Anonymity / Authenticity – why not both?

March 14, 2011 § 1 Comment

I was reading this ReadWriteWeb article about Moot’s point of view on anonymity online, which is obviously to come down on the side of anonymity. It compares this to the opposing point of view, which is that signing your name to something increases authenticity.

Is it not blindingly obvious that both are true? For certain things, maintaining your anonymity is beneficial and allows you to express your opinions without fear of reprisal. For other things, signing your name to your opinion forces you to put a certain amount of thought into your sentiment and be prepared to defend it.

So, while using my Facebook account to comment on TechCrunch (just like posting on my technical blog under my real name) is fine, you’re not going to see me regularly posting on 4Chan or even Reddit under my real name, because sometimes I want to sign my name, and sometimes I don’t.


§ One Response to Anonymity / Authenticity – why not both?

  • Brandi Young says:

    I’d also add that sometimes people with opinions just like to have some privacy. (Regardless of potential reprisal.) Sure, I have public profiles online but that doesn’t mean I want people knowing every little thing about me.

    It’s simply dumbfounding how much info you can get about someone online.

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading Anonymity / Authenticity – why not both? at Mike Vallotton's Blog.


%d bloggers like this: