[aaronbrethorst]

I use my real name everywhere online. The reasons why are pretty straightforward:

1. It reminds me to be civil and think before I post.

2. It makes it easier for other people reach out to me based on things I've posted (I have a fairly unique name).

Pseudonyms are relatively easy to 'decode'. If I wrote something particularly dumb, offensive, or stupid, and someone wanted to pin that on me, I'm sure they could given enough time and effort.

[tw8888]

Use of real name isn't problematic as long as you don't have unpopular opinions. I'm not foolish enough into thinking that the work world is like college when it comes to free expression. My employer wants to be popular in the market place, therefore they don't want to be associated with unpopular opinions.

If Gawker writes a hit piece on me because I held down an unpopular opinion in a discussion on feminism in tech I know I'm out of a job. I would likely be out of most jobs in Silicon Valley.

[stfu]

Absolutely! OP comment sounds a lot like the "I use my real name, because I have nothing to hide" argument.

As long as your viewpoints are completely aligned with the mainstream opinions held in your extended peer group, you have nothing to loose using your real name.

But in all other cases you never know when some HR minion thinks he became a data mining genius because he dug up some comment you made 10 years ago on a random message board,

[aaronbrethorst]

> "I use my real name, because I have nothing to hide"

Of course I do, everyone does. I'm just very thoughtful about never posting it online ;)

Also, pet peeve: it's "lose", not "loose".

[prodigal_erik]

Really, a smiley face? Dissent is how civilization fixes bad ideas, and suppression of it is not to be taken lightly.

[aaronbrethorst]

Yes, really, a smiley face. Relax. It isn't my dissent that's suppressed.

[VLM]

Minor correction, aligned to mainstream opinions for all time. Imagine how weird it must be for some old people to have to go from public hatred of minority group X to public idolization of the same group. And vice versa of course.

[dredmorbius]

"Unpopular opinions" can change. There was a time when sexist, racist, and homophobic ribbing were de rigeur in society, entertainment, and business. They still are in some political circles. You might have friends, neighbors, or associates who turn out to be murderers, inside traders, political rebels, questioned for terrorism, whistleblowers, accused of partner battering, or of immigration irregularities (all drawn from my direct personal experience). It wasn't so long ago that a prominent political figure was accused of "palling around with terrorists".

Moreover, with profiling tactics, implicit signals can be leaked of your preferences and habits (isn't that precisely what all the heavy marketing support of all these "social" sites is about?). Subject of a current HN item:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6871033

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/08/opinion/sunday/shameful-pr...

[MatthiasP]

Out of most jobs in the Valley? Is it really that bad? I still have the illusion that being an IT professional gives you more freedom of having an 'unpopular' opinion than any other industry. As long as your work is in high demand, that is.

[gngeal]

1. It reminds me to be civil and think before I post.

That sounds very much like "I don't kill people because I'd get caught". Why can't you be civil (whatever that means) and think just because?

[robbrown451]

"I don't kill people because I'd get caught" is probably true for most people.

If you lived in a society where killing didn't tend to be punished, you'd probably kill. Because if you didn't you'd be dead. Don't underestimate people's tendency to adapt to their environments.

I get what you are saying, but I think if you look at it in the big picture, sites which require real names (and sites that otherwise reward you for gaining a positive reputation over the long term) tend not to degenerate into cesspools of ugliness. It may be partly because the non-civil go elsewhere, but I think it also is because it encourages civility from those who are there.

[jkrems]

Sociological studies bla, bla - TL;DR: You are more civil when people recognize you. You are more likely to act in the "interest of the group" when you sign stuff with your real name. At least that's the state of the research to my best knowledge.

[simbolit]

please do not confuse correlation and causation. i see the correlation, obviously, but i do not see the causation.

in fact causation could be the other way around. those who behave well are more likely to sign with their real name.

[jacalata]

This paper [0] compares newspaper comment systems that allow anonymity against others that require names, and finds more civil discourse on named discussions - the assumption seems to be that people are not picking their newspaper site based on comments protocol, therefore the anonymity is causing the uncivility. There is surprisingly little research visible when I googled just now.

[0] https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/12420

[jrockway]

Why do you care how someone achieves a positive result? If we're all being nice to each other because of the fear of punishment, I think the system is working as intended! If I'm not being killed, I'm happy!

[damon_c]

Maybe he would have been relatively civil, but it reminds him to be even more civil...

[mturmon]

Alas, it seems to be the human condition.

[eshvk]

One thing that fascinates me is Linkedin Groups/Forums. People post the most outrageously sexist opinions or have kindergarten level fights with other people there; all connected to their real names. It is not as bad as Youtube comments but it is not clear how all these people don't have a filter. I guess only time will tell if Youtube comments get moderated due to the real name connection.

[randomdata]

However, the most effective way to learn is to make bold statements based on your current level of understanding and wait for people to correct your errors. Sometimes you even need to play devil's advocate to properly model the information in your head.

Our great folly as humans is in assuming statements connected to names actually mean anything.

[aaronbrethorst]

I don't think that's true at all. See this Quora thread, for instance, which discusses effective means of learning at length: http://www.quora.com/Learning/What-is-the-most-effective-way...

…oh, I see what you did there ;)

[goggles99]

>1. It reminds me to be civil and think before I post.

This may be true but it inevitably makes you dishonest. There are things that you believe or feel about certain things that you will never post. These omissions equate to a lack of honesty (you are not voicing your full opinions)

The internet is one of the last places where people can say what they feel. Sure some are jerks about things but these people are just being honest. They really are jerks. They might hold it all inside when offline but this is because of sensitivity conditioning and political correctness. These things only hide the true problems of our society. Do you think that because racism is repressed by PC and an agenda of a few in places of power to impose swift public embarrassment and isolation those honest enough to express their opinion that it does not exist?

If anything, this exacerbates the problem. It is funny that many want to legalize drugs so that those with drug problems can come forward and receive help without being demonized, yet those same people just want people dealing with hatred and bigotry problems just to keep it inside until it eats them (and their lineage) alive.

>2. It makes it easier for other people reach out to me based on things I've posted (I have a fairly unique name).

This simply is not true. What forum or internet based messaging means today does not have email, twitter, Facebook ETC. where anyone who just read your info can contact you?

[aaronbrethorst]

> This may be true but it inevitably makes you dishonest. There are things that you believe or feel about certain things that you will never post. These omissions equate to a lack of honesty (you are not voicing your full opinions)

Disagree. I wouldn't post them anyway given that I assume a sufficiently dedicated person could link them back to me one way or another...And we're always dishonest somehow or another. Only a person dishonest to themselves would ever claim they're entirely honest online.

> This simply is not true. What forum or internet based messaging means today does not have email, twitter, Facebook ETC. where anyone who just read your info can contact you?

Hacker News.

[icebraining]

Hacker News does have an info text area where you can put an email address / Twitter handler / etc.

[goggles99]

My point is that the ability exists to set contact info (as you have on Hacker News). This can include your real name or not. The contact info can include identifiable info or be some anonymous email account. The choice is left up to you.