2 ms·
"A site which requires real/verified names is automatically flagging itself as a potentially/probably unsafe space for women, or for anyone else at risk of hara
by fleitz 16y ago
"A site which requires real/verified names is automatically flagging itself as a potentially/probably unsafe space for women, or for anyone else at risk of harassment, violence, job discrimination, and the like."
Facebook seems to be doing fine with pseudo requiring real names. I haven't seen any data indicating that Facebook has increased the number of victims of violence.
I know it's not popular to think this way but statistically you're far more likely to be victimized by someone you know rather than random person from the internets. Most people who have the resources to fly across the country to victimize someone have better things to do with their life. However, I still worry about Jay and Silent Bob showing up at my door at any moment.
The problem is that guy gets beat up by forum poster is far more newsworthy than guy gets beat up at bar. And thus we optimize our risk profile around the uncommon.
- mattdw 16y ago> Facebook seems to be doing fine with pseudo requiring real names. I haven't seen any data indicating that Facebook has increased the number of victims of violence. Of course, Facebook gives everyone access controls - and witness the fuss when the boundary shifts between private and public. I would assume the piece you quote above is referring to public and/or open online spaces. And yes, you are more likely to be victimized by someone you're acquainted with - but that doesn't mean they'll already know the information now tied to your real name. (See also current problems with adopted kids being contacted on Facebook by birth parents who, in many cases, are legally supposed to have no contact with them.)