When I started my blog back in 2002, I felt the need to remain relatively anonymous (I used only my initials in my tag) due to my employment situation, and my uncertainty with how my co-workers would respond to my development in thought. Not long after my departure from that job one year later, I chose to come clean with my identity.

While I understand the desire to protect one's skin in the 'real world' by not revealing one's identity in the 'virtual world', when I was semi-anonymous I fought the temptation to use my mask as a wall, behind which I could hide and launch verbal grenades. Sometimes I succeeded, sometimes I failed.

My view is this: regardless of the level of anonymity chosen, it behooves one to write as if one were acting in public. However, whether that means being on one's best behavior or not ultimately rests on the individual.

One thing that people may not realize about the Internet is that it is a public square that occasionally disguises itself as a closed room. If you provide just enough information (or others provide information about you) even as you try to maintain anonymity, someone will discover your true identity despite your efforts.

I am rejecting your challenge to get real.

In this age of Google and internet stalkers, I don't know how anyone CAN give out personal information online. There are a lot of psychos online, and ESPECIALLY in religious cyber-realms. Frankly I don't want some nutjob I disagree with coming to my apartment to "settle it". I don't want harassing phone calls from trads who think I'm wrong about the old Mass, and I really don't need someone taking a disagreement with me to my church. Now all that information CAN be put together by someone willing to do the research, but I'd rather not give them the opportunity. To put it simply, I'm paranoid. If I interact via e-mail with someone, I always include my name and position, but there's no reason I should give out more than I do.

And honestly, I think you're ridiculous to demand more from people, Francis. You have my handle on here, why would it matter if you had my full name? If you identify me as "Gavin" or as any other pseudonym I use for e-mail addresses, does it make a difference? You know who I am: I'm Gavin. You know Cantor. It's no different from Mark Twain. There wasn't a real author named Mark Twain, but we can identify Samuel Clemmens as such inasmuch as he wrote under that title. Frankly, Francis, I thought your name was a pseudonym at first. But it doesn't matter, since the pseudonym is the person. We don't have anyone on here who's signing on as "Musicgeek101" posting garbage and another "IluvMass102" agreeing with them. Everyone here holds to their name or a pseudonym and it's by that which we know them.

My real first name is Gavin, I'm a 20-something, I work and live in West MI, and I'll be returning to finish my B.Mus in the Detroit metro area in a few months. That is WAY more information than you need to interact with my arguments. Or better yet, if I said my name was Michael Russel and I live in Buffalo, NY, how would that lie make my arguments any stronger than if I used the handle "RCOrganist"? Sorry, Francis, but handles, pseudonyms and full names don't make a difference when it comes to the issues.

I understand what Francis is getting at, but I also agree with Aristotle.

I'm a newcomer to the conservative music/liturgy blogisphere, and my employment situation is just shaky enough that there are some who would leap at the opportunity to "expose" me in an effort to jeopardize my job security.

Much of what I say on these various blogs is an exercise in "thinking out loud," testing my ever-developing perspective on the more orthodox end of Catholic issues in the areas of liturgy and music. While I make every effort to self-edit, I'm not always successful. Overall, I hope that my contributions to this forum and other blogs that I frequent are of value, or at the least are well-reasoned and insightful.

"David Andrew" is in fact my first name, and my chosen confirmation name, so to that extent I'm being as honest about my identity as possible. In other threads here and on other blogs I've made references to churches in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area, thus providing another identifying tag. I've also made rather general comments about my current parish (size, demographics, "cultural" atmosphere), and my relationship with the staff and the pastor.

I've told my pastor that I participate in these blogs and forums, and I assure him that I never say anything so uncharitable as to cause scandal (at least I hope that's the case). I've never specifically identified the parish by name.

At some point I may go so far as to fully identify myself, but will do so because the circumstances warrant. In the meantime, I hope that we don't begin to force people "out" or worse, take action to "out" them here or on any other blog.

This is a pretty interesting discussion, and an issue that I've struggled with for a number of years.

I have a number of identities which are active:
- As a citizen and family member
- As an employee of a large company
- As a parishioner, RCIA leader, chorister, and chant schola director
- As a book author and publisher

One of the things that's challenging at times is how these might interact. Most of the time it's no big deal, but there are occasional conflicts that can arise. For instance, in my book I don't say anything about my employer, lest that create a conflict of interest with my job. At work, I tend to not say anything about my religion (unless it's in a personal relationship context) because it might lead to misperceptions that aren't useful.

But online, all of these are muddled together. If you do just a little work, it's not hard to find out who I am in all these contexts. So it's probably more about me being paranoid. My kids don't worry about this kind of stuff at all.

Here's some principles I've created for myself over the years:
1. Behave as if everybody knows your name. Hiding behind anonymity is unreliable.
2. If you're ever tempted to say something anonymously, it's probably because you wouldn't want to say it in person. Leave it unsaid.
3. Take accountability for your actions. If you wouldn't do it In Real Life, don't do it online.
4. Assume that anything published anywhere on the internet is permanent. It is. It's impossible to absolutely retract anything.
5. It's ten times harder to create a good reputation than a bad one. Make that a hundred times.

Therefore, I've learned to be very cautious in my postings. I've been monitoring all the (rather vigorous) discussions on this forum but generally decline to say anything because of the above principles.

"I guess I follow the general guide of letting my Yes be Yes and my No be No."
I find that rather self-righteous and offensive, but I'll assume it wasn't meant as such.

"All I am saying is that I cannot take anyone seriously in what they say without knowing who they are and what the believe."
As I've said, you know who I am. You know who David Andrew is. You know who Cantor is. Do you need my Social Security number to interact with me? Blood samples? Should we correspond by snail mail along with a signed photo of me writing the letter and a fingerprint so that you "know who I am"? Come on Francis! All of us listed have online identities, well established through publishing at various places, and we are well known. Others are getting started under pseudonyms. You can not SERIOUSLY say that the use of a pseudonym is a barrier to communication! And you know what we believe, it's what we're writing! I believe the use of pseudonyms is merely another extension of identity. So again your charge that you "don't know" someone is ridiculous.

And David, keep your alter-ego, the mild-mannered organist, well hidden. I HAVE in fact been nearly run out of a job over plainly sensible comments made on a blog being identifiable as mine. There's no sense in getting people angry over the term "standard funeral fare" (I actually had complaints about that!) just to please someone who's looking for ways to conveniently ignore your argument.

Fair enough Francis. I don't know whom exactly you're referring to, but I'll trust you have a legitimate beef with their use of the forum's relative anonymity.

I will say that I think the anonymity can stand in the way of forming professional relationships, which is partly what I'd assume the forum to be about. But towards that end I'm always happy to converse by e-mail with others here. Just that I'm not going to be giving away the personal information willy-nilly.

You have nailed it, Gavin. It stands in the way of professionalism.

I think we need to give each other space to speak and be spoken to! I will ALWAYS respond back, even if it takes time, because I like to truly consider everything that has been said and answer most honestly and from the heart. If we cannot even represent our true selves here on this forum, than everything here is nothing but hot air! CMAA can provide the canvas, but it is up to us to paint something worth looking at and considering.

ps. I have never met a vinegar yet I haven't been able to swallow. ...now throwing acid and then turning and running, is a different thing altogether... especially if your wearing a ski mask!

thanks, cantor... hope we meet someday.