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.
Willis Eschenbach says:
April 26, 2011 at 11:17 am
I’m glad you liked the idea. There is an awful lot of religious organizations and the trick would be to keep the selection list fairly short and still be meaningful. Most of your respondents will be Westerners, so I would suggest being somewhat detailed where Western categories are concerned and more general for non-Western religions:
Roman Catholic
Orthodox Catholic
Anglican Communion (Anglican, Episcopalian, Church of Ireland, etc.)
Main-line Protestant (that would include Baptist, United Church of Christ, Methodist, Lutheran, Quaker, etc.)
Historically Black Church (e.g. National Baptist Convention, AME, etc.)
Evangelical / Holiness Christians (e.g. Jehovah’s Witnesses, Pentecostal Assembly, Church of God, etc.)
Mormon
Judaism
Atheist / Agnostic / Secular / Non-Religious
Muslim
Hindu
Buddhist
Sikh
Baha’i
Jain
African Traditional Religion
Native American Traditional
Neo-Pagan / New Age
Rastafarian
Spiritual but unaffiliated
Other
This list includes most of the top 20 major religions of the world, but I’ve left off Juche , for example, (ranked number 10 in the world with 19 million adherents, according to http://www.adherents.com ) because I really don’t expect to see any North Koreans responding to your survey. Even with the best of intentions there is still room for misunderstanding. During my race and ethnicity lecture I was trying to emphasize the similarities between White and Black Americans and made the observation that like most whites, most blacks were also Christian. One young lady got very indignant and accused me of politically incorrect generalizations. She insisted that most African Americans were NOT Christian; she was NOT Christian. I asked “What are you then?” She snarled back “Baptist!”. It’s not good form to weep in front of your students, so I threw her out of class instead.
As for the political orientation thing, I’m currently a registered Democrat, but that’s because a friend needed all the votes he could get in a primary election. Another friend once described me as a “right-wing social democrat”…. which may or may not have been the same as Gore Vidal calling Bill Buckley a “pseudo-crypto-neo-fascist” on national TV…. and, as I recall, they were the only two in the whole country who knew what THAT meant. I’m not sure your poll could successfully get people to reliably place themselves on some sort of continuum that is meaningful across societies (an American Liberal (Liberalus Americanus) as I understand it, would be considered reactionary in Sweden)…. so perhaps simply a check box for “I am a registered member of a political party” followed by a fill-in-the-blank box to put the name of the party…. that portion would have to be tabulated by hand, but you would be able to report “… out of 263 USA respondents, 3 were Democrats, 5 were Republicans, 2 said “a pox on all of you” and the remainder wanted directions to Attila the Hun’s camp”. If I can think if anything more sophisticated that won’t take up bandwidth I’ll let you know. I still think that the left-right, liberal-conservative, democrat-republican divide that we seem to see too often in these threads is really what the Marxists would call “false consciousness” – it’s really a statist elite versus the rest of us.
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) ☺
There does appear to be another Andy G posting on local climate sites (or it was me and I don’t recall doing it, that can happen after a bottle of red ;-))
So henceworth I will TRY to remember to put ’55’ after the Andy G on any climate posts anywhere.. to make it a bit less ambiguous.
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.
I just want to be like everybody else, with a neato moniker that makes people think I’m a cool kind of guy. Kind of like going along with the consensus, I mean.
Really, isn’t that why everyone believes in global warming anyhow? And because the mass media tells us all it’s true, true, true.
Oops, wrong blog, I’m sorry. Thought I was on Real Climate.
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.]
I think that you have now made this so complicated that it will end up a meaningless exercise (sorry, but I had to say it). Several “issues” belong in several “bins.” Several issues are in the wrong “bins,” IMHO. No allowance for all the nuances involved.
I would just give it up, if I were you.
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!
Using one’s real name not only only encourages literacy, suppressing potentially idiotic rants, but makes it easy to filter out responses. Since crude and vulgar, nasty-minded individuals invariably prefer to post anonymously, comments under hippy-dippy pseudonyms are easy to excise, extrude, excrete on principle from posted threads.
Over the years, we’ve lost surprisingly little of interest by taking this approach.
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
Jae,
Yetis don’t have big feet, Skeptisaurs do. Their vibrations tear down fairy floss castles and bring out the criminal and violent tendencies in the stupid.
I would swear we live in a Jule’s Verne alternative universe. Nemo and me feel right at home.
Scottish Sceptic says April 26, 2011 at 5:42 am that he does not agree that use of correct name in formal publications is the same as using correct names on blogs.
Use of a correct name on a blog is not simply an appeal to authority. One can reject the work of all people, if they use full names or false. There is no implied authority in using a full name on a blog post.
You did not answer my question about the difference between submitting to a blog or a publication under a real name. IMHO, there will be a greater incidence of false and mischievous blogs under noms de plume than under real names. Formal publications require real names to reduce the frequency of the known falsehood mischief, because there is a return path for repercussions.
The devil in me does admit that pseudonomynous blogs can be more entertaining that the straight ones under real names – but this is a science web site, not a Hollywood one.
Too many choices will ruin the poll.
Beside that, internet polls are not scientific.
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
On topics of free speech, I find this post topic offensive, my right leg was amputated after I got a HTD, hospital transmitted disease. Guess what the name of the disease was. 18 Months till the saw cut. People demanded more off me in life than they would dare off another person.
I had a life of people trying to break my bones mostly failing. Free speech does not have to be rude or offensive and not by Maxwell Smart types who have never lived or worked under threat of violence or intimidation their life.
Anthony and Willis and your crew I think we are done.
Fair wind at your back.
Like many others, if I were still working in consulting engineering for clients that want/need to be “green:, I would have to use a pseudonym. My company does “green” energy studies and has received many environmental awards (for good engineering regardless of what name you give it.
My training and my 34 years of engineering experience tell me that AGW is political, not scientific. I had to study weather to do my engineering work, and it is pretty clear that CO2 is not the villain of the piece to me.
I retired to farming and given that my hay fields are still covered with nearly two feet of snow this year (last year I finished fertilizing weeks ago), it is just WEATHER. But the under 30 crowd have not lived long enough to understand weather variations nor have they read enough history to know how different the climate has been just in the time Europeans have been on the North American continent. In Southwestern Alberta, we cultivate the Palliser Triangle, an area the early explorers called a desert.
When Old Wives Lake in southern Saskatchewan dried up due to “Global Warming”, tree stumps were exposed in the lake bottom.
So, I have good reason to watch the weather … and I no longer have a reason not to use my real name. But I certainly understand that many of my peers in the environmental or related engineering disciplines could not use their real names for “political” reasons.
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.
I think it’s fine for many reasons. Under each pseudonym, there is a real person.
My second thought is: people should be able to modify/delete their WUWT comments for their own reasons. This is my only request for a quality website with fascinating stories, most of which, supersede anything you’ll find on a normal news site (minus drudge report of course).
Thanks for the great posts. Heed my request if others agree. It would be the icing on the cake. 🙂
@ur momisugly John Whitman, woops, forgot the happy face behind that first paragraph above. If you didn’t get that, I was just nudging you. ☺
This is a hot button issue isn’t it. For me as you can see I use my name and professional title and well as my company name. The reason is not that complicated. I have always stood to be counted. I believe what I have to say is valuable and deserves to be taken seriously. I have the same right as anyone else to be utterly wrong. I will not be intimidated or silenced.
If others choose to use a pseudonym that too is their privilege. I am skeptical of people who do and also skeptical of those who don’t. Then being a scientist, I am skeptical of everything and everyone until it is demonstrated the skepticism is unfounded.
I too have a pseudonym, give to me back in the old days when we all had CB radio handles. I am even known to use it now and then. My name is fairly distinctive so I do not face that problem. Mostly I want to know who is behind the comments and opinions. It would be rather two faced to express that desire and make my own identity.
wayne says:
April 26, 2011 at 8:29 pm
@ur momisugly 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
I prefer the Half-Weasel way myself. I use my given names and initials, in various order, on the internet.
I do make a point of being more polite in discussions with anyone using their full name, which I think they deserve, be they wrong or right.
“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 tend to the view that, if the bastards are out to get you, they’ll succeed whether you give your right name or not.
There are a number of regulars on here of whom I am in awe – but who chose to use pseudonyms. Doesn’t worry me one way or the other. They likely have their own reasons – a good variety of which are now listed.
What I’d really like to know is how many of the regular Trolls are actually riding on the cAGW gravy train. Sorry, don’t think the answers to Willis’s poll will show that up!
If Anthony Watts, Willis Eschenbach, Dick Lindzen, Roy Spencer and all the rest can use their own names when posting their bombshells, then I don’t see why I should be scared to make my trivial asides and comments under my real name.
And if Big Bad Bob “Attack Chihuahua” Ward or some other nitwit gets p*ss*d off at me taking the mickey and wants to track me down, then I’m sure Jeremy Grantham will advance him a few quid to pay for someone to find me.
If I might borrow an apposite expression from my cousins in Oz:-
DILLIGAF.