There is a misconception that anonymity on the internet inevitably leads to toxicity. But pre-Facebook and social media, most people on the internet were anonymous. Or more precisely, they were pseudonymous, meaning they used a continuous username and avatar, but that name/image was not tied to their real-life identity. In the 1990s and early 2000s it seemed absurd to reveal your real name/face online. Yet under that pseudonymous internet, on average, people were more honest and cordial than they are today when everyone posts under their real names. Contrary to intuition, there was less toxicity when more people were anonymous.

From 1997 to 2007 the most popular internet platform was AOL Instant Messenger (AIM), a sort of early iteration of Twitter in some ways. But nobody dared use their real name on AIM. Everyone created a “screenname,” or pseudonym, to communicate online, whether with friends or strangers. Their profile pics were never photos of themselves, but some kind of image that expressed their personality or interests. The same practices were used on all internet platforms at the time, which mostly consisted of thousands of independent chatrooms and message boards formed around a certain topic (such as a hobby or favorite band), rather than one centralized platform for everyone, like modern social media.

Using a pseudonymous avatar people would be extremely honest and post intimate details about their personal lives online because they had the freedom of not being judged, of no one knowing who they were IRL. No information you shared on the internet would ever be relayed to your family or employer in the real world. This enabled more honest discourse in the early days of the internet. Of course there were some trolls, catfishes, and liars who took advantage of online anonymity, but they were rare comparatively speaking. On the whole, people were more honest online under pseudonyms than they are now when everyone uses their real names.

Even still, people posting under their real names has not eliminated catfishes and trolls. Perhaps there is less trolling, catfishing, and deliberate lies today, but instead, everyone online is constantly telling white lies. People don’t reveal their true opinions about politics or cultural issues for fear of backlash. Everyone is constantly walking on eggshells, afraid that by speaking an unpopular truth they will be attacked by an online cancel mob, resulting in losing their friends, family, or jobs.

There’s a reason voting ballots are private and anonymous. It is not so people can lash out and vote for absurd things they wouldn’t otherwise. It is so they can vote honestly for their true ideals without social pressure. Public social media is pure social pressure. People constantly virtue-signal and post to support the Current Thing, not because they truly support it, but because they fear the social ostracism that will come from not doing so. This phenomenon was portrayed brilliantly and hilariously in a Seinfeld episode. “Who?! Who doesn’t want to wear the ribbon?!”

The online discourse today is less truthful than it was twenty years ago because without the veil of anonymity people are afraid to be honest and post intimate details of their personal lives or their true opinions about news, politics, culture, and hot-button issues. People say what they think other people want to hear rather than saying what they really think. Pseudonymity enables freedom for honesty whereas true names result in more lies. Admittedly, anonymity does not make people more kind, only more honest. Sometimes the truth hurts. But would you really prefer the white lies and fake kindness that arise from public social pressure?

There will always be trolls. People associate anonymity with trolling because most trolls are anonymous. But anonymity does not necessarily lead to trolling; trolling leads to anonymity. If everyone online was anonymous, everyone wouldn’t suddenly turn into a troll. It is a small minority of the population who enjoy being toxic and abusive to other people online, and that minority will always exist. For the vast majority of people, anonymity would provide the freedom to be their true selves. Most anons don’t become trolls, but most trolls become anons.

This is where pseudonyms are valuable as opposed to complete anonymity. While your real life identity and personal information is protected and private, you still have a single continuous online identity that is built over time. (Plus you can create multiple avatars for different situations, such as one for work, one for family, and one for friends—or even more for different friend groups. Most people adopt different identities depending on who they are communicating with.) If you provide helpful comments and cordial conversation, the reputation of your pseudonym is elevated. You gain trust and status. Likewise, those avatars that troll or detract from the conversation will develop tarnished reputations and get banned from platforms. Sure, they could always create a new avatar, but people will not blindly trust a new avatar with no reputation.

Pseudonymous online identities help remove the white lies from internet discourse. Behind the protection of an avatar, people can speak more honestly about political and cultural issues without fear of being canceled. Of course their opinions could still be challenged online, and their username could even be banned if their ideas are truly beyond the pale. But online cancellation of their pseudonymous avatar would not extend to real life. If someone says something nasty online but is always nice in real life, they should be punished online, not in real life.

There is a common phrase, “The internet is not real life.” And it isn’t—yet—but some are desperately trying to make it so. Restoring a buffer between the digital world and the physical world would make both worlds better. This can be accomplished by everyone creating a pseudonym for online activity while reserving their legal name for the real world.