More on anonymity
Rich (who also knows my secret identity – say, is there anyone who doesn’t?) on anonymity:
When you create an internet identity, it becomes a character you play. Put enough work into it and it takes on a life of it’s own. You may find yourself saying and doing things you’d never imagine saying or doing in the real world. The freedom is exhilirating (sic), but like everything, there is a downside as well. Anonymity brings not only the freedom to say virtually anything, but also removes accountability, or at least pushes it step or two away.
And this can be a bad thing.
As I said before, I say nothing here I wouldn’t say to someone’s face. As for accountability, I am accountable to my readers. I don’t find this ‘yeah, but you’re anonymous’ schtick particularly convincing.
June 21st, 2005 at 11:44 am
Just to play devil’s advocate a bit, how does blogging anonymously differ from, say, unsigned editorials, of which you’ve been very critical in the past?
June 21st, 2005 at 11:50 am
An unsigned editorial supposedly represents the editorial board. I find that BS because one person writes it and someone researches it. That person should take credit. Blogging anonymously, you still know who to attribute it to even if that attribution is to a pseudonym.
June 21st, 2005 at 1:33 pm
I have spent a long time on Usenet, over at rec.motorcycles.dirt where some anonymity is useful, especially if reading and posting while at work, or if you just want to avoid a lot of SPAM – which is my current position. That and I value my privacy, and I’m just not into the whole soul-spilling “open book” life-exposure approach. I felt like that in my 20’s, but not now.
I could probably be tracked down pretty easily, but maybe not by spiders or bots.
The politics of dirtbikes can get pretty noisome what with wars over four-strokes vs. two-strokes and other things, and having watched and been engaged in it since 1996 I believe (and here’s my much delayed point) there’s an “arc-of-exposure”. At first there is a lot more “saying-and-doing-things” at a volume and intensity that would be highly uncharacteristic of a person, and that represents the un-tethered freedom one initially feels – but over time, as you become more known among the community, the acting-out grows less strident.
A lot of us on RMD have met-up and gone dirtbike riding together, and while that does not make everybody instant friends it allows for some leeway and understanding rather than brick-wall and shouting-match behavior — unless you decide that’s a fun thing to do. 😉
June 21st, 2005 at 2:49 pm
People still seem to be confusing pseudonymity with anonymity. The anonymous person can be held unaccountable because they cannot be found. But the pseudonymous person is a different beast.
SKB posts to the same site constantly. That site is openly available. He has open comments, to which he also responds. He post his own comments on other blogs. He’s not anonymous, since we know where to find him and we can interact with him.
No disrespect, but pseudonymity comes from a wishful variant of cowardice. Neal created the SKB character to be the fearless avenger he cannot be in real life. I suspect, in the wake of the outing, you’ll see SKB continue with his true-life identity an open, but ignored, secret. It will occasionally be thrown in his face on the blog, (until Neal deletes it down the memory hole, of course).
I suspect, though, over time SKB will begin to pull his punches. The breach between his persona and his RL will slowly close, like it or not. Either the RL person will toughen, or the original RL person’s fear will tone down SKB. It’s inevitable.
BTW, don’t forget that one of America’s most respected and beloved writers was a pseudonym: Mark Twain. He was born Samuel Langorn Clemens. Mark Twain was the character he played for most of his life.
June 21st, 2005 at 3:37 pm
Let’s look at this from another angle – he’s using a “nickname”. Lots of people do that. For example, nearly everyone in the entertainment industry; actors, musicians, writers – like skb.
It’s a different voice in a person’s head, but faulting a blogger for using a nickname is like faulting a traffic reporter for using a different name on each station – it’s not a valid criticism.
And I see no evidence that skb’s postings will change. There are plenty of creative people who can manage their personal lives in one voice and their professional lives in another. Actors do that on a daily basis.
I think it was a petty attempt by a powerless lunk to exort a person for what he wanted.
June 22nd, 2005 at 3:27 am
Just for clarity’s sake, I’m not saying that anonyblogging is by nature bad, or that every blogger who uses a pseudonym is doing so to avoid negative repercussions. I’m just pointing out that it can be abused and has been.
And for the record, I agree with Mike; something will change for Bubba. Either the page will tone down or his alter ego will become, shall we say, more vocally supportive of his fellow travelers.
Interestingly enough, Clemens adopted the Twain pseudonym after writing a serious of articles lambasting a local judge, who apparently took offense, declaring hid intent to thrash the yong Clemens soundly.
June 23rd, 2005 at 1:00 am
I’ve actually found the opposite to be true for me; as I build a reputation online, I am more cognizant of protecting that reputation and not doing anything reckless. Recklessness comes from having nothing to lose, and that doesn’t matter if that loss is associated to a psuedonym or a government name.