Who Is Patterico?
I am thinking of shedding my pseudo-anonymity. I haven’t ever been particularly careful about masking my identity anyway, and there’s already a Google connection between my real name and the blog. (I actually received a call at home from the editor of the Daily Journal asking me about a blog post, which strongly reinforced the “pseudo” aspect of the pseudo-anonymity.) Several people at work have learned about the blog, so the cat’s kind of out of the bag there as well.
This way, the Jeff Jarvises of the world won’t be able to accuse me of being a coward for hiding my name.
Anyway, I have already taken a step towards disclosure. More on that tomorrow. [UPDATE: Or later today, as it turns out.]
If I do this, I’ll still use the “Patterico” pseudonym — like the guys at Power Line, whose names are freely available but who continue to write under their pseudonyms. I happen to like the name Patterico, and I think I’ll keep it.
If you have any thoughts, let me know in the comments.
P.S. I don’t mean to suggest that I think the Jeff Jarvises are right to criticize those who use a pseudonym. Mostly, I am just getting tired of explaining why I am keeping my name secret, when I don’t even really know the answer to that question myself.
And it makes a big difference that people at work have found out about the blog. (I had mentioned it to a friend and I guess I didn’t sufficiently caution him to keep it quiet.) I had previously worried that, if people at work learned about it, I might somehow get pressure to shut it down. (I had no particular reason to think that, but it has happened to other bloggers.) But, to the contrary, the few people from work who have read it have said nice things, and it hasn’t been a big deal.
Could it hurt you to completely ‘come out’? I used to blog under a pseudonym because I would blog from work. Then I got a job where blogging is encouraged (yes, really) and dropped the pseudonym.
Comment by Karol — 5/25/2004 @ 6:52 am
I know of no specific reason that it would hurt me. But I am a cautious person — some might say paranoid. I worry that there is some aspect of this that I haven’t thought out thoroughly enough.
Comment by Patterico — 5/25/2004 @ 6:57 am
One word: Washingtonette.
Comment by boifromtroy — 5/25/2004 @ 8:51 am
Nothing wrong with a pseudonym, IMHO, because what matters to me is content. You flay the dolts at the Dog Trainer, and you do a good job of it, so I couldn’t care less what your name is. Are you going to tell everybody where you work, what your religion is, how old your poor dog is, and so on? Irrelevant! Giving out personal info can make a blogger look puffed up and self-important. If I were you I would carry on as is and handle the identity crisis with a couple fingers of Laphroaig. Just a splash of water.
Comment by L. Barnes — 5/25/2004 @ 8:54 am
I like the semi-pseudonymous model. That way, the most committed readers figure out who you are, but you keep a certain distance from everyone else. It also guarantees that there is no chance that anyone with an IQ above room temperature will think you speak for your employer.
Comment by Xrlq — 5/25/2004 @ 9:13 am
I haven’t really followed the Washingtonette thing, but I have a vague sense that she was engaging in different activities from anything I’d be involved in.
I think I like Xrlq’s approach: no extraordinary measures to hide the name. Allow it to show up from time to time so that regular readers will figure it out. But make people read regularly, or hunt hard, to find it.
I have a feeling that’s the way I’ll go. It’s sort of what I’ve done so far anyway.
Comment by Patterico — 5/25/2004 @ 9:58 am
I’m with L. Barnes. It’s the content that counts. Nothing you do will satisfy your critics. Publish your name or stay pseudonymous. It does not matter to me. Just keep shining a light on the Dog Trainer. Check with your wife and see if she has any worries about lessened privacy.
Comment by Stu707 — 5/25/2004 @ 11:54 am
Really the only things your employer will complain about are 1) blogging on their time; and 2) dragging them into the discussion in any way.
So, as long as you keep your EMPLOYER anonymous, and don’t shirk work to blog, it shouldn’t be an issue.
There is the matter of having YOUR opinions follow YOU around. God help Volokh if he ever gets nominated for a judgeship….
Comment by Kevin Murphy — 5/25/2004 @ 11:59 am
That’s why I like Breaker’s motto: “Throwing away any chance of becoming a judge.”
Comment by Patterico — 5/25/2004 @ 12:16 pm
Of course, Glenn Reynolds has more posts, but I’d like to see the Senate go after him for “Indeed”, “Heh” and “Interesting”.
Comment by Kevin Murphy — 5/25/2004 @ 1:24 pm
I say keep the anonymity - even if most people know the real patterico.
It’s like KISS, one they took off the make-up. Just not the same band…even though everyone who was a die-hard KISS fan knew who they were and what they looked like off-stage.
Comment by Justin Levine — 5/27/2004 @ 3:04 pm