Shakespeare is a pen name.

I have chosen this venue to further develop a platform from which the Shakespeare question could be reexamined and discussed.
There are web sites scattered throughout the Internet ocean that present a lot of relevant evidence that Shakespeare was a pen name. Perhaps enough of these sites will eventually join to form a convincing body for this perplexing and current controversy.
The Stratfordians have a strong presence unfortunately based on belief. There are also many good writers of books who enjoy writing a history of the times and insert a mythical character in the middle of it and calling it a biography.
The pitiful admissions of speculations, assumptions, conjectures and illusory connections of books devoted to this topic is alarming considering the high intelligence of the biographer and targeted reader.
The Stradfordian biographers could not have read enough of the literature of the day and still conclude an invisible man wrote the plays and sonnets
For Shakespearean scholars this is an emotional topic because careers are based on there being no knowledge of a man named William Shakespeare. An identified author would cause a complete reanalysis of the plays and sonnets.
It is absurd to think that the author of the plays and sonnets would be invisible in the existing record and would have no presence in the memory of neighbors a mere sixty years after his death.
A man who wrote like Shakespeare would leave something else written with his name on it.
The man identified as Shakespeare would not also be known as Shagspur whose signature appears virtually illiterate and whose last will and testament is ridiculously simple.

The man or men who wrote the plays and sonnets would need to have a very good reason to remain anonymous and he would be an unparalleled literary, social, and scientific giant.

He did and was.