5 ms·

I don't think it actually makes that good of an argument against real names. For instance it shares a link to a study that found accounts with feminine names go

I don't think it actually makes that good of an argument against real names. For instance it shares a link to a study that found accounts with feminine names got more malicious messages in IRC rooms [1]. However, the people sending said messages didn't have to use their real name. That doesn't mean a real-names policy would make things worse. It could be that people, when forced to use their real name, are less likely to send harassing messages. I certainly think there's places for pseudonymous or anonymous discussion. That link talks about how people may face social repercussions for deviant interests: sure I wouldn't expect a real names on e621 and the like. At the same time, real names provide a level of accountability that's beneficial in a lot of contexts. 1. https://phys.org/news/2006-05-female-name-chat-users-malicious-messages.html https://phys.org/news/2006-05-female-name-chat-users-malicio...

buisi 6y ago
Contextual accountability is hard. Real names / pseudonyms tend to be sweeping across a service, particularly large goliaths like Facebook where you could do things like political activism in a group. You either get more exposure than you're comfortable with, or more privacy than other people are comfortable with. Real name policies also tend to be cultural where usage of real names tends to encourage more usage of real names, even when it might make sense not to use a real name.