OT: USENET name vs. real name

[Witchy]

Mornin' :)

I know this is an odd question but it's one that's sometimes puzzled me given the nature of USENET, and since this group is perched precarously in Real World (tm) territory it seems a good place to ask.

USENET being what it is means I've had this name - witchy - since

1995; back then I wasn't into DIY as I am now. After a period of anonymousness (internet user since 1993) I took a name from the rather excellent Neil Gaiman/Terry Pratchett book 'Good Omens' - Witchfinder.

Human nature being what it is 'witchfinder' was quickly shortened to 'witchy'

Question for the group - does a real username give credibility to a posting, or is it more the nature of the question? The vast majority of the people who post here use (I assume) their real name and it seems most of the 'odd' questions are posted by people who don't. (Natural Philosopher and BigWallop notwithstanding :o) - you know what I mean!)

cheers

witchy/binarydinosaurs

[Colin Wilson]

So it is !

You`d be suprised - in uk.media.dvd most of the posts from people who know what they`re talking about include such nicks as APPRIA40WR*, Bardo, The Incredible Swearing Man and Fatboy - if they`ve been on usenet long enough to adopt a nickname, that`s often a good thing :-}

The newbies can usually be spotted by virtue of using real email addresses rather than "disguised" ones :-}

• taken from Terminator 2 I believe - "a phased plasma rifle in a 40 watt range"

[BigWallop]

I've had the nickname BigWallop from my days as an apprentice. I got it because if something didn't fit, I'd give it a Big Wallop and make it fit. But you can give things like transformers, breaker gear and cable binders, that weigh a tonne or more, a Big Wallop when you need them to fit.

So it's the name that stuck to me and not me that stuck to the name. We also had a bloke on our team that went by the nickname Long John and I never found out why, but imagined it had something to do with his trouser department. No. I mean I think he wore long johns under his trousers in winter time. Unlike the rest of us who wore tights. A totally different story there.

But Witchy is brilliant for use on the groups and is less confusing than every one being called Jimmy. So your leaving a space open for someone else to use the same name as your real name, but everyone then knows the difference. An example of what I mean is. I replied to a question the other day, that had also been replied to by Dave, but there are a few Daves who use the group, so I answered back to the wrong question because it had Dave in the reply thread. (i know what i mean) But if it had been Witchy in the name, then I wouldn't have made that mistake because you're unique.

By the way, my real name is Ben. Pleased to meet you.

[Wanderer]

I reckon it's all down to personal choice. I've had one or two disagreements with the proponents of the 'real world' names, but there again, this *is* usenet, and we can all be exactly who we want to be, can't we. I recollect an amusing - for the onlookers - flame war a good few months ago when one guy was claiming all sorts of qualifications, which in the end turned out to be one of those phoney US 'University of Life' degrees.

Until someone can come up with a convincing argument that my nick is any less valid than any other name used by other posters, I'm staying as the Wanderer! It also has the advantage that I can choose when to reveal bits of info about myself. What *is* far more important is whether or not other people give any credence to what you have to say. You've given a couple of good examples!

[PoP]

My view is that credibility, like respect, is gained by reputation and not by some mandated arrangement passed down from above. There are people on these forums who have gained a lot of respect from me, some of whom use real names and others who prefer a pseudonym.

The name "John Prescott" could equally be replaced by "Buffoon" and it would make no difference whatsoever to my respect level for that plonker.

PoP

[Dave Plowman]

Really? ;-)

[stefek.zaba]

Makes naff-all difference. What matters is persistent behaviour under a fixed name, from which the participants build up their own evaluation of the poster's clue quotient. Whether that name is an obviously assumed 'nym, like yours, a given-at-birth name, or an apparently "normal" name bearing no relation to that given at birth, makes very little difference; it's the stability of the name which allows the reputation - good or ill

- to be established. There's probably a slight bias in this particular group to meatspace names; in others nyms are de rigeur, and you'd be considered an absolute plonker to use your given name.

A few pests hide behind assumed names, it's true; that's what killfiles are for.

Stefek

[Bob Mannix]

But, and in any case, how do you know a "real" user name is real?

What's the difference between signing yourself PoP or Witchy and putting Fred Jones or Arthur Smith, as the "real" ones could just as easily be made up?

Seems a pointless discussion unless you mean "real" name users put corroborating web addresses etc., to identify themselves or can be found easily on the net.

[RichardS]

Ah, not necessarily, "Rachel" at the weekends..... :-P

I agree with Stefek and PoP - credibility is gained over a while by quality of posts, etc. I don't take too much notice of whether the person has used their (supposed) real name or not unless I thought that they were expressing views that they would not express otherwise (given the nature of this group. I realise that this doesn't extend to political groups).

The only true sin is hiding behind a Usenet name in order to make the post appear as if it came from one of the other contributors.

cheers Richard

-- Richard Sampson

email me at richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

[dmc]

Not convinced myself :)

Darren

[PoP]

True. Though I suspect "PoP", "Witchy" and "BigWallop" et al would most likely cause the reader to assume "this is a made-up name".

Whereas a name like "Andy Hall" or "John Stumbles" (if those gentlemen would not object to me using them as a reference) is more likely to be assumed to be real.

PoP

[Christian McArdle]

Cheers! ;-)

Christian.

[usenet]

Quite, I've been using a real E-Mail address on Usenet for ten years or more. I currently use [e-mail] which allows me to see what mail was sent in response to usenet postings. This E-Mail address gets *no* spam at all unlike some of my other E-Mail addresses. A recent survey (which did experiments to see where spammers got their E-Mail addresses) showed that by far the largest proportion of spam is sent to E-Mail addresses which are visible on web sites, E-Mail addresses on USenet come a very distant second.

[Witchy]

That's another thing - I've been flamed before for not using a real email address! I s'pose said flamer could've been a hapless n00b but he didn't stay non-killfiled long enough for me to find out.

Riiiiight :)

cheers

witchy/binarydinosaurs

[Witchy]

That's today's first near coffee stroke keyboard incident! It's not often I go 'pffffft' in 'ere apart from answers to trolling questions about two-way light switches! Oh yeah, and your 'office' incident the other week...

Yep, and thank %deity% there's only one of me :o)

Adrian, and likewise!

cheers

witchy/binarydinosaurs

[Witchy]

I often think of USENET as being a big pub where you can meet and get to know total strangers without actually meeting them or really getting to know them - there's no guarantee they are who they say they are and could have completely different lives outside the pub.

Having said that the vast majority of the people I've met from either newsgroups or messageboards act exactly like they post :)

Indeedy.

cheers

witchy/binarydinosaurs

[David]

Hmm - that's a good point! Right then, as one of the plethora of "D-i-y Dave's" I will henceforth change my moniker, to... er... er... Lobster, OK? To echo the stupid hotmail address I use for Usenet posting. The only reason I have that is that when I was setting up the account, I couldn't come up with any damned name which wasn't already taken, and I keyed in 'lobsterpot' without even thinking.

And my nickname isn't Lobster, OK...!?

David

[BigWallop]

Welcome Lobster. Pleased to meet you. :-))

[The Natural Philosopher]

The trouble with posting your real name, is if you feel lik egetting involved ina flame war, or duvulging personal secrets, and also have to work in a rather sedate company, and be seen to Be Respectable, it helps to have a fairly anonymous account.

If you upset someone in here, with no useable e-mail address, and no real clue as to your real name, you are unlikly to get directed e-mail attacks, and Animal Rightists thrwoing firebombs at the thatch. For example.

I stupidly did use derivations of my real name on Usenet once. I still get variations in junk mail. Never again. If all I did was uk.d-i-y, I'd probably use my real name. However I wander far and wide, and sometimes get involved in fairly heated argument in the more outre places.

Not everyone appreciates self confessed cannibals in alt.vegetarian etc. Remarkably humourless. Not that I ever DID, its just an example.

In particular, I am no friend to the ALF, and they at least have a history of direct and violent action against people they disagree with.

Its up to you really, but personally, I wouldn't use you real name here.

[John Rumm]

I would have to put in another vote for it being the behaviour / past performance of the poster that counts and not the name! I do think that maintaining a consistent name is quite helpful though. Quite often I find that a quick check on google groups will give you a good feeling for reliability of information given by a poster. Its also handy to work out if someone is permanently rude and tetchy or just having a bad day! ;-)

I have nothing against people using nicknames - I just tend to find I lack the imagination to come up with a good one for myself! ;-)

As for spam, I tend to find that obfuscating the address does help in this respect. I would estimate that 90% of the spam I receive per day (60 messages or more) are the result of usenet postings made back in the early/mid nineties. (Due to a couple of posting errors where messages went out with a corrupted from address, I can usually spot the source!). The technique of obfuscation that I use on these posts, and on the way that email addresses are disguised on our web site also seem to work since I receive very little spam to either my "normal" email address or any of corporate addresses (info, sales etc).