Sam Danielson

I spend some time lurking on forums and I have found that there are actually meta-levels of flamewar, or flames about flames. One particularly interesting level is the "USE YOUR REAL NAME ASSHOLE" (UYRNA) argument. The real-name-user (RNU) is almost always responding to a personal attack from an anonymous user (AU) and is usually justified in their response. I don't question the RNU's right to self defense but it is bewildering that anyone would engage an enemy on such impossible terms.

Here are Carl von Clausewitz's principles of war as understood in the USA. from Wikipedia.

Objective

Define a decisive and attainable objective for every military operation.

Offensive

Seize, retain, and exploit the initiative.

Mass

Apply sufficient force to achieve the objective.

Economy of Force

Focus the right amount of force on the key objective, without wasting force on secondary objectives.

Maneuver

Place the enemy in a position of disadvantage through the flexible application of combat power.

Unity of Command

For every objective, there must be a unified effort and one person responsible for command decisions.

Security

Never permit the enemy to acquire an unexpected advantage.

Surprise

Otherwise known as "Audacity"; Strike the enemy at a time and/or place and in a manner for which he is unprepared.

Simplicity

Prepare clear, uncomplicated plans and clear, concise orders.

These principles weigh strongly in favor of the AU. So much so that an attack on the AU by an RNU is foolish.

Objective

The objective of the flaming AU is to distract, humor, or annoy the RNU and others to detract from the arguments at hand. The RNU makes an excellent target because of their singular and tangible status. The objective of the RNU in response to the AU is more general, thus the common UYRNA theme. The RNU is stating that they do not have a specific objective every time they request that the AU make themselves known by a real name.

Offensive

An AU cannot be seized, retained, or exploited because the identity of the AU is not tied to the full momentum of its owner.

Mass

Anonymous users as a group account for the majority of accounts on many forums. Attacking a particular user for remaining anonymous is conceptually an attack against all other anonymous users. The RNU is swimming the rapids upstream.

Economy of Force

It is impossible to have economy of force without an objective (see the definition). Shooting flames at an AU is just spraying bullets in the general direction of any noise.

Maneuver

An RNU is tied to their real name while the AU is free to change identity. Because changing viewpoints often actually weakens ones position, it is advantageous for the AU to have multiple accounts and attack the RNU and their ideas from a variety of identities, each having a unique but antagonistic viewpoint. The RNU, being tied to an identity, must thouroughly justify any apparent change in point of view. One user with multiple identities can maneuver and envelope a RNU. The RNU, in the enveloped state, will be too busy spreading flames in every direction to make any forward progress.

Unity of Command

Anonymous users as a whole suffer from a lack of command. The control of multiple identities by one person, however, could be considered unity. The RNU's are using lone-wolf tactics whenever they directly engage the AU with UYRNA. There can be no definition of unity for a single combatant since it is absolute.

Security

RNU's are open to attacks not limited to Internet forums. This is perhaps the most compelling reason for a user to remain anonymous. How would an RNU throw a rock bearing a note through the livingroom window of an AU? The AU's limited visibility provides security and makes certain attacks possible that would be inadvisable otherwise. They are a B-2 stealth bomber relying on secrecy to get the job done. Exposing the 'real' identity of an AU is almost always a sure path to victory for the RNU if the AU has stretched themselves too thin under cover, thus UYRNA.

Surprise

The limited visibility and intangibility of the AU make a difficult target to suprise. The RNU can only surprise an AU by compromising the AU's security. The RNU's security is largely non-existant unless they happen to be a celebrity already under constant attack. It would be very hard, for example, to suprise Jay-Lo by exposing her past relationships. A married father of three, however, may be very open to attack along this avenue.

Simplicity

Nothing is as simple as when it first begans. The AU can always scratch and start over. The RNU is tied to an ego that grows complex with passing time. This momentum of the complex ego prevents change and hinders maneuver. The RNU must consider past positions before taking new ones and this complexity leads to a growing surface area for attack. Whenever an RNU gets chided for conflicting statements it is a result of complexity.

Conclusion

The Internet is a new battlefield in the war of ideas. New terrain and weapons make the tactics of yesterday obsolete. One can't help but compare the RNU to a soldier of the British army in the American revolutionary war. How can the RNU, wearing the red coat of a real identity in the middle of an open field, defeat the camouflaged AU firing back from the treeline. "Stand up and fight like a man" rings an isomorphic note to "Use your real name asshole!"

Of course I use my real name and that opens me up to attack. Thankfully, the similarity of war to the expression of ideas is weak. The similarity of war to eflames is more interesting and complete. Everything has it's place. Think before you speak. Think twice before you act. Think thrice before you write. There's a tactic unlikely to change.