Just a note:

I try, actively, to use different handles for different boards.  On a lifting board I frequent one of the posters used the same handle that he did on a hardcore femdom S&M board; he never lived it down.

I also periodically change handles just to insulate myself from the stupidity that builds up from posting every half-formed piece of loudmouthed ignorance I think of.

I'm akratic in real life, so the pseudonym fits.  It's convenient to use the same name on different boards.

My handle is a warning for others.  

"Uh-oh, there's that crazy Dr Rotwang! again.  Stand by for 80's pop culture references, stupid jokes and ill-prepared statements about the cyberpunk genre in three...two...one..."

"Dude, you could just IL him."

I should note that I am not a donkey irl. Scientists aren't sure exactly what I am.

Ned

I use my real name on forums whenever it's available.

Quote from: Ned the Lonely DonkeyI should note that I am not a donkey irl.

"donkey irl"?  You mean, like, opposite of "donkey oy"?

!i!

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaYeah, I remember that business.  For my part, I wasn't interested so much in real names making other people accountable for their words as I was in compelling myself to be responsible.  

I think it may have been a sort of counter-"Matrix" reaction-formation on my part, too.

!i!

I do get pissed off with the notion, prevalent in the indie scene for some reason, that using your real name is somehow more mature or more honest.

Bollocks, the use of internet handles allows people to post without clues as to their gender, race or culture.  That's part of what makes the internet what it is.  That and my desire not to have some fucktard stalking me does not mean I don't stand by what I say.

Quote from: Ian Absentia"donkey irl"?  You mean, like, opposite of "donkey oy"?

!i!

Look at me when I'm talking to you, irl.

Ned

Quote from: BalbinusI do get pissed off with the notion, prevalent in the indie scene for some reason, that using your real name is somehow more mature or more honest.

Bollocks, the use of internet handles allows people to post without clues as to their gender, race or culture.  That's part of what makes the internet what it is.  That and my desire not to have some fucktard stalking me does not mean I don't stand by what I say.

You mean your real name isn't Balbinus? I'm really disappointed. I was half expecting you to carry on that bizarre UN convention of silly sectretary general names. Boutros Boutros Ghali, Sun-ki Moon....then when you got elected, Bobby Balbinus.

I'm crushed...:haw:

If i were trying to be billy-badass-full-of-wit, i suppose i might not use my name, but as it is...who cares.

The people who act the most concerned with online anonymity are usually the ones who troll the hardest, or incorrectly assume that they're somehow important.

I'm surprised that nobody has come at this from the angle of the monetary value of an online reputation.

Big companies pay big bucks for guerilla marketing campaigns to tap into exactly this effect ... the warm glow that you have toward people you "know" online, and how that glow transfers to ideas and products that they espouse.  Same thing happens on the small-scale as well.

So, yeah, my reputation (both the good and the bad) has measurable worth to me.  I can measure it in sales.  If I were suddenly unable to keep growing that little identity it would (a) be sorta sad, emotionally and (b) impact my bottom-line.

Few of us have monetary bottom lines associated with our online representation. I imagine anyone who posts as a representative of a company like, for example, Wick, Justin Achilli, Mike Mearls, HinterWelt and others have given considerable thought to the value that their name has on their finances though.

If I were to publish my homebrew setting in exchange for dollah billz, I estimate that I'd go out of my way to bump my personality up a few notches, for example, and change the way I was viewed online because I would both care more, and have more invested in being known.

Quote from: TonyLBI'm surprised that nobody has come at this from the angle of the monetary value of an online reputation.

That's a definite consideration for me as a reviewer.  Additionally, I'm more likely to at least look into a game if I know it's written by someone I already respect on roleplaying forums.

Capes, for instance

Quote from: C.W.RichesonThat's a definite consideration for me as a reviewer.  Additionally, I'm more likely to at least look into a game if I know it's written by someone I already respect on roleplaying forums.

Capes, for instance

My problem with that, is that a lot of time it seems to color people's impressions. There is a natural urge to be less critical of people we know. I've experienced that in creative music seminars, where one minute, someone is bashing a well-known rock band and the next minute praising an amateur offering of extremely poor quality because the guy is right in our face and kind of nice.

Not saying you're doing that yourself. But it's something I keep in mind. Internet cliques are part of the bullshit I dislike about this medium and it's pretty clear that people are harsher on games where they don't know the creator. At least, that's how it works on RPG.net in general.

Can't blame creators for using that strategy, though. Internet is becoming a powerful PR tool, especially in such a niche industry. But at the end, I'm just interested in a quality product and not the time spent doing meaningless PR.

I'm more likely to look at past writing credits than posting history.

Dan Davenport's reputation shifts product, a good review from him makes a real difference I suspect.

Same for Shannon Appelcline and Tom Vasel to a degree for wargames/boardgames.