Screen Names vs. Real Names

Many applications, especially the social networking ones, allow users to pick a "screen name" rather than using a real name. This can be important if your name happens to be John Smith and you want to stand out. Even Facebook has opened up to it as of last night.

I actually came up with my screen name ("Wordjunky") when I started blogging in 2004. At the time I was not certain what I was going to say or how my voice would evolve. I used it as my "online persona" and to set up accounts in various services like Flickr, del.ico.us, digg, etc. When Twitter showed up and I decided to try it out it was natural to use that for my identity as well since I had already established it as a 'brand' (for lack of a better term).

However, when it came to a profile name, I read an article saying that having a real name lent a bit more credibility to your "tweets" so I chose to add my real name. In addition, when networking with others I found that introducing myself as "Wordjunky" only works well with a geeky subset of all my acquaintances. Granted it is a large subset, but you get funny looks from HR types and suits. I have been modifying my online self so that the stage/screen name and real name are easily identifiable for anyone who cares to look.

My disclaimer. I am not trying to be controversial or outrageous online. There are no pictures of me having "wardrobe malfunctions" or doing keg stands nor do I use my blogs or Twitter to rage and flame. Potential followers, prospective employers, friends, enemies, or others who check up on me will find an opinionated person who has many interests and takes stands on issues, but who also writes for an intelligent and broad-minded audience. As long as I do that I don't think it matters what I call myself.

I suppose if I were writing some radical call to arms or were trying to embarrass my workplace I might have a reason to keep anonymous, but that is not the case. And if it were I wouldn't admit it here.