For example, if I signed things as FriendsOfTheEarth to slam people I perceived as environmental criminals, I'd be using a DramaticIdentity. However, if I signed things as MeatBall to make project-wide announcements I'm probably not using a dramatic identity. There really is someone behind the mask.
The idea is to appeal to a sense of greater importance than petty individualism. It's also harder to attack/defend against an abstract identity because there is no person behind the persona.
Dramatic identites are entirely rhetorical. They serve no deep functional purpose except for appeals to emotion. As such, they probably should be encouraged through the medium's system of identities.
Question whether DramaticIdentity(s) are actually more rhetorical than OnlineIdentity(s). After all, what's in a name?
All identities, whether "real" or "dramatic", are arbitrary. They exist only in the mind of the beholder.
(That was the original intent of the pages on WardsWiki as I understand it. See also Wiki:EasternWuss.)
See also ErvingGoffman's The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life .
Must all DramaticIdentitys be designed to [purportedly] represent some group? What about an invented identity which is deliberately singular but designed using the same dramatic and rhetorical means? -- TheOnlyManWhoCares
I don't think DramaticIdentity necessarily represents a group. When I sign as "TheWikiMistress" on the wiki I look after, I'm taking up a role - which is more abstract and has more authority than my individual person. It is a dramatic identity. -- StephanieBooth