So I am struggling with the issue of online identity. This is partly due to several different personal philosophies, but it also has a lot to do with personal history. Reconciling the different issues surrounding this decision has led to the worst result possible-no decision at all! So here is my attempt to deconstruct the problem.
In terms of philosophies, I believe in honesty and transparency, and standing behind what you say, do, and write. I also believe that privacy is an illusionary robe with which we cover our social nakedness in our increasingly interconnected society. Anything we do publicly could be seen all over the world by millions in an instant, and we only make this all the more likely when we put it on a computer ourselves. And the work it would take to prevent someone from determining the identity behind a pseudonym is not worth the effort for me. So basically, I believe that I should not be putting anything on the internet that I don't want anybody knowing came for me.
On the other hand, I see benefits to a pseudonym that has nothing to do with privacy. A creative and descriptive pseudonym is simply good marketing. It captures not your entire identity, but that part you want to share with an online community. It also distinguishes you from digital interlopers and provides virtual "street cred" because crafting an online identity is what the digital culture does. Adopting the pseudonym is an act of inclusion and revelation, done on your own terms.
How does history apply to this question? I have been involved in online communities for 20 years, the earliest social media service I remember being ICQ. I have lurked and participated in online chats, discussion forums, and blogs longer than much of the current digital generation has been walking and talking. In that time, I've assumed a number of different identities. I just feel very indifferent to crafting yet another. Two of I choose to separate my social identity from my professional one. Just thinking about it exhausts me.
Time for breakfast.