This process, though not always positive, allows for the possibility of growth according to Turkle: “When people adopt an online persona they cross a boundary into highly-charged territory. Some feel an uncomfortable sense of fragmentation, some a sense of a relief. Some sense the possibilities for self-discovery, even self-transformation” (260). Most modern students adopt this range of identities without conscious thought. The classroom, therefore, allows us to present students with more than just another username and password to add to their rolodex; in asking students to think critically about discourse communities, we are, in effect, also asking them to think critically about identity. Most online communities use pseudonyms or screen names as a mutable signifier of identity: “The decentering of the subject in electronic texts is taken to an even more radical extreme when students use pseudonyms in discussions. Researchers have made claims that the use of pseudonyms in electronic discussions leads to even greater participation and self-disclosure” (Faigley, 191). Despite the supposed freedom, however, Faigley observes that, when attempting to use pseudonyms in class discussions, “the pseudonymous discussions resemble the regular networked discussions; in fact, in smaller classes particular writers come to be identified by the character of their messages, and pseudonyms prove to be very thin disguises” (192).