Nom de plumes are as old as plumes and certainly older than blog posts. But a foolish state legislator in Kentucky wants to outlaw them for online use. Good luck. The Internet ain't called the world wide web for nothing. Attempting to exert control across national borders, let alone state borders, is a daunting task.

The bill's small-minded sponsor says that he wants to protect against online bullies. I do too. That's why I support the right to use pen names on Internet sites. Bullies often disguise themselves as the bullied to more effectively bully others into doing what they want or shutting up about what they don't want to hear. One of their favorite ploys is to whine about being offended. This is offensive to me--one who makes a living off of words--as it always appears directly aimed at silencing the one and intimidating the many. This trick doesn't work when you can't identify the "offender."

In a perfect world, we would all take ownership of the words we use. I do. But I make my living off words. People who make their living in some other manner can't afford the hassle of the speech police. That's why they use Internet handles. Anonymity, at least in an age of political correctness, makes for a freer discussion. Aside from political blogs, there are whistleblower sites and sites rating professors, cops, and others where the lack of anonymity would crush the endeavors.

The bill is silent about what it seeks to do about libraries and book stores that carry works by Mark Twain, George Orwell, and O. Henry. Stage names, too, don't get addressed. Should Kentucky television stations be forced to note that it was really Marion Morrison who starred in The Searchers? Would one hear disc jockeys on Kentucky radio stations say, "And that was Like a Rolling Stone by Robert Zimmerman"? In other words, the use of invented names isn't confined to the Internet even if the purview of this bill is.

Had such a law been in place 225 years ago, The Federalist Papers might never have been written. Had it been in place last week, those posting on this site would have been silenced, forced to reveal their identities, or, and this is an especially appealing option, encouraged to break a bad law. Don't fret. Should the bill become law, you won't be held liable for using an Internet handle. I will. The first offense will carry a $500 fine, with suceeding transgressions costing $1,000 a piece.

Dan, Does this mean that my website would be illegal? I live in Western Kentucky now.

Be well,

Sponge

I think so, Sponge, if this law is passed--unless your legal name is "SpongeDaddy." The lawmaker's name is Tim Couch (not the quarterback) if you care to educate him on the issue.

You mean that "SpongeDaddy" is not a real name? Mrs. asdf would be shocked!

Internet anonymity is a double edge sword. It protects the a-holes who would post any kind of smut, trash or cutting commentary they wish but it also provides for the free flow of honest thought, some of which would not be possible if participants were to be required to provide personal information about themselves.

It is a privilege that people should not take lightly.

I have typically had to monitor what I write as I sometimes forget that words and usage have meaning. The anonymity that the Web provides can allow those who will not reign themselves in to act badly.

The current government here is a joke. The democratic governor keeps threatening more budget cuts, like education and pensions. Of course many of us realize that this is a ploy to talk us all into allowing legalized games of chance, the end all of state financial woes.

I will be educating Mr. Couch forthwith. Sponge Daddy is just my pen name, my real name etc. is on the website.

Just more nanny state crap all in the name of protecting us.

Be well,

Sponge