Unless you have an unlimited number of email accounts to send them from, and an unlimited number of addresses, the pseudonym will not conceal your identity. It seems to me that the sole purpose of pseudonyms is that Lucy doesn't like it to appear in the magazine that she has given more than one award slot to the same person. So the need for pseudonyms really only kicks in if she wants to award two to of your entries. In any event, if you send in ten, and she only wants to print one of them, there's no reason she can't use your real name.

Err ... not necessarily apocryphal, John. Back in those days (at least in the Spectator), there were only three prizes; one of a fiver, and two of three quid.

Well, I believe I wrote one that positively needs a pseudonym. (It's a persona poem, ahem.)

Roger, you're quite right.

That's why I said I sometimes use "borrowed" names, i.e. names, emails, and addresses of friends and family.

It's also true that if you send an entry under your own name and another under a recognized pseudonym, if Lucy wants to print only the latter, then she'll put it under your real name.

In the early days, I had a couple printed under pseudonyms (which I thought I needed to use) and not my real name. But I had taken steps to conceal my real identity and Lucy apparently did not see through them. I think I had one printed as Roger Slater, for example, and if memory serves, another under Kay Nine (a pseudonym I had earlier invented for some sort of dog-related contest).

I know someone who submitted several using only his own name, and when Lucy wanted to print two of his entries, she then asked him for a pseudonym.

But if Lucy can sometimes stipulate that there's a limit to the number you submit, as she did last week, I think it's a fair inference that there is no limit when she does not so stipulate, and you are free to use your own name and not mess around with pseudonyms.

Really, Brian. Only three. I think it was the New Statesman, much the more successful magazine in those days, though that may be difficult to believe now.

I suppose my take on this is slightly different, in that I rarely do multiple entries for a comp. Dammit, I often miss the deadline and don't even manage ONE!

I lack self-discipline. Like, at this moment, I should be doing housework. On Thursday I have my relatives arriving from Germany for three weeks, and the house is not up to the required state.

My feeling about pseudonyms is that, on the occasions I DO manage a win, I want everyone to know it's me! OK, I'm vain as well as lacking self-discipline :o

Jayne

Well, Jayne, as you know, my recent ventures into pseudonyms have reulted in that scoundrel Holbrook stealing my thunder; he has become a serial winner. (But rest assured, his knees are still intact - unless he does it again.)

And at your urging, here are my current thoughts on this competition. (I have to say that when I'm not doing competitions, lust is usually the sin at the forefront of my mind.)

It is with a certain pride that I can say that I’ve overcome my natural sloth, and written entries on all seven sins. You may think me a glutton for punishment, and wonder whether I am driven by lust for fame, or merely by greed for money. Well, it doesn’t really matter; when the results are announced, I’m sure I’ll feel my usual wrath for the judge, and envy of the actual winners.

Nice one, Brian.

I haven't attempted this yet. I'm bound to do Envy - I'm envious of you and that Mr Holbrook, the other cad who keeps winning!

Jayne

Oh, dear! Over achiever as always, I've tackled all the seven (although I was hoping that a collective package might be ascribed to the singular) Milk is good, for instance. Back to the Miltonic morass.

NB: note how discreet and debonaire Jayne is. Never once said: "That idiot Levens..."