Actually, Cowardly Pseudonym, an actual diagnosis of any type of neuroses requires a great deal of analysis into more than a few scattered posts from the subject(s) at hand. One can use dimestore psychology and assert that anyone who would continue to go to the trouble of engaging in this farce again and again and again is a consummate neurotic, a textbook loony, him what left his groceries at the supermarket. However, this case, as in many cases, leads me (and I’m sure I’m not alone) to believe that this is precisely what our individual wants: to glorify himself by having people assert he’s ‘insane,’ and by insane he feels ‘special.’ He’d love to believe he’s different in a purely psychological sense. But, as the time-lost adage goes, ‘Them whut’s crazy aint gunna tell ya so.’
Look at anyone who plays Dungeons and Dragons, or other RPGs. These folks are not necessarily suffering from MPS or (not to be confused with schizophrenia—they’re not the same thing). They simply enjoy actualizing fantastical given circumstances in order to experience the rush of taking risks they cannot take in real life, i.e., slaying dragons. One transfers this easily into the cyberspace arena: no one can see your face. I could be man, woman, muscular, scrawny, popular or a wallflower—no one will know.
At least, not at first. But we’ll get to that.
One can come up a somewhat accurate assessment as to whether or not one person is responsible for many pseudonyms. This is nearly rudimentary for anyone who has a even a modicum of observational skills and a memory. If I were to list the criteria for assessment here, many would no doubt giggle at how obvious they are; I will not do so, however, because I would rather our mystery perp figure it out for himself. To list the basic ground rules in character assumption, especially in the nom-de-plume, where the inflation of one’s socio-psychological aptitude is nearly impossible, would be unfair to him who’s trying so very hard to figure it out on his own. It’s much more fun to do it the hard way.
I will say one thing: in general, folks who lack attention in their lives will go out of their way to continue to draw focus by pointing the finger constantly back at themselves. (in this case, other pseudonyms) They don’t seem to realize that, while thinking themselves sly and hyper-intelligent, they betray themselves with consistencies of character, or threads, if you will, which string their dramatis personnae together. They ‘play’ at other characters without the proper psychological makeup applied. Sort of like Keanu Reeves playing at Hamlet: to borrow from playwright extraordinaire John Patrick Shanley, ‘ when [the stage] becomes a place for cowards masquerading as heroes, it becomes a boring travesty, abusive to the actors and audiences alike.’
I think this is happening here—except this is far from boring for this audience. The majority of the folks in this theatre are intelligent enough to know that, no matter how much makeup this actor wears, he’s no Gary Oldman (or Anthony Hopkins, plug plug) and he’ll be pegged time and time again as a ‘wannabe.’ This audience, upon seeing the cracks in the façade, will make every effort to get at the man behind the curtain and, once revealed, will unceremoniously oust him from the controls and play with him until he smartens up…or ceases to be amusing.
In which case, the performer is forced to don a new mask, one which hopefully fits better.
But I think you know this quite well.
Dontcha.
If we are out of our mind, it is for the Lord; if we are in our right mind, it is for you. 2Cor.5:13
