Have you noticed how people are becoming less likely to use their real name. Even in an age where people are increasingly likely to expose their most intimate details on websites like Facebook, there are others who are perfectly happy, even encouraged, to hide behind 'user names' on web forums and the like.
There are some companies who now operate 'no-names' policies. These policies are in place for a number of different reasons, but the primary one appears to be to block cold-calling salesmen.

You can understand why some may decide to do it but we all have some sort of product or service to sell and what happens when one no-names-policy company attempts to do business with another no-names-policy company? It must be a horribly long drawn out and confusing process. And who do you blame if something goes wrong?

'Good morning. Can you tell me who your marketing manager is?'

'Sorry, we have a no-names policy here.'

'Well, could you put me through to him?'

'I'm sorry, he's in a meeting. Can I get him to call you? Who is it calling?'

'Sorry, I can't tell you. We have a no-names policy here as well.'
It may have been a positive benefit to the Lone Ranger and Clint Eastwood, but in the real world anonymity can be a real barrier to business.

It doesn't happen so much now but a few years back it seemed 'fashionable' amongst many youngsters in the pr industry to only use their christian names in any of their dealings with the press (or perhaps it was just me?).

Asking their name would be met with a simple 'Sarah' (by that I don't mean she was simple - although she could have been), or suchlike. Attempts to coax a surname out of them was met with the response that 'Sarah' was OK as they were the only person there with that name.

Apart from making you feel like some sort of stalker, that insistence on only using christian names would have been alright if not for the fact that so often when you phoned back and asked for 'Sarah', the switchboard operator would enquire 'Which one?'

I often wondered whether this reticence was down to the pr person having a ridiculous christian name/surname combination, like Tanya Bottom or Tara Raboomdiaye.
Now, with an increasing number of strange names creeping into the schoolyard I'm beginning to think this is actually the reason for the no-names policies.

Our celebrities have taken some serious liberties with the baby names dictionary, but, inexplicably, it is New Zealand that seems to be the hotbed for strange names. A couple of years ago New Zealand authorities wisely refused to allow a couple to christen their son 4Real.

He was more fortunate than the New Zealand girl who for nine years of her life was called Talula Does The Hula From Hawaii. Last year during a custody battle, the judge ordered her to be made a ward of court until her name was changed.

Others that have been approved by birth registration officials in New Zealand were Number 16 Bus Shelter [hopefully not a Beckham-esque reference to the place of conception], Midnight Chardonnay, and the twins Benson and Hedges.

So when you next come up against a no-names policy just be aware that it could be for a very good reason.

Neil Everitt
Editor