From: utzoo!decvax!harpo!floyd!trb
Newsgroups: net.singles
Title: Re: Thanks for the cards and letters, but...
Article-I.D.: floyd.1489
Posted: Mon May  2 11:14:08 1983
Received: Thu May  5 09:49:52 1983
References: rlgvax.368

I'm one of those who's in favor of people posting netnews followed by a
signature containing their real names.  I accept most of the points
made by thekid, but I have a few of my own (as always).  I've gone
through this before over netnews, but not lately.

When a person takes a pseudonym for no apparent reason, it leads me to
suspicion, just like if someone walks into a store with a stocking
mask pulled over his head.  Yes, it's a prejudicial impression, but I
bet there must be someone else out there who gets the same impression.
The impression is that either the person has something to hide, or is
going to do something that he won't be proud of.

The reasons for keeping your gender to yourself seem weak.  thekid
claims that he doesn't want people to ignore his netnews based on his
sex.  If his netnews is interesting, people will read it.  If it's
boring they will grow to ignore it.

For some people, the point of the netnews seems to get overwhelmed by
the pseudonym.  Not to judge Lady Arwen's netnews but I get the
impression that there are readers out there who picture a damsel
waiting to be won, whereas if her name were just Arwen the impression
wouldn't be nearly as strong.  I don't really believe that I have
enough evidence to make this too strong a conclusion, let's call it an
impression.

About the only necessary use for a pseudonym that I've seen on netnews
(well, the only one that comes to mind) is rabbit!bimmler's pseudonym
in net.suicide.  Here's a person who wants to present a consistent
(though degenerate) viewpoint, which he doesn't want to be associated
(and confused) with his usual (reasonably respectable) image, so he
created a separate one to help us distinguish the two.  Of course, he's
gathered his share of enemies, don't count me among them.  If you don't
like his content, fine.  I have found his malice childish on many
occasions.  I have also found my malice childish on many occasions.
But I feel his use of a pseudonym is proper.

I find it hard to keep the "network personalities" distinct in my
mind.  This is necessary if I want to maintain a sense of continuity in
these discussions, and as long as people sign their articles in some
way it's ok.  When I see an article whose author is only identified as
sdcruft!gch666 I have trouble keeping a personality in mind.

I have had the nickname Tribble since I was a freshman.  There were
people who didn't know my real name.  They knew me personally, and
Tribble served to identify me uniquely, and that was ok.  My login is
now trb, and that doesn't say much.  I sign my articles and my
signature probably strikes a familiar chord with many of you,
dissonant though it might be.  Of course, the fact that I share the
pronunciation of my name with Andrew S. Tanenbaum, European Hacker,
has caused slight confusion here and there, but at least you can
associate my netnews with my signature.

I like a pseudonym is better than no signature at all, but I can't help
but get a bad first impression from someone who uses one.  As you've
probably noticed if you've read my netnews, I try my best to be frank.
I know well that clear communication with other people is hard enough
without establishing obstacles in my own path.  If the person you're
talking to sees your pseudonym as a distraction or obstacle, then
that's what it is, and it's hindering your point.  You might or might
not have the strength in your ability to communicate to overcome these
obstacles, but I don't see why you'd set them up in the first place.

Do what you will, we can't stop you, but know that your presentation
does affect our impression of you.

	Andy Tannenbaum   Bell Labs  Whippany, NJ   (201) 386-6491