Why the preference for real names?

[metaposter]

I've read in the FAQ that there is a preference for real names. As is obvious from my username, I prefer some degree of anonymity. Since I didn't see an elaborate explanation in that FAQ, I thought it worth asking: what are the relative merits of each preference?

For myself, I'm happy to disclose to any individual here my identity. I am not however happy for anyone who idly googles my name to discover the complete history of software and statistical dilemmas that have led me to this forum and others. Indeed I was happy to see that there is now a forum, since the listserv forced my email to be linked in perpetuity and in public to every question I've asked. If this site gains the capability to obscure from public view our names I will gladly use mine.

What purpose is met by preferring real names? The internet is littered with forums where people anonymously interact, yet respect is still maintained, impart through reputation. My username is, as of this writing, associated with two posts on this forum. I hope they both convey the respect I have for this community, and having invested in some reputation I should like to maintain it.

[William Lisowski]

You could perhaps use one of the other sites to which Stata users occasionally cross-post their questions, as have been mentioned in the responses to some recent postings here. For now, though, I see that the members of this forum who are most active in providing assistance are also the most forward about reminding posters of the request for real names. As a new member who expects to need their assistsnce, I'll defer to their preferences.

[Carlo Lazzaro]

I would say that the preference for real names stems from the fact that a relevant part of Statalisters has been posting for years and a smaller proportion of us know each others personally.
These circumstances eased a friendly environment and, as such, the preference for introducing ourselves with our real names and surnames.
I understand that students and researchers may shy away from this requirement, fearing to be spotted by teachers and colleagues.
However, reporting our doubts and even being corrected by other listers (luckilly, it happened to me many times in the past and hopefully will occurr again in the future) is one of the advantage of this list (and should not be seen as a posters' weakness: all in all, as an Italian saying goes, nobody was born educated), that comes at the (non compulsory) request of identfying with our real full name.
Surely you can get helpful replies indentifying yourself as Spiderman but your chance to be helped out will probably fade away in the long run, since in the real life nobody outside Marvel's comics would advise Spiderman on Stata or statistical topics.
I cannot rule out that somebody who knows me, googling through this forum as a guest, caught Carlo Lazzaro writing statistical nonsenses (or posting in a far-from-oxonian English), but I really don't care about that.
I'm really more interested in learning from other posters and contribute to this forum as far as I can.

[Richard Williams]

It isn't compulsory. Some will respond to anonymous posters, some will not. I suppose someone who wanted to could probably cheat, although a name like Peter Parker might raise suspicion. I greatly prefer real names. Some reasons off the top of my head:

• It is the culture and custom of the board, and if I want help I think I should honor those customs, Remember, you are asking for favors and nobody is obligated to help you.
• Anonymity is hardly universal across the Internet. You and the other billion people who use Facebook are all supposed to be using your real names, right?
• I like to know who I am dealing with
• It helps to foster professional relationships, including co-authorships
• I can better assess the expertise of those who are responding, and those who need help.
• I think it helps me professionally. A lot of people know me and my work because of Statalist who might never know of me otherwise.
• I've never heard of anybody's career being ruined because of stupid questions they've posted. And if it seemingly has been I bet the bigger problem was that they did stupid things in general.
• I think it encourages more professional behavior and courtesy. I've seen plenty of different types of forums where people say things anonymously that I don't think they would ever say otherwise.

[Nick Cox]

Others have explained it well and positively. In 1994 when Statalist started people posted with real names and affiliations, as I recall. That created a generally very good atmosphere, which we wish to maintain.

As Stata questions are answered on other forums where there is no expectation of real names people who need or seek anonymity have other choices.

[metaposter]

Well I appreciate all the helpful responses.

A few quick responses of my own: I think I'll be more comfortable in a community like stackexchange, which 1) allows anonymity, 2) doesn't treat people as though they're asking for handouts, (e.g., "you're asking for favors and nobody is obligated to help you." 3) has a more professional and courteous environment. I can understand many of you associating anonymity with poor behavior, but lest you mistake correlation for causation you should visit sites like stackexchange.

And yes, I do use facebook with my real name, but as I mentioned in my initial post facebook has the feature of being private if I wish it to be.

[Nick Cox]

A personal response:

It is equally true on Stack Exchange sites or anywhere else similar that no one is obligated to help you. It is unclear what point you are trying to make there.

As a contributor to Stack Exchange myself I don't see it as more professional or more courteous than Statalist. Abusive posts and comments are not so visible because they tend to be removed promptly. In fact I've seen much ruder tone and language on SE sites than would be tolerated here.

[metaposter]

I agree that it's true on stack exchange as elsewhere that no one is obligated to help you. It's just my experience that one is reminded of the fact more frequently on this site. Hopefully that clarifies my point, without seeming ungrateful.

[Carlo Lazzaro]

A would-be Statalister is reminded of re-registering according to FAQ until the full names identifier comes alive on her/his next post.
Obviously, preferences for different statistical sites are perfectly legal (I personally prefer this forum vs SE).

[Richard Williams]

I agree that it's true on stack exchange as elsewhere that no one is obligated to help you. It's just my experience that one is reminded of the fact more frequently on this site.

I think people are only reminded when they aren't following the list guidelines. Also many comments are designed to help people come up with more informative posts so they can be better helped. Like, we don't tell you to provide code and output because you are breaking a rule, we do it because it is much easier to help you if you follow the suggestions in the FAQ.

Different places have different customs and procedures. Many would like this list much less if it became more like Stack Exchange. Luckily there are multiple options out there so you can go with the one you feel most comfortable with. (Incidentally if I was new to Stack Exchange, I wouldn't expect it to change its customs and procedures to whatever it is I prefer.)