Why did these highly-visible traditionalist leaders use pseudonyms in their comments here?

Comments

3 responses to “Why did these highly-visible traditionalist leaders use pseudonyms in their comments here?”

1. 

   2007-06-14

   Joe White

   I go back and forth on the issue of writing annonymously, though of late I’ve been coming down in favor of it. While I think a person should stand behind their statements and views by identifying themselves, I can see how anonymity allows the the comments to stand on their own merits and not the reputation or office of the writer. Anonymous writing had a great deal of influence in the early history of our nation.

   Reply
2. 

   2007-06-14

   lgipson

   D.C.–the reason I use a “screen name” as Type Key refers to it and provides for it is that I have learned from past experience, what I suppose many have learned, that sometimes those who post comments on blogs don’t like to just stop with the blog. If they really like or really hate what you say, they send letters and e-mails which can be a problem. If they really hate what you say, they can create havoc with the web site of the church where you serve, such as registering a large number of people for dinner in the parish you serve who, of course, don’t show up.
   If it were my intention to hide my identity from the writers of the blogs on which I post, then I’d have to be pretty stupid to use my own name and church e-mail address (rather than a false name and my private e-mail adress which doesn’t reveal my name) to sign in with Type Key and other such services and blog registrations.

   Reply
3. 

   2007-06-14

   D. C. Toedt

   Larry, your TypeKey profile doesn’t identify you, nor does it give your email address. (I had to look at the profile’s URL to figure out who you might be.) In any case, thanks for the explanation, which makes sense.

   Reply