managing and protecting nyms...

[John Young]

There have been several anonymous contributors here who
have developed pretty good reputations by the quality of their
contributions, technical, philosophical, literary, even occasionally,
fair-minded wisdom.

Some have been subsquently identified -- by self-revelation or
by leaks -- others remain unknown. Fortunately their contributions
endure (where are the archives these days, if any?).

As established here over numerous years, reputations might
well be more solid if contributors are not identified, instead
contributions have to stand on their own and not be colored
by personally-identified reputation -- the latter highly subject
to spin and fabrication, not to say plagiarism, vanity, pride and
braggardy.

Anonymous reputation comes close to the saw that there
is no limit to what you can accomplish if you don't fret getting
credit for it.

To be sure, it will be hard to avoid wanting credit, so deeply
embedded is that aspiration in societies based on prizes
and praise, egos and salaries.

Some say the greatest cause of neuroticism and pathological
behavior among spies is secrecy from the public about who
has accomplished what. And the agencies' piddling certificates
and stars on the wall are salt in the wounds of insufficient
recognition.

No wonder the murders, rapes, burglaries and other high crimes
of secret operatives are TS, no, not those committed against
enemies, those done in-house.

FWIW, the spy agencies do not act on anonymous accusations
against themselves, way too dangerous, but eagerly spread
those against others.

So, following the lead of the best and brightest criminals in
the world, it is probably a good idea to have multiple personas,
some anonymous, some not. Insist that others identify themselves,
and rat on those who refuse. Thus, the increase in calls for
Internet IDs.