Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
[NOTE: This is not the poll, it is preparation for the poll.]
Well, I have to say that I have learned a whole lot already in this project. In preparation for an upcoming poll on the use of names in posting, I’d asked for reasons why people post either pseudonymously or under their own name. I was very surprised at the number and the wide range of reasons people put forward.
In order to make sense of it all, I have divided them up into general categories. I think that what I’ll do with the poll is ask the questions about the categories. I’ll include the examples so that people can make informed choices. In general order of the number of responses, these are the answers to the first question:
WHY DO YOU POST UNDER A PSEUDONYM?
The category that got the most answers was
The Issue is Privacy/Security From General Retaliation / Fraud / Spam
In this category I tried to distinguish the issue of the specific subject matter (climate change) from issues regarding privacy or retaliation in general. The comments were:
- Stalking is always a concern to a female.
- I was stalked by a spaced out woman. A narcissistic poisonous toad from high school.
- I have been attacked for my views.
- I am pleased to get some protection from the cloud of gnats hovering around the net.
- I am the sole support of others.
- I’m concerned about putting any personal information about myself on the web for any reason.
- I believe in the right to privacy
- A substantial reason in the UK is the current state of defamation law.
- I post anonymously to avoid ad hominem and personal attacks from a co-worker, who is a rabid militant anti-religious, pro-CAGW atheist/zealot (not a nice guy).
- I cherish my privacy.
- Having been personally harassed (phone calls, sugar in the gas tank, nails in the driveway), I’d rather avoid dealing with more crazies.
- Even if the risk is only slight, countless others are refusing to take the risk, so why should I?
- I don’t know who might read the post and what they might do with it.
- It would be easy to connect up my posts, email address and ultimately my credit cards. Spam and fraud would then follow.
- I have someone constantly Googling my name.
- Metaphorically speaking, I have relatives in the old country …
- I am concerned about identity theft.
The Issue is Freedom to Express Myself
In this category were a variety of statements that the person found it easier to express their opinions when using a pseudonym.
- I can say things that I would be embarrassed to say in person.
- I feel able to express more confident views if those statements aren’t personally attributable to me.
- It is like putting on a superman suit, you can say anything, be anything and fly anywhere. And if any-one with kryptonite strikes you down, what does it matter, tomorrow you will be Clark Kent.
- I find it easier to express negative views when I post anonymously.
- The anonymous nature of the blog site allows people to speak more freely.
- I have blown my credibility using my previous handle. It is time for a new public identity.
- It allows me to “compartmentalize” my opinions on very different subjects.
- Posting anonymously offers an opportunity for crowd-sourced criticism before having my name attached to a bad idea.
- I have no strength of conviction or lack intestinal fortitude.
- I enjoy “trolling”, stirring things up.
- It’s a chance to let out my repressed wild and crazy inner personalities.
- To express things I wouldn’t have courage to express otherwise, the same reason many students are hesitant to put their hand up in class.
- I’m posting for relaxation – not “publication”.
The Issue is that the Web is a Permanent Record
In this category people pointed out a number of issues with the permanence of the electronic record. The comments were:
- To be honest, I also say some pretty stupid things, occasionally, especially when imbibing the suds.
- A future employer might have issues with some of the things I post.
- Who wants to be responsible for my stupid ramblings when I am involved with Jack Daniels? Not me!
- I want to maintain plausible deniability.
- I don’t want people / future employers / opponents to be able to research my previous statements.
- What you say on internet is searchable anywhere and forever.
- It could interfere with getting a security clearance.
- I don’t want current comments being dredged up in a possible future political campaign.
- If a potential employer or anyone else for that matter searches for me, I want them to see my CV or work
- I plan to run for president and want to be able to change my opinions as may be convenient.
- I don’t wish for my thoughts and comments from years gone by to turn up whenever someone does a search on my name.
The Issue Is The Specific Subject Matter of Climate
These were people for whom the issue was that stating their views on climate would cause them problems.
- It may cost me business/lose me funding.
- I work with clients/customers or in a market where skeptical views are not welcome.
- I don’t fancy being beaten to death with a lump of coal in the middle of the night.
- I do a fair bit of sub-contract work for companies that have bought into the green dream, so I’m invoking my very own version of the … uh … precautionary principle 🙂
- I wish to keep my views and general discussion on climate (and science more generally) distinct from my professional life which has an element of being public.
- A rabid green has haunted me in other forums.
- I have to make a living proffering engineering services to some of these “green” industries, so I can’t risk getting blackballed.
- I’ve experienced prejudice in the workplace
- I work with people who believe Albert Gore is a scientist.
- If I posted under my own name, it would be tantamount to expressing my political views to all and sundry and in my industry that would convey a lack of professionalism.
The Issue is Judgement Of Ideas and not Personalities
These people felt that if they posted pseudonymously people would judge their ideas, and not judge them personally:
- I want readers to judge my comments on their content, not their provenance.
- I don’t wish to disclose my formal qualifications, or lack of them, or that I am in a different field.
- My identity does not validate or invalidate the contents of my post. Too often credentials are used instead of a sound argument.
- Using my real name is just asking for ad hominem attacks.
- I don’t want to be associated with my job when posting on technical subjects.
- I have worked for oil companies, mining companies or agribusiness and it would likely be held against me.
- I am concerned that my age, gender, ethnicity, educational level, etc are factors that can affect the people who read a comment and many of them unfortunately then respond in a biased way.
- It’s good that no-one on the internet knows if you’re a frog.
The Issue is Governmental/Organized Retaliation
For these people, the issue is organized retaliation or reprisal from the government or other major organization:
- I post anonymously for the same reason I do not register a gun.
- Trust no one.
- Greenpeace said “We know who you are. We know where you live. We know where you work. And we be many, but you be few.”
- I’m not even half as paranoid as I should be.
- Didn’t Zorro and the Lone Ranger wear their masks because of things like this?
My Pseudonym Is A Significant “Nickname”
These people feel that the pseudonym under which they post has significance:
- I use a moniker because it describes what I am and how I see the world in 3 words.
- It’s traditional since the beginning of the web to have a handle.
- People will recognise my handle and recognise what I stand for.
- I think it is fun to call myself by my handle.
- I enjoy putting forward an identity that says more about me than my name.
The Issue is Restrictions On My Freedom To Post
These are people who have external restrictions on what and where they can post:
- In my country you could be targeted by the consensus people.
- I am an executive in a company incorporated in the U.S. As such, I am legally responsible for anything I say in public, and anything I say is by definition, company policy.
- It has been explicitly stated that unapproved public posting (on any website) would be a bad career move.
- Many companies have policies against talking to the media without authorisation – usually for the obvious reason that the employer doesn’t want employees holding themselves out as representing the company if they’re not authorised to.
- I am under an implied contract to never make public pronouncement under my name that might in any way embarrass or disadvantage any segment of a multifaceted corporate endeavor.
There are Issues With My Real Name
These people pointed to various problems that can arise when they use their real name:
- I have a common name and use a pseudonym so that I can search for my postings.
- I’m not British / American, and for an English speaker my name is difficult to remember / sounds weird / carries a silly pun / leads to misunderstandings.
- it would be entirely possible to get a stalker, and some poor innocent victim(s) could be hounded unfairly.
- Google my name and you can find many people. I would not like to get any one of them in trouble.
- My name is the same as a wanted criminal / bad person.
Unknown
This is a catchall category.
- I feel more comfortable posting anonymously, but I’m not sure why.
OK, so those are the categories for people who post pseudonymously, along with the examples. If there are problems or things mis-categorized or better categories, please let me know.
Next, here are the categories that came up in response to the second question, again in general order of number of responses:
WHY DO YOU POST UNDER YOUR OWN NAME?
It Is An Issue Of Honesty / Responsibility
The most common response said that when posting under their own names, the issue was one of personal honesty or responsibility. The comments were:
- If I write something, I’ll stand for it, or I would not write it.
- I feel that by posting under my own name I am showing I am willing to be open and honest about who I am, what I do and why I believe what I do.
- If I can’t be willing to put my name to what I think, I won’t post it.
- I can’t lie with a straight face.
- I say what I mean and am terribly honest at it.
- I’ve had my own name a long time and have grown attached to it.
- I have to stand for what I believe as who I am, otherwise what I say is all posturing.
- I consider my self responsible for my own opinions.
- It’s a matter of clarity and honesty.
I’m Free To Disregard Opposition
These people recognized that the were operating in a hostile environment, and are free (for various reasons) to choose to ignore that:
- I am retired, and don’t care if people read what I post.
- I’m confident enough in who I am to not be concerned about what others think of my opinions.
- I don’t fear professional retribution as most of my peers hold similar views to mine or are just plain disengaged from the topic of global warming.
- I’m in the “I don’t care” crowd.
- I am totally uninterested about what other people think of me.
- Because I don’t follow th herd.
- Since my work is not publicly funded or grant funded, I’m at liberty to say what I wish without concern of losing my job.
- If they want to google my name, they should do it if they don’t have better things to do.
- I don’t post anonymously because I have a martyr complex.
It Is An Ethical Question
For these people, it is a question of personal ethics:
- A person of worth will stand up in their own name for what is right and against what is wrong.
- If such things as climate change are important we should pony up and admit where we stand.
- I dislike anonymity on principle
- A screen name feels like hiding behind a false front.
- I consider it a basic aspect of decency not to say or do anything to which you would not sign your name.
- I grew up a cowboy, and criticizing someone from behind a mask of anonymity feels like shooting someone from ambush … and a cowboy can’t do that, it’s in the contract, ask Tom Mix.
- I feel uneasy posting anonymously.
- I have never not posted with my own and real name. Why would I do otherwise?
- I prefer to say what I think and feel anyway without hiding under a cloak.
The Issue Is Standing Up To Intimidation/Fear
These people say that they post under their own name because they are standing up to intimidation:
- I refuse to be intimidated by the dangers of the world.
- It would be cowardly for me to hide behind an alias.
- I would rather walk free in the sun, than skulk around, frightened of my own shadow, tugging my forelock at the Econazis.
- I always sign my name. I believe that it is cowardly not to. I am a devout Catholic and a AGW sceptic.
- If I have too little courage of my own convictions to sign my name to my opinions, why should anyone pay attention?
- It’s a statement that I will not be intimidated.
- I think it is cowardice to post anonymously.
- Courage is what is needed right now, if you have something to say and if you can, then put your name to it.
It Acts As A Brake On Excessive Behavior
These people highlighted that they act less responsibly when they post pseudonymously.
- I am much better mannered when I have to take responsibility for my words.
- My claims tend to extravagance when I post anonymously.
- Using my name forces me to keep my posts measured and decent.
- I started posting under my real name after making an ass of myself anonymously in a blog comment section.
There Are Social Benefits from Knowing Each Other’s Names
The benefits to society were the main issue to these people
- I believe it is simply good manners to identify yourself when talking to people.
- I think that in the long view we as a society get along much better when we know each others names.
- I use my real name after getting involved in a serious debate turned web based research project with several people who had to live down the consequences of being called killer wombat, Mr buggles and mudge!
I Have No Problem With A Permanent Record Of My Statements
These people are aware that the web record is permanent, but they are not deterred by that:
- I feel free to change my opinion should I have reason to and will defend or dismiss my former opinions accordingly.
- I have no concern about people reading my opinions a decade from now.
- I want to be able to claim ownership of my ideas.
So that’s the categories for the poll as they stand now. A few general comments.
First, I was surprised by the wide variety of responses to both questions. I would not have thought that there were that many reasons. Even divided into categories there are still a lot, and very interesting reasons.
Next, I plan to add the following questions:
- Age
- Sex
- Country
- Career (Industry/Education/Science/Health/Student/Retired … what other careers?)
- General AGW position (skeptic/supporter/still considering)
What else would make the poll more interesting?
My thanks to everyone for their contributions to date, the poll goes forwards.
w.
Also, thinking through this there is a difficulty with one class of answers. These are answers like:
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. Indeed, some assert that right here but not elsewhere on the web … the poll needs a question on that too, huh … damn thing’s turning into a novel.
w.
A strong argument against internet anonymity.
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.
Oh yes and I almost forgot …
V: People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.
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 post under my name on climate related blogs, but typically under my gaming handle(s) on non-technical forums. I haven’t really given much thought as to why. My name isn’t so unique that it identifies me to all who see it, but throw in a few clever keywords to a google search and I can be found.
I don’t feel threatened by kooks or zealots, but I do respect the eternal nature of internet search data. So I craft my comments with care (except for the occasional one-liner 🙂 knowing that someone some day will try to hold my words against me.
Census data:
Male age 40 – 49
Educated as a geophysicist, working as a bureaucrat
Count me as the following:
Climate changes: convinced
Global warming since 1800s: convinced
Global warming since 1976: skeptical
The A in AGW: very skeptical
The C in CAGW: dismissive
The impact of the IPCC: alarmed
The level of fundamental science being done to quantify “the greatest threat to mankind”: disgusted
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 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 you 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.
“WHY DO YOU POST UNDER A PSEUDONYM?”
In a word….. modesty.
In regards to some comments about just how common or identifying one’s real name is or isn’t, for example post by: Jenn Oates says: April 26, 2011 at 8:50 am
I’m in the opposite situation – while my first name isn’t a particularly common one, it isn’t at all unusual either. My last name is however – I know for a fact that there isn’t anyone else in the USA with the same name as mine (first & last even, e.g., true even without considering my middle name) – and strongly suspect that’s probably true world wide also. Even so, the name is often quickly noted/recognized and remembered, because of a famous 2nd cousin. If I used my real name, in two seconds flat anyone so inclined for any reason would know exactly where I live, what my phone number is, etc.
Those here who post using their actual name, who seem to feel that it is somehow less than ‘honest’ for others to not do the same, ask yourself if you would be so cavalier about it if you had a name that allowed immediate unique identification of exactly who you really are, where you and your family live and work, what your career is, and so on. Most people’s names are more common than that – and so they still have some anonymity even using their real name. Some of us don’t have that luxury.
Also, re the privacy issue – years ago (probably a decade or so) in completing a free but required registration at a site in order to post a comment, I used a made up first name and a very misspelled version of my last name. I don’t recall if I gave a real or made up email addy – but if the former it wouldn’t have been one that I used for muchy of anything. The site of course claimed that all such registration info was kept private, not sold, etc. IIRC, that was the only site I ever used that combination on, and it was a well known/respected news type site. Low and behold in very sort order the made up name appeared on my credit report as an alias. As I’ve never used ANY alias for any legal issue, or for that matter for anything other than internet posts, I don’t believe the listing as an alias on my credit reports holds any water – point being that things are incredibly interconnected these days.
I’m very open with friends and family, co-workers (possibly more so than is really prudent), and even with people I “meet” on the internet. I’ve wound up with a number of good friends that I met initially on the internet, some of which I’ve met later in person, and quite a few have remained friends for many years. It is an awesome aspect of the internet – we can ‘meet’ and get to know and be friends with people from literally around the world, who we almost certainly woudn’t meet otherwise.
Even so, I don’t think it is at all wise to put personal details out there widely to perfect strangers. I don’t go very far in trying to keep those details private – probably not nearly as far as today’s technological situation warrants. I have no doubt that anyone interested in doing so could probably figure out exactly who I am. I’m an open book very quickly even in relatively new private email correpondenses, and very much tend to give people the benefit of the doubt and feel that the enrichment gained that way far outweighs the disadvantages over time. It’s just not worth the extra time and effort to figure out how to cover my tracks better (although if I run across such info, and it’s not difficult to do, I’d incorporate such practices – I’d love to see a good authoratative article that says “here are the x number of steps, in order of importance, that you can easily take to remain private on the web” that at least goes beyond the most simple things like not accepting most tracking cookies & not using your real name on posts {VBG}).
I would have NO problem with Anthony, or quite a few other’s here at WUWT knowing exactly who I am. I do have a problem with the idea of any joe blow who happens on the site for whatever reason, or googles it up who knows how many years from now, knowing personal details about me. I just don’t think it’s prudent on many different levels. So while I’m sure ‘joe blow’ could figure out who I am, etc., at least it would take a little bit of effort on their part rather than it just being handed to them on a platter.
I also created (10+ years now), own, and run a high volume bulletin board (totally unrelated subject/discipline than here – and my real name is clearly there as list owner, although I still post there under a user id that isn’t my name, but with an auto sig. that is my actual name ending each post). Frankly I think many folks here would be utterly floored at the number of people who ‘lurk’ on blogs and bb’s, never or almost never posting – and for a wide variety of reasons. Being ‘attacked’ or ‘put down’ and ‘privacy concerns’ seem to be large issues for quite a few of those – and we’re pretty strict about not allow any personal attacks.
Many people who aren’t familiar with science or technical disciplines, however, seem to feel that even polite questioning of details, logic, assumptions, etc., are actually personal attacks. I find out about them when I get private emails expressing such concerns – or when they finally take the plunge and make their first post to the list and mention the issue. Some who send private email only, I can reassure with a bit of correspondence, explaining the list and how it works, why some posts that may seem harsh to them have very good reasons and motives behind them and how the back and forth winds up benefitting everyone, especially the person who might on the surface appear to have been ‘attacked’ (gees, you can’t help fix someone’s problem when they’re asking for help, without knowing all the relevant details!!) Others will come out of hiding after they’ve lurked for some time and begin to see the actual purpose and positive results that comes from reasonably polite questioning at inquiries. Others lurk to find prospective clients (I encourage membership to email me or my moderators immediately if they get private solicitations, and promply ban anyone who behaves in such a fashion). I’m sure some are trolls or have other nefarious reasons, although I very much hope there aren’t many of those. Then I’m sure a large number of ‘lurkers’ probably don’t really follow the list that closely, but don’t bother to unsubscribe.
The point is that literally anyone throughout the world can either post or follow lists – for all sorts of different reasons, both good and bad. And unfortunately, one has no way to know what some of those people might choose to do with the information. As with so many other things, all too often it’s very much a situation where a few bad apples spoil the bunch.
Willis, if you include any breakdown on education, please be sure to separate out the B.A.’s, M.A.’s etc. from the B.S.’s, M.S.’s etc. – at least in the USA, typically the former are non-science disciplines, while the latter are far more science oriented. A differientiation that I would think is highly relevant to your poll.
Willis said:
My premise? My premise??? Dude, this is setting up for a poll. You do understand what etc. etc.
Take a deep breath and wait for the poll, my gaelic friend, that’s what polls are for,
etc. etc.
“Willis, when did you stop beating your wife?”
“What is causing global warming”?
“Can’t you understand irony”?
etc.
Have you never heard of a leading question?
I am extremely disappointed by your response, because I thought you were intelligent enough to understand what I was saying without forcing me to spell it out!
To ask the question “WHY DO YOU POST UNDER A PSEUDONYM?” implies by the very nature of the question that there must be some rationale for people using a pseudonym, just like asking “what is causing global warming” not only implies there is such a thing as global warming, but that it has a cause. The question demands an answer and by forcing people to find an answer that fits the question, a leading question forces people to bite the “bait” and use the answer implied in the question, thus leading them to say something they would not ordinarily have said. And then as people try to rationalise the dissonance between their response and their views, they solve the dissonance by bringing their views into line with their response, so changing their view to fit the answer they were forced to make by the leading question. The result: mankind must have caused warming because …I had to find an answer to what caused the warming and it’s the only answer I have … and because I said it, I must believe it!
It is a well known phenomena of questionnaires like this that e.g. fear of crime increases as soon as you ask people about their fear of crime, because asking people how afraid of crime they are immediately makes them consider all possible reasons they could be afraid which in itself raises their awareness they “should” be afraid and so such questions are known to ENHANCE FEAR OF CRIME.
So I have to ask: “Is your intention really to promote fear of being a sceptic?” If not then why are you actively running a series of articles suggesting to people that they ought to be afraid to use their real names in posts like this? To be frank, it’s entirely counter productive!
Fear breeds fear, and asking this type of question in the way you are going about it and then analysing in great depth why people ought to be afraid will only suggest to people (like me) who have no problem using their real name, that we must be wrong and that we ought to be afraid.
So, just tell me straight, am I wrong? Is there nothing to fear posting using your real name?
—> I want readers to judge my comments on their content, not their provenance
This.
I’m not afraid of using my full real name as much as I feel like this issue is wholly polarized on personalities. If I and others stay more anonymous, we may post in a more vulgar fashion true, but we also will not be creating more personalities that are simply dismissed out of hand because of the name.
I remember quite clearly when this “battle” between skeptics and warmists began. The first salvo’s fired from the warmists were pure ad hominems. I remember seeing lists of names of scientists who disagreed with the IPCC and all manner of slander against them. I remember laughing out loud at one particular “discreditation” list; in this list next to Steve McIntyre’s name they could only say, “Steve has no science degree.” Next to Ross McKittricks name, they could only say, “He is an economist.”
It was absurd, yes, but because those men lacked a peanut gallery that spoke unassailable truth while wearing a veil, they were ignored. I’m happy to provide a portion of that peanut gallery so that those men are not ignored.
Die Zauberflotist says:
Ouch! That certainly sheds a whole new light on Tamino and Eli Rabbet…
Willis-
As always your posts make me think. Since your last post on this subject, I have been thinking about whether to comment under my own name or not. I find I can agree with many of the reasons on both sides of the discussion. I can agree with reasons to use a nom de plume, or screen name as it is called now, and I can agree with reasons to use my own name.
I would like to point out, that using a screen name, as long as it is always the same, is not the same as an anonymous comment. For instance, here at WUWT, I recognize Smokey ( I know he says that’s his name) and his comments, as much as Pamela Gray’s comments, and I have come to respect them both.
Which brings me to my last point. I think your poll should also include a question for those who now use their real name, and those who did in the past, but no longer do.
The question: Have you ever had anything happen to you, that people fear will happen to them if they use their real name? We have already had a couple of comments to the effect that they are pretty sure they lost their job because they expressed their opinions openly.
What about it. Are these fears groundless or not?
As you can guess, for the time being I’ll stick to my nom de plume.
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.
I am comparatively analyzing two hypothetical situations.
The first is where someone engages actively in face-to-face discussions on a topic (say AGW-by-CO2) but on the internet uses a non-real identity to comment on the topic.
The second is where someone does not engage in face-to-face discussions on a topic but on the internet uses a non-real identity to comment on the topic .
Hmmmmm. In the first situation we cannot know the person is maintaining intellectual integrity between their face-to-face statements and their non-real identity online statements. So no accounting is possible.
Hmmmmm. In the second case we have a person showing implied anxiety as their motivation of using non-identity in the real world and also online. The behavior does not advance the discussion of a topic as well as an anxiety free situation that encourages using real identities.
Fun discussion.
John
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?
Willis,
Condensing these responses, it seems to me that either using a real name, a moniker or alias, we are seeking uniqueness. If a real name is common (e.g. ‘John Smith), confusion and mis-matched identity can arise. ‘grumpy old man’ was stolen, so the quest goes on. But if we are happy with a code name or a real name that identifies that author, and that author only, then that is all that is needed.
It is uniqueness that we crave.
(I use a moniker on another site, as do all the users, and the site registers them so that others cannot use that name, at least on that site.)
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.
Tucci78
April 26, 2011 at 11:52 am
##
Re: Piranha, defiantly keep nitrates below 15 ppm (10 is better) and turn the water over at least 3 times an hour (very high O2). They also are much calmer if they are in a fairly large group (at least 6 but 10 is better). I never had any problems except parents guarding fry, though I made sure that I was not tired or distracted before messing with their tank!
I post under a pseudnom because I am concerned that my daughter who does valuable research in marine science (medical extracts and identification) will have trouble with research grants and other funding. She has already complained that research funds are heavily weighted towards global warming outcome projects (which have no benefit for anyone). My name is uncommon and a search on my name on the internet brings up thousands of hits about her work, papers, interviews etc.
I hope that my pseudnom expresses a friendly attitude.
I am an engineer who has some understanding of thermodynamics and heat transfer.
I take in and support the assessment of Dr Van Andel who has two interesting papers in the same issue of Energy and Environment as Willis.
I have calculted using Prof. Hoyt Hottel’s equations that CO2 in the atmosphere absorbs insignificant amount of energy so that the there zero sensitivity. It is good to see that Miskcolzci and Van Andel looking at real data confirm that.
old engineer says:
“I would like to point out, that using a screen name, as long as it is always the same, is not the same as an anonymous comment. For instance, here at WUWT, I recognize Smokey ( I know he says that’s his name) and his comments, as much as Pamela Gray’s comments, and I have come to respect them both.”
Thanks, engineer, I agree with you about Pamela’s posts. But I have to make a correction: “Smokey” is the name of my wife’s scrappy tomcat, with notches in his ears from all the fights he’s gotten into [not so much any more, though; like me he’s gettin’ too old]. I’ve mentioned this a time or two in the past, but it’s been a while.
I always post my comments under “Smokey.” Thanks for noting that you can recognize an individual and get to know them, no matter what the arrangement of pixels precedes “…says:
@ur momisugly 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.