ST Alpha - "So, following the 'persona' thread... what do you think of Google's 'no pseudonyms' policy that's been getting a lot of heat? " (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 164

So, following the 'persona' thread... what do you think of Google's 'no pseudonyms' policy that's been getting a lot of heat?

Posted by Dr.Johnny Vermin (aka Dr.Vermin) Sep 2 '11, 12:50

I'm somewhat sympathetic when it comes to stalker victims and people with the same names as sex offenders and those with other special circumstances that make using your real name on a social network problematic, but...

I dunno, after all the complaining I hear here and elsewhere about the obnoxiousness that internet anonymity cultivates, I rather think the positive will outweigh the negative consequences.

A rough analogy would be minimum speed limits on the freeways. Sure, there's people that are uncomfortable with -- or lack (through no fault of their own) the capabilities to -- drive fast enough, but for the greater good...

Responses:

i don't care. google is a private company and can set their social network anonymity policy as they see fit....nm - x Sep 2, 12:59 3
- that's it, in the end. it's just a bummer for me that I can't have the good parts. -- nm - b. Sep 2, 13:01 2
  - yeah, i understand how it could be annoying....nm - x Sep 2, 13:08 1
    - I mostly just want to play word games. -- nm - b. Sep 2, 13:10
i dont like it, obviously, because my google account is hsjtruman -- nm - tRuMaN Sep 2, 12:55
I am fine with google knowing who I am, but I don't want just anybody to. - b. Sep 2, 12:53 17
- Google+ requires a profile be public and that it use your real name. But beyond your real name (or a convincing fake) every piece - TWuG Sep 2, 13:00 2
  - the g+ thing is why I let myself have friends there and don't on fb. - b. Sep 2, 13:03
  - IM edit: "should NOT have to" -- nm - TWuG Sep 2, 13:02
- Then keep your sh-t private and don't friend people who you don't want to see your sh-t -- nm - Mr. Havens Sep 2, 12:54 13
  - there aren't enough options, and people make mistakes. companies, too. - b. Sep 2, 12:59 7
    - Look at what it's called. Social Networking. If you don't want to be social, don't use it - Mr. Havens Sep 2, 13:01 6
      - I just want to be able to choose how and with who I do that. it's a bummer that, too often, it's one way or the other. -- nm - b. Sep 2, 13:06
      - I want to be social. But some of the web knows me by my real name, some knows me as TWuG, some knows me as mrtwug - TWuG Sep 2, 13:05 3
        
        Then use FB for the fake sh-t and G+ for the real sh-t. Again, simple, if you allow it to be -- nm - Mr. Havens Sep 2, 13:08 2
        
        that's a lot of shit. -- nm - Reagen Sep 2, 13:09 1
        
        I'm more full of sh-t than most, but the basic point still stands -- nm - Mr. Havens Sep 2, 13:15
      - What if Chris Gaines wants to use it? -- nm - Beryllium (iPhone) Sep 2, 13:04
  - Also, I don't think they have any support ATM for organizational accounts (like the ST one) -- nm - Beryllium (iPhone) Sep 2, 12:58
  - Can you keep your name private? -- nm - Beryllium (iPhone) Sep 2, 12:57 3
    - After 20+ years online, could my name be private online anymore anyway? - Mr. Havens Sep 2, 12:59 2
      - My name is my gmail, but I don't want my name to be what the slacker talk gmail is seen as. See what I mean? -- nm - Beryllium (iPhone) Sep 2, 13:00 1
        
        See my response to b above -- nm - Mr. Havens Sep 2, 13:02
IIRC, one has the capacity to keep their info private on sites like FB and Google+, and one must approve anyone who wants to link up with you - Mr. Havens Sep 2, 12:53
[deleted]

Post a message top

So, following the 'persona' thread... what do you think of Google's 'no pseudonyms' policy that's been getting a lot of heat?

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.