People frequently ask us why we are anonymous. The answer is that we’re not anonymous, we’re pseudonymous. Both of these approaches are useful ways to conduct your internet science, so here is a quick guide to choosing which one works best for you: 

Anonymous

• No name attached at all.
• Highest level of separation between government identity and the individual.
• Can be good for one-off research or theoretical pieces that don’t need to be connected to other things you’ve worked on, or things that might be better for a different audience.
• For study participants, the best option to protect their privacy.
• Literally you can do infinite anonymous identities.
• Naming conventions: numbering is easy, but there’s lots of opportunity to be creative. Or just say “by Anonymous”. Actually Google Docs has a nice approach: 

Pseudonymous 

• A pseudonym is like a band name. It’s a name that you will use multiple times, and a name that can develop its own reputation.
• A pseudonym may or may not be connected to a legal name — this can also change over time or in different contexts. Lots of people are known by a stage name or a pen name professionally, but you can still find their other names without too much trouble. You may not immediately know Jay Z’s government name, but it’s not hard to find out that he was born Shawn Corey Carter.
• Pseudonyms are great for groups! Fighting for first authorship is stupid — just come up with a silly name instead. 
• You can also have multiple pseudonyms. Generally it makes sense to pick one name for a given project and stay with that for a while, so that people can get to know your style and see what you do as a body of work that should be considered. But using different pseudonyms for different projects, or when you’re working with different groups, is a good approach.

Conclusions: Really it’s a spectrum. There are lots of different options that can work, depending on the project and your specific concerns.