wayne is. They also know who I really am. I had the same problem you have, too common of a name. I was just one of the lucky ones that wayne happened not to be used for some reason, have never collided with anyone to date. Would it help if I assumed a pen name with first and last so you can feel you should then listen to what I say here?
Sometimes you are far too shallow in your thoughts on this matter. If you don’t realize it, you have belittled me, as a person, by your words on his manner, explicitly saying you will never listen to someone without two names in their pen. Do you think since so many people know who wayne is that I would say something I would not say face to face. Never. It is just an identity John and as much as your ego wants it to be, John Whitman is a plurality of a pen. Pick something totally unique (if possible) and stick with it.

John, I’m sorry, is that the very unique pen you chose? If so, ignore that above. (but I still think you should listen to everyone and get to know who to listen to or not by their words, not merely judging their pen name) ☺

It seems it would be a much shorter list to discover why people post under their real names. Mine is fairly simple. I got used to having to comment over my real name in “Letters to the Editor” hence have developed a “Don’t give a damn” thick skin. It also helps to be self-employed.

Willis,
The blogging world, every two to three years has this conversation, also on censorship or the snip functions. The censorship issues seem to be self maintenance by the blog owner/s and the better, read here more successful blogs run a well ordered free public house. Most bloggers seem to run post censorship either well or egotistically or selfishly. Guess which have the most hits and which don’t.
I have done work in privacy and security, previously. Not technical, but some of the high level stuff on the morality and safety issues and this issue is a trust and safety issue paramount.
Now we teach people, the internet is a dangerous space. And it is. The one crime on Pseudonyms that seems universal is sock puppetry. Double personality posting. I personally think the crime is more like an intellectual vote rigging thing, but it appears to be almost universally abhorrent .
Myself I use my psuedonym, in humor and whimsy and some times just to flame and my real name means I enter the debate with my most electrically charged point I have.
In the beginning we encouraged people not to give their real details and we still encourage children especially to be careful, I was doing some work in developing discussion to the new internet moralities. My space and face book have shown that though they are great tools, they are misused in bullying and associated results from bullying have been tragic, let alone more specific intended criminal actions.
What may be an intellectual debate on WUWT about comment identification if applied universally across the internet can and will have unintended consequences.
I note the blog owner Anthony Watts some years back appeared uncomfortable with psuedonyms. I thinks if he looks around in this charged political debate now on AGW he can see the real attacks and danger, now as historical facts.
Personally I am ambivalent on pseudonyms and prefer a cautious approach with personal details and identity.
Psuedonyms are not for everyone, fair enough, for any of us that prefer caution, we will use them and any blog demanding a real identity, should be prepared to decimate its readership and such a rule is counter intuitive about what the internet was designed for in free thinking and free discussion. Psuedonyms were allowed in the beginning of modern literature, say since Guttenberg. History is littered with ghost writers, ghost-talkers if you will, the reasons d’etterre are readily apparent. The world is very big and can be very dangerous for free thinker and free talkers.
The beginning rules of Net ID and email address are still valid.
Capn Jack says Yaar, “what me matey Nemo said. Interesting boofhead boffin debate, Yar bloggers can always contact posters by a personal email for a personal chuckle session but yer won’t”.
Final Note: This is the biggest in progress workshop this poor old species has ever seen, some wear suits and ties, some wear jeans and check shirts or t shirts and some come naked, it is the thought and knowledge and experience that is important.
Apol for length of post. Look at the bottom of most financial institution pages you will read a trust statement. Safe harbor statement. Most blogs including this one wont declare their own behaviours or guides. What they will or won’t do.
Me I started in the vexatious issue of identity ownership and Pamela Gray nailed this, I have to trust you to give you my identity not the other way round. I am doing you the favor with my visit, not the other way round.
I intend no offence, just observations.
[Reply: You write much more legibly than Cap’n Jack. ~dbs, mod.]

Check out Hannity’s program tonight at Fox News. I just learned from a postnormal Gaia spokeswoman that I’m a deniersaur and a fossilfool! LOL. It just gets more and more fun!

Plain and simple in my case. When a friend and fellow blogger received death threats from his right to life site, and then someone stole his identity and racked up bills in his name, I decided I would remain anonymous so I could have my career working for the federal government (as a contractor) independent of my views as a citizen.
It is actually quite refreshing to post my unvarnished opinions and not have to worry about some lynch mob of bureaucrats using my freedom of speech against me, my company and my employees.
Anonymity is not an issue, it all comes down to the content of the argument. What name is attached is irrelevant. And I am not risking my families future over prudish concepts by a few malcontents on the internet!
Cheers, AJStrata

wayne says:
April 26, 2011 at 5:51 pm
John, I’m sorry, is that the very unique pen you chose? If so, ignore that above. (but I still think you should listen to everyone and get to know who to listen to or not by their words, not merely judging their pen name) ☺
———
Wwayne,
Thanks for yourcomment. We can arrange for me to privately prove to you that my name is John Whitman.
John

Anthony and Willis and your crew I think we are done.
Fair wind at your back.

I used to use another pseudonym along with my realname on a website I used to have.
Only to find some scumbags pirated/hijacked some of the material on my website to me and reposted it one of those radical anti-western forums of eastern european origin. The material was to do we radio communications. They didn’t bother to strip off the html tags at the bottom of the page that also bore my realname and amateur radio callsign. I ended up having to put a disclaimer on my webpage that I was not associated with that radical anti-western forum. That was only after I’d found out about it.
I had some rather unpleasant experiences in cyberspace there for awhile.

@ John Whitman, woops, forgot the happy face behind that first paragraph above. If you didn’t get that, I was just nudging you. ☺

wayne says:
April 26, 2011 at 8:29 pm
@ John Whitman, woops, forgot the happy face behind that first paragraph above. If you didn’t get that, I was just nudging you. ☺
– – – – – –
wayne,
Sorry I mispelled your name in my earlier post. It was a mistake. Did that comment on my Blackberry while waiting for my bags at ALB baggage claim after a looooooong day traveling back from Tokyo.
It is nice to have a long standing protagonist like you. I enjoy dialog with you. No problema.
John

“What else would make the poll more interesting?”
I don’t think it’s relevant, but I’ve been wondering about this for a while, and it would certainly make the poll more interesting: religious affiliation, or lack thereof.

I give enough to simply reference myself and give a general impression of my cultural standing (Texans are our own thing, and Houston runs on oil). However, I too represent a company that has decided interests in the climate change debate, and while I may not set compnay policy by my actions, I do have to deal with the regulatory agencies, so I am in a position where my environmental views are of legal interest, and I would prefer not to broadcast them to the world with my full, google-searchable name.