Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Well I use my initials which comes from a long time ago when logging on to early unix machines using a teletype. The fewer keystrokes the better.

Since then I've been a bit inconsistent, sometimes I continue to use my initials so as to make it easier for others to cite me in the thread, but more recently I've started to use my whole name which matches the name of my web site.

I've become a "brand".

I added the middle initial when I discovered another person with the same name as mine living a few doors down on the same street. He's since moved further away so I no longer get his mail (and vice versa).

I have a philosophical issue with screen names, especially on political sites. I think one should be willing to stand behind one's opinions openly. I'm willing to grant the need for some to remain anonymous when there are privacy issues, especially for whistle blowers.

Policies not Politics
---- Daily Landscape

by rdf (robert.feinman@gmail.com) on Mon Dec 31st, 2007 at 05:26:33 PM EST
All my words here represent me and not any organisation I work or have worked for.  Yet it could easily be misinterpreted (deliberately or otherwise) that when I talk about certain topics, I am representing the view of my employer or so on. I could lose my job if that happened.  I've experienced first hand the dishonesty of some journalists who have taken my opinion from a blog which I'd written under my name and quoted me in the paper completely out of context.  This was about 4 or 5 years ago.

I'm willing to back up my words but I'm not willing to make myself vulnerable to some nutter taking a dislike to me and harassing me for it. My name is not common and it is easy enough to find me. Stalkers are not fun.

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Mon Dec 31st, 2007 at 06:08:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
This is a touchy issue. The problem is that it cedes too much authority over one's life to one's employer.

I can understand people in certain professions being required to suppress their own personal opinions. Two that come to mind are the staffs of legislators and judges, and military officers.

Having said that, I think being required (even implicitly) to hide one's identity because of fear of interference with one's employment shows a defect in current employment arrangements. Unfortunately I see no practical way to fix this.

Perhaps the limits on one's personal liberty would be a topic for a future discussion.

Policies not Politics
---- Daily Landscape

by rdf (robert.feinman@gmail.com) on Mon Dec 31st, 2007 at 07:13:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]
My employer wouldn't treat this too harshly (they are aware that I blog here) but we are a representative umbrella organisation and a political one at that. So if a member organisation chose to take issue with my opinion voiced on a blog, that puts my employer in an awkward position.  As I said before, I don't trust our local journalists and with good reason.

But that still doesn't solve the issue of my personal online safety should some troll or person with a grudge decide to harass me.

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Mon Dec 31st, 2007 at 07:25:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Trust me on this one.  "They" "know" who you are.
Conviction and patriotism should overide this.  They are completely tied up with other "wars".
by Lasthorseman on Mon Dec 31st, 2007 at 10:56:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series