You know my name!
Get flash to fully experience Pearltrees
Google+, the pseudonym banstick, and the netizen cultural schism. « point7
As we all know by now, Google+ has a policy of only using real names (real world identities) in profiles. And they’re enforcing that policy with a big lumpy banstick . This is causing much angst , a lot of gnashing of teeth . However it seems that the technorati, as well as the Googlers (and Facebook before them ) are unmoved by the arguments, and sincerely puzzled by the outcry. What’s the big deal? Just create another profile, for crying out loud.
Recently there's been a controversy concerning Google's "Google+" social network. It seems that Google is actively enforcing a policy of using "real names" on the service. To quote from the published justification: Google services support three different types of use when it comes to your identity: unidentified, pseudonymous, identified.
Miscellany: Pseudonyms vs. Autonyms
Who is harmed by a "Real Names" policy? - Geek Feminism Wiki
This page lists groups of people who are disadvantaged by any policy which bans Pseudonymity and requires so-called "Real names" (more properly, legal names). Often theses policies attempt to reduce or eliminate the veil behind which online bullying, harrassment, and stalking can occur. However, there are unintended consequences to anti-pseudonymity policies. This article is an attempt to create a comprehensive list of groups of people who are affected by such policies.
Ok, that title is way over the top to get your attention.* BUT . I do want to talk about what the “no pseudonyms” policy adopted at G+ means for women, LGBT folk, and civil servants. There are many, many resources that can explain to Google why adopting this policy is a stupid idea (aside from the obvious business advantage of not alienating early adopters and potential G+ evangelists). One of the best can be found at the Geek Feminism Wiki : The cost to these people {of denying pseudonym use} can be vast, including: harassment, both online and offline discrimination in employment, provision of services, etc. actual physical danger of bullying, hate crime, etc. arrest, imprisonment, or execution in some jurisdictions economic harm such as job loss, loss of professional reputation, etc. social costs of not being able to interact with friends and colleagues
Does Google+ hate women? « Bug Girl’s Blog
On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog
"On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog" is an adage which began as the caption of a cartoon by Peter Steiner published by The New Yorker on July 5, 1993. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] The cartoon features two dogs: one sitting on a chair in front of a computer, speaking the caption to a second dog sitting on the floor. [ 2 ] [ 3 ] As of 2011 [update] , the panel was the most reproduced cartoon from The New Yorker , and Steiner has earned over US $ 50,000 from its reprinting. [ 1 ] [ 4 ] [ 5 ] [ edit ] History
Google Plus: Deleted, not suspended
Google Plus accounts are supposed to be under an identifiable name, so people who know you know who they're talking to. It doesn't necessarily have to be the name on your ID -- there are examples like someone whose ID says Thomas going by Tom instead -- but it should be the name that family, friends, co-workers, know you by. Since 2001, I've been azurelunatic on the internet. It's the name I use with everyone I'm approaching with the intent of friendship (as opposed to co-workers, who I have to work with whether or not I actually become friends with them, so I'm rather more careful there), and the name I most often use when I don't need to produce ID to say who I am. I'm not as uncomplicated as people like
Mirrored from Infotropism . You can comment there or here. I’ve been seeing a lot of the same things get asked/said repeatedly so I thought I’d cover a few of them here. “Why not just change your Google+ name to Kirrily Robert?
skud | More comments on Google+ and names
Mirrored from Infotropism . You can comment there or here. So, just to backtrack and fill everyone in on the details: I’ve been a strong advocate of pseudonymity for a considerable time. Hacker News and pseudonymity is a good example of my writing on the subject, from June last year.
skud | I’ve been suspended from Google+
You get up tomorrow and log into GMail. You can't get in. Your account is locked. Your mail, calendar, documents — all gone.
reddragdiva | How to back up your Google stuff BEFORE they lock your account.
firecat | Community Standards: A Comparison of Dreamwidth and Google+
I know that Google+ and Dreamwidth are very different services, and that there's no particular need for people to choose only one of them. But when I saw this post I was inspired to do a similar comparison. http://jilliancyork.com/2011/06/30/goog le-vs-facebook/ "Community Standards: A Comparison of Facebook vs. Google+" IdentificationÀ l’occasion de la sortie de Google Plus, on a beaucoup évoqué la question de l’identité numérique via le choix, imposé ou non, du pseudo ou du vrai nom (lire par exemple l’article d’Owni Google Plus, la dictature des vrais noms ). Dans l’article ci-dessous, traduit par Clochix [ 1 ] , l’influente Danah Boyd nous rappelle l’impact, souvent non prévisibles, des normes sociales dans la direction et les usages d’une plateforme Web communautaire telle qu’un réseau social [ 2 ] . Elle affirme ainsi : « Les normes sociales ne font pas partie du logiciel. Elles n’apparaissent pas en expliquant aux gens comment ils doivent se comporter. Les normes sociales apparaissent lorsque les utilisateurs comprennent comment une technologie a du sens et s’intègre dans leur vie.
Pseudo ou vrai nom ? De l'impact des normes sociales sur les réseaux sociaux
In his seminal book “Code” , Larry Lessig argued that social systems are regulated by four forces: 1) the market; 2) the law; 3) social norms; and 4) architecture or code. In thinking about social media systems, plenty of folks think about monetization. Likewise, as issues like privacy pop up, we regularly see legal regulation become a factor. And, of course, folks are always thinking about what the code enables or not. But it’s depressing to me how few people think about the power of social norms. In fact, social norms are usually only thought of as a regulatory process when things go terribly wrong.