Anonymity and lurking in online communities: They can be a comfort . . .

Being uncomfortable with sharing too much personal information in the online world as well as being an introvert, I understand the appeal of remaining anonymous as well as lurking in online communities.  I have experienced both. 

1. Anonymous member:  This suggests a user who contributes content, but does so without revealing his/her identity.  I think in some cases, online anonymity serves a valid purpose.  For example, I belong to the SJSU MLIS Yahoo Group where I view and contribute to the Course/Professor Recommendation database each semester; contributors to this particular section are automatically anonymous by design so that SLIS students (who comprise the members of this group) will feel free to publish honest comments.  Also there is a moderator, as Rosenberg (2010) suggests, if needed to monitor inappropriate comments.  Without the use of anonymity I don’t believe these recommendations would be as helpful and many might not even be written.  

On the other hand, while I often do not feel comfortable revealing my true identity to the online world (as evidenced by my blog name), I also do not typically contribute online content in a completely anonymous form (with the above exception).  I usually prefer using a pseudonym; Grohol (2006) refers to this as “anonymity that hides a person behind an online persona via a username.”  I agree that “people [can] build reputations in their usernames, and so their reputation becomes something they value and want to protect.”  While my writing may not always come out sounding the way I want it to, I do think very carefully about what I post online.  Even though my blog viewership more than likely consists of a small number of fellow library science classmates, it is possible in theory (although highly unlikely!) that the whole world could be watching.  This should be enough to make anyone think twice regarding what they reveal about themselves online.  

2. Lurker:  As Reed (2009) noted, this suggests a user who may engage in the community by viewing content but does not actually contribute new content themselves.  Before enrolling in this Web 2.0 class, I didn’t really have much of an online presence.  Not that I have a huge one now, but it is growing slowly.  For the most part, I have been a lurker; although I’ve never thought of myself that way before (other meanings of the word can conjure up some creepy images!).  I would say the main reason for my “lurking” rather than “contributing” tendency has been due to the risk of “sound[ing] like an idiot”, as expressed so eloquently in three different comments to Reed’s blog.  Yep, that’s the reason.  Though upon reading this week’s assigned articles, I have a new appreciation and understanding for why online communities tend to thrive even more when more members contribute.  I don’t know that my lurking behavior will change soon, but I will consider being more of a contributor in the future when joining new communities and making my way out into the online world.