Hi Layla,
Really interesting question and very well put. I wanted to comment on the question of anonymity.

You say: “On the other hand, the anonymity encourages a more honest approach: using an alias makes me feel extremely free to share very personal experiences with total strangers, or to say something controversial and this is certainly positive.”

I have always in front of me the example of Freud, who in his interpretations of dreams tells us many of his dreams. Now, who more than him knew how much we can learn about him from that. He knew he was revealing to us his innermost secrets and character, but to speak, to teach, he was willing to do that, and did not shun away from that. (Whether you think he was correct or not is immaterial as he believed it to be so). Another example is Montaigne where in the introduction to his essays he says: “Had I been placed among those nations which are said to live still in the sweet freedom of nature’s first laws, I assure you I should very gladly have portrayed myself here entire and wholly naked.”

You can add to this autobiographies, and even most serious works of fiction which as we all know are always in some ways autobiographical. 
When people speak they reveal themselves, and to live one speaks. It is not the anonymity which allows for openness, but a certain distance. A lot of people write in their autobiographies things they wouldn’t tell their closest friend. Why then? Like you say in the first quote, there is no commitment here. You don’t like somebody, it is not that you would need to meet them in the corridor tomorrow. It is a similar distance to that which allows one to go on stage naked for a performance, or on film, though they wouldn’t walk the streets like that, nor meet their closest friend like that.

There is a certain privacy which comes from writing alone, whoever will read it later. You don’t think writers know that their parents might read it? You don’t think that’s strange to them? But then, they care about speaking, AND, there is nothing to be ashamed of. Your post  is quite personal, but then, do you really care if people know this about you. Yes, it’s not something you would tell most people, but so what if they know. There was a point to your story, and that point, you felt, was helped by your story, so then, it was worth it. Most of us have nothing to be ashamed about our life. Does that mean we need to go out and tell everybody everything – nope. But if to say something, if to speak and teach (ourselves perhaps) it is needed, then why not. 

Still, I can see why it could be comfortable to use a different name than your own. You might want that even if people can recognize you from your posts that it won’t be so immediate. You might not want your co-workers immediately recognizing you. Though again, in most cases I don’t see the problem. Of course for special discussions about your partner, or friends, you might prefer to use an alias so they won’t know you’re talking about them. Or, it could be a nice way to hint to someone you like them by using a very shallow alias and have them get the hint.


Also, you ask: “Should we try to concentrate on the words, on the message, or should we try to learn how this particular person, the writer, thinks?”
Like you I obviously find it much more, perhaps only, interesting to talk to a real person, which is also why I find it nicer to talk to people with real names, even if I suspect they are invented names, than with someone named dragonfly23. (This is also why I pronounce your name Leila). A name is just a way to speak to a particular person, and people, at least in the west, can go and change their legal name to whatever they feel like. Still, almost nobody goes and changes it to dragonfly23, then why should they here? (though at least if they did it legally it would be original).


I’ll also mention this post and this post  which try to think of Meta-THINQon as you put it. They are more philosophical in nature, and though on several issues I disagree with them, they're interesting, even if personally I find the discussion here more approachable.

Hi Layla and Arthur,

Very interesting question and response. Arthur remarked on anonymity but I wanted to react to:

“You will learn to know me through my posts, and of course there's a lot I can communicate about myself this way. But you will never, of course, really KNOW me this way. There's no harm in this, you may say, this is not a way to meet interesting people, but rather a way of exchanging ideas, without the big commitment that a friendship involves, without having to take the "complete package Layla Tov". ”

Well what does really know you mean? I’m not sure we won’t know you better in some ways than your friends, and in some ways less. Your friends know certain things about you, but as you say, you are freer to speak here, and this openness does allow us to know you somewhat. Would we, if you stick around, know who you really are less or more than people who see you in the real world is less clear to me. Who knows Kafka better, the people who worked with him in some insurance company and saw him daily, or people who read his stories and letters? I can’t answer this as obviously it’s different. 

So I would definitely say it is a way of meeting interesting people and not simply an impersonal exchanging of ideas.

Moreover  the lack of commitment is both good and bad, as it does also create a sense of freedom which one doesn't have in life, always fearful of what one is commiting oneself to.

On a personal note: I moved around a lot and so most of my friends do not live in the same place as me. So yes, we talk on the phone and I see them when I visit, but in what way do we still live our lives together? I know some of them very well and for a very long time, but then regarding daily life, I know almost nothing about them. And the “complete package,” do we even know that of our partner? I can certainly say its fun for me to interact with them here, and I learn quite a bit about them.

It’s obviously a different kind of interaction. In many ways, it is lacking, it is very lacking, but in many ways it is actually fuller. It is not a replacement for relationships but another possibility. Like talking on the phone is not the same as meeting someone, but it is still nice to have. I do think people can get to know very interesting people like this, and if they turn up being near you, or move there, you might at some point also get to meet them. These are not mutually exclusive. 

Hi all, reading your posts and walking through THINQon reminded me of a play I saw a few years ago: Le Jeu de l’amour et du hasard by Marivaux. I got now the text to refresh my memory and wanted to point out some parallels between what is going on here and in the play. The play’s starting point is two wealthy fathers who want to marry their children to each other, the children are told they should meet and decide by themselves if they agree. So they have the liberty to choose, the question is how to judge the other. Their greatest fear is to be deceived by the appearance, the mask the other will wear on that meeting. They come up separately with the same idea of taking another identity and that’s where I’ll stop talking about Marivaux and get back to THINQon. I think THINQon is the ideal place to meet and get to know who the people really are when they take away their true everyday’s life mask (looks, name, social background, cv, and so on). For instance, it’s a great place for singles seeking their soul mate as they can immediately come to the essential. You can see by one click on a profile of someone that appears interesting, or with whom you started a conversation, the affinities, taste and sensibilities. Even and maybe especially the anonymous ones or the ones with borrowed identity, because they leave behind them the details that strike us first when we meet but are in the final, as Marivaux points out, more misleading than we think.