Posted by: Chris | April 20, 2010

Welcome George

Hey guys, since Dick Nunn promised but never delivered, George is now a poster here by my hand.  It is good to have another person posting who doesn’t feel obligated to masquerade around under superfluous pseudoanonymity, though your fully anonymous traffic will be missed.  Oh well.  You can always just tag everything “android dashboard” and more than make up for the lost hits.  Never use categories.  They just make a mess of things.



  1. Lolz I like your tag.

    Welcome, George

  2. I don’t get your problem with pseudonyms. (Quite obviously – I use one and would like to continue to do so, though that may be a vain hope with you here being unfriendly about it.)

    Sure, you can (if you’re a sucker for meretricious writing) describe publishing under a pen name as “maquerading around under superfluous pseudoanonymity” just as you can describe someone who publishes under his real name as e.g. nancying around saying “look at me!,” but neither description points to anything wrong with the practices.

    Absent some reason to think pseudonymity does harm, your “unmasking” the pseudonymous is troll-like and falls, depending on how strongly they want to remain that way, somewhere between annoying and vicious.

    Also, no need to reply “[realname],”. It would be kind of droll, but now someone’s already thought of it, so you don’t have to.

  3. My problem with pen names (or rather, with people who get all flumoxed when their real names are exposed), is that they are:

    a) rather silly
    b) break the natural flow of conversations/typing (when I refer to various posters in my mind, it is always by real names and I think the same can be said for everyone else)
    c) infringe upon the friendly and colloquial nature of our blog
    d) utterly unnecessary (with our traffic, the chances that some one we don’t explicitly direct finding our blog are negligible.

    I don’t think a-d are so necessarily strong that they demand we all use our real names all the time. But I do think they are sufficient to a) allow a preference for people who do use their real names and b) allow the capacity to refer to people by their real names. However, if it really upsets people so tremendously, I will try to watch what I write and call people by their pseudonyms.

  4. Your comment’s problem clearly isn’t with “people who get all flumoxed [sic] when their real names are exposed;” it is with noms (nom nom nom) de plume. So what’s the “or rather” doing up there?

    As for the rest of your post, I get the feeling (a) is the operative reason and the rest is window-dressing designed to make it seem as if your prejudice against pen names is grounded in something other than reflex. (That (a) is operative is evidenced by your most animated complaint being that you “masquerade” when you write under a pen name – masquerading is silly.)

    Even if it isn’t, (b) strikes me as something you can effortlessly work around (I don’t have a problem with it when it comes to MM); I expect, re: (c), that declining to respect fellow poster’s wishes infringes on the friendliness of the blog more than does using pseudonyms; and (d) is inapposite. Or, rather the fact that pseudonyms do no harm is a perfectly good reason to use them (or not) depending on which you just so happen to prefer. It is, in other words, a reason to let your preferences be as they are, and not force them to conform to the pronouncements of Reason (who, I can’t imagine, much cares whether you use a pen name or not).

  5. Thanks for the warm welcome, guys.

  6. CF, with regards to your first paragraph, just reread my last.

    If anything d) is the operative element of a-d. Since pen names add no benefit and use of real names provides no harm (if you affirm d, which I read you as doing; perhaps I am wrong in that regard) then the admittedly weak and person-specific combination of a-c provide me with a preference for using my real name and those of others. Your own set of personalized preferences might lead you to different conclusions with respect to the desirability of nicknames and would refer to yourself and others accordingly. But (assuming d is the operative element here and we all affirm it) none of this really matters except to ourselves, and the problems only really arise when people get upset that others’ preferences do not conform to their own. Hence my original “or rather”.

    And also, I think nancying about saying “look at me” is a fairly accurate description of my motivations re: The Lure.

  7. chris, i think you’re just pissed because you didn’t think of the idea first and now feel weird since everybody else is using a pseudonym (although i see that now you’ve managed to trick george into using his real name – well done). of course, my assertion is completely unsubstantiated, but so is your point about “superfluous pseudonyms”

  8. northernlights:

    Two things I would note with respect to your post:

    1. I too used a “pen name” on our previous attempt at blogging (, where I was the eponymous pseudonymous poster). Indeed, as the originator of that blog, I might even be seen as the nickname trendsetter. I changed to using my real name for reasons a-d (also maybe e, specific to my own circumstances: my name is incredibly common) when our beachhead in the blogosphere was re-established.

    2. George was already established on WordPress under his real name, an observation which precipitated my original comment.

    So in both cases the ordering of events was opposite of your supposition, but, since neither factoid is terribly apparent, I can understand how the causality could be interpretted differently.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: