I am Kirk Douglas's Son

When I came back to the UK in 2001, a new acquaintance said to me "Everyone's called Ian these days". Guess what he was called? I see that another blogpowerer has gone for the first name only route - that was my franchise, Shades. And anyway, Manic has a point. There is a lot to be said for building up an online identity that is easily identifiable. I know some people - no links, no pack drill - have gone fishing for, say, Unity's real name, but Unity already has his own online persona. Same for Tim/Manic: whichever nom de guerre he employs, you know who it is. Same for Guido 2.0... Rachel North, itself a pseudonym, also has a clear online identity; she, too, has come out against anonymous comments.

So my dilemma is this: everyone is called Ian, these days. Should I use my actual, real, name, or do I worry that some of the less reverent stuff posted here could come back to haunt me (having said that, my real name and also a picture are only a click away...) My initials are no good, as they evoke a terrorist organisation. I liked the Drummer's creation of Imagicom, but it don't half sound corporate. Then there's Anadict Benderson, as a sort-of-spoonerism of our sort-of-patron saint. I quite fancy the handle Anomie, given my ongoing obsession with the breakdown in cohesion of modern-day society, which in itself ties in with Imagined Community as a blog title, given that we seem to have less and less of a real one. There's sufficient assonance with anonymous to make that my favourite candidate. Still, I can't help feeling that if I've got summat to say, I should say it in my own name. In the pub you'd know who it was talking; should blogs be much different?