The topic of anonyimity in web comment streams has risen again in these pages. The most recent instigation was the advent of a commenter who signed himself “XXXXX” that set off a stream of responses from other commenters some of whom also use a ‘nom de web’. Under ‘Hillary’s First Loyalty’ I questioned XXXXX’s need to hide behind such a bizarre moniker. Readers ‘Bill Tozer’ and ‘jon smith’ pointed out that I had a naïve understanding of how the use of real names under real sentiments can be dangerous to one’s financial health.
This issue is a real one that has arguments on both sides which should not be dismissed out of hand, and therefore deserves its own discussion area which I provide here. My thoughts on the matter go back some years, and may now be dated by the amount of water under the bridge – cf ‘Internet Conversations – Sackheads & Scattershots’ and ‘A Sackhead Saga’ that also features RL Crabb’s contribution to the matter.
[Tozer 1014pm] Dr. Rebane! - To admonish you gently....uh...I hate to see you embarrass yourself...uh......I take it that you have been out of the workforce for a couple of years.......like the time I discovered Fox was anti-Trump, which came as a humongous surprise to me, but nobody else here. Hey, I am living without the boob tube, duh. But, the Doc was gentle with me.. In return; things have changed in 7 or 5 or 2 years, with random flurry of changes in a short time spans, and then bi-monthly, then your humble reader said, I ain't working on Maggie's Farm no more. Ouuta here, long time no come see.
As your field representative for "corporate America" and the private sector's street sweeper, I could never say anything to press, radio, print, media, social media statement to the press, radio, and film...Internet, airwaves......blah, blah, blah. Company is publicly traded and 60,000 employees in the States was my division, but that rule applied to all, each and every one of us...no nothing without prior approval from the fleets of lawyers with jets out of Chicago and the corporate government relations divisons, media division, public relations folk spread all around. …
[smith 919am] GR - jon smith is as real as xxxxx, but like the pseudonym Bill Tozer, Walt, or fish lends a bit more of a face to my opinions. I won't get fired by using my birth name, but I would most assuredly lose bids, referrals, and find it a bit more challenging to put bread on the table. I contract our services to all manner of people, companies, and government entities. Most would prefer to do business with their own ilk, or at least a milk toast wallflower that won't be offensive to their customer base. I am an atheist and recently did work for a well known church. They apparently appreciate our work since they have been a repeat customer. I doubt they would be doing business with an atheist if they knew better. There are plenty of god fearing people who can do (almost) as a good a job as I can.
Being retired or on welfare (or both) has its benefits and the ability to freely express one's opinions without penalty is one. If Reinette stuck with simply selling her taco no one would have paid heed to her screed; yet 36 hours before she loosed her cops are killers post she took an oath of office and her ability to pursue truly free speech was hindered. I hope those who have left the work force and no longer contribute to our GDP can have a bit pf empathy for those of us who pay into your social security benefits. If birth names were required on all politically motivated blogs, the blogosphere would die a quick and merciful death do to lack of input.