Who is that commenter?

Yesterday I commented on Timothy McNulty's column in the Chicago Tribune. In that post, I talked about the mismatch between the idealist concept of the Internet (it will break down barriers; it will enfold us in an electronic blanket of love and joy; it will create one world of Coca-Cola perfect harmony) and the reality we've observed (I am Nigerian prince; I want to sell you something; I hope you choke on your far-left liberal squishiness and die!!!). That both extremes may be true to some extent does not mean we should be surprised that the other pole is well-represented, and I consider the Tribune to be somewhat naive in believing the former is possible without the latter.

Today, however, I want to pick up on a part of the thread, that of anonymity. From McNulty,

But is it worth it to have these immediate online comments on the news from anonymous strangers? Some insist this is part of the evolution of newspapers to the Internet, and the conversation someday may morph into more meaningful dialogue than the current random chatter.

Still, I don't see much value to anonymous rants.

Anonymity emboldens the rascals, allowing one to express those feelings that, in a society based on civility, probably should be repressed. (I know that conflicts with our current let-it-all-out society, in which "genuine" is all too often a synonym for "boorish" or "inappropriate." "To thine oneself be true," sure, but I neither need to see your flesh hanging out of your low-rise jeans nor your psyche hanging out at a dinner party.) To remain anonymous in a public forum is the equivalent of being a sniper, and snipers always seem kind of unfair. If you can't stand behind your own words, why should I pay any attention to them?

Yet you may notice that Androcass is an anonymous blog (unless you thought that was my name). I don't put my name here anywhere, I stay fairly vague on my location, I haven't revealed a lot of personal details. There are a few people who know the real person behind Androcass, but I have no intention of making that public in the near future.

How do I square these two beliefs? Can I say that anonymity is a shield for some who want to hide their hate, while remaining in the dark myself? Well, I can, but I'm not wholly comfortable with it.

I live in the real world. I work, I apply for work, I am essentially a powerless cog in a big machine. We have all heard stories of employees being fired for writing a blog, and there is certainly evidence that prospective employees are being Googled, scrutinized through their electronic impression. When I write that "United Airlines [is] perhaps the worst-run major company in the history of the U.S.," I believe that, but I would hate to have that show up in my file if I applied for a job there.

Is that a cop-out? Probably, but until my persona as Androcass makes as much money as my persona as [name redacted], that's a reality.