Precisely - the author's obligation to the work depends entirely on the author's purpose with the work. If one were writing an ecological manifesto designed to alter the behavior of a vast swath of humanity, simply writing it and walking away would be irresponsible. If, however, one wishes to spill a trifle into the Sunday Times that was intended as a small, modest, thought-provoking piece, the best move is to leave it be. I often quote Jeron Lanier in discussions such as this, who covers total anonymity, operational anonymity and pseudonymity in "You are not a Gadget." As a named author with a reputation and a body of work, hashing it out with the pseudonymous is a losing venture. There is no upside. You are effectively on trial against and endless sea of people in masks who want only to get their licks in. The most effective thing is to let the work find its own champions - after all, if your point didn't get across in what you wrote, that means you failed as a writer... and attempting to triangulate public opinion back to what you "meant" from what you "said" is always a losing proposition.
That's an insight that defines the catalyst of a number of social media debacles. Not only is it a blindspot for those haplessly trying to defend themselves, but it remains a problem that much of the general public view the internet as a place where someone ought to have the ability to properly defend themselves in a manner that reflects the non-anonymous world. Seeing that Krieder is the author of some pretty scathing comic satire, I would guess that he is hip to all this.As a named author with a reputation and a body of work, hashing it out with the pseudonymous is a losing venture.
It is the A #1 problem with Reddit. 1) Person writes something insightful or funny under total anonymity because there are 2 million usernames and who the hell cares 2) 2 million usernames note the insight 3) Person's random string of numbers and letters goes from total anonymity to pseudonymity as people note the consistency of insight/humor 4) Dichotomy between anonymity and pseudonymity becomes obvious as pseudonymity requires maintaining a reputation and anonymity does not 5) Pseudonymous contributor can no longer participate anonymously under pseudonym and either vanishes back into the noise or becomes a hated object by anonymous commenters who were hating you before you were cool Reddit kills its rock stars on a monthly basis. Any social setup like theirs would do the same. When you emphasize the ease of account creation and degrade the responsibility one user has to another, you will end up with "[first post] (finally found some facebook gold) (crossposted from /r/aww) HIVEMIND UPVOTE ME FOR POINTS"