The name we use online is usually the first one we find that the site will accept. One that is not already in use and we do this because the site asks us to.

Jeri's point about not posting under your name or handle raises some interesting questions. Especially when she (or he, this is getting too silly), points out that when she has done this, her post has been largely ignored. Should The Mudcat forum not be more about what is said rather than who is saying it?

If all contributions were made anonymously I feel that the responses would be made to the points rather than to the individual making them and the discussions would be better as a result. The downside would be that the forum would tend to be less interesting and possibly more insulting? It is about reaching a balance, I suppose?.

I generally just read the posts and having read them will move on to the next one. I only very occasionally even look to see who is making the point. I feel those that those here who say that they look out for and respond to certain other posters, possibly miss out on the full potential of and may limit the forum to some extent? I feel however that this may represent the minority view?