As most readers have surmised by now, I was Juan Non-Volokh. I explained my decision to blog under the JNoV pseudonym at the beginning and at greater length in my last post as Juan. As I noted in the latter post, the concerns that prompted my use of a pseudonym were never exclusively (if even primarily) ideological. Nonetheless, I would agree with those who think I was overcautious. My colleagues at Case voted unanimously to grant me tenure this year. However things may have looked in 2002, I have no reason to believe the outcome would have been any different had I contributed to the VC under my own name. In any event, I hope VC readers have enjoyed my posts as Juan, and that you all find my future posts on this site worthwhile as well.
Related Posts (on one page):
- I Was Juan Non-Volokh:
- Who Is Juan Non-Volokh?
Sincerely,
Hoosier Guy
It's a little more complicated than that. I had been a contributor to NRO (including ocasional Corner posts) before I became an academic and before Eugene asked me to join the VC. At the time, I largely confined my writing on NRO to issues on which I already had a track record prior to entering academia. As I've noted before, I was concerned that some might think that my pre-existing political interests and commitments would compromise my success as a an academic. Over time, as I published more academic articles and received positive feedback from my colleagues about my writing, teaching, and the like, I gradually expanded my horizons -- blogging about judicial nominations on NRO, guest-blogging at Southern Appeal, blogging on The Commons, writing WSJ op-eds, etc. WIth each step, the case for retaining the JNoV personna diminished. I also became increasingly frustrated about my inability to blog more substantively about my research interests while retaining the pseudonym. The question then became when to give it up. I almost did so several times in the past two years, in part because I did not think it was much of a secret anymore, but was discouraged from doing so by friends and colleagues who (in an overabundance of caution) thought I should wait until tenure -- and I did. Had I to do it all over again, I am not sure I would have adopted the pseudonym in the first place, and I doubt I would have maintained it for as long (4 years) as I did.
JHA
Will students be referring to you now as Prof. NOV?
*I* am Spartacus.
And I'm with Hoosier guy.
Orin
Volokh is located in Los Angles, and with a pseudonym like Juan one could reasonably have the impression that the blog had some, as they say, ethnic diversity. It turns out that Juan is yet another Jewish law professor, exactly the same demographic as most of the other bloggers here. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but the Juan thing was subliminally misleading IMO.
Joshua son of Nun might have been more appropriate.
Given the transient nature of people and the availability of name alternatives via the internet, I've often found that a person's name offers some anecdotal insight into their background at best.
If the reader dislikes the viewpoints or backgrounds of those on the Volokh Conspiracy, he or she should consider asking to be a guest blogger instead of needlessly attacking Adler's psuedonym choice.
Any personal information I relayed in various posts -- where I went to school, grew up, etc. -- was always accurate. While posting under a pseudonym, I sought to be honest in the content of all of my posts.
JHA