5 ms·

Anonymity is, in fact, quite crucial to a surprisingly wide range of people: <https://geekfeminism.fandom.com/wiki/Who_is_harmed_by_a_%22Real_Names%22_policy%3F

by teddyh 2y ago

Anonymity is, in fact, quite crucial to a surprisingly wide range of people: <https://geekfeminism.fandom.com/wiki/Who_is_harmed_by_a_%22Real_Names%22_policy%3F https://geekfeminism.fandom.com/wiki/Who_is_harmed_by_a_%22R...>

Manuel_D 2y ago
That page doesn't make a very compelling argument. Yes, bullying and harassment without an anonymous identity is potentially more damaging. But nowhere does it seem to consider that many of the bullies and harassers would only dare do so with an anonymous identity. Which has the better culture? 4chan, or professional settings and churches? Non-anonymous settings almost universally have better culture because people's behavior has an impact on their social standing in their community.
- portaouflop 2y ago
  How do you define “better culture”? I wouldn’t say you can compare churches and 4chan - one is an online activity with millions of people around the world joining; the other is a highly intimate affair conducted in a small community.
  - Manuel_D 2y ago
    Exactly: the fact that people aren't anonymous and their behavior affects their standing in the community is a big part of why anti-social behavior isn't nearly as common as in anonymous spaces.
- teddyh 2y ago
  > But nowhere does it seem to consider that many of the bullies and harassers would only dare do so with an anonymous identity. Have you seen Facebook? Anonymity does not, in any way, preclude horrible behavior and harassment. Also, reducing the problem to “bullying and harassment” is frankly laughable, and gives rise to the suspicion that you at most only skimmed the page.
  - Manuel_D 2y ago
    I'm sure you can find cherry-picked pages of Facebook people acting out. Likewise, you can browse /r/LinkedInLunatics. But the vast majority of interactions on these platforms are better than on anonymous and pseudonymous platforms. Anonymity and pseudonymity are big enablers of bad behavior, since it shields reputational harm that would normally be incurred by engaging in that behavior.
    - teddyh 2y ago
      I mean, public flogging also (arguably) reduces crime, but we don’t want to have it, for good reasons. Disallowing anonymity has a lot of negative effects for all but a select privileged few, as documented by the link I gave.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - Manuel_D 2y ago
        And again, I've read your link and found the arguments lacking. It doesn't consider the fact that much of the bad behavior it identifies is enabled by anonymity. I'm not sure how public flogging relates to anonymity. There are alternatives to public flogging, like incarceration. By comparison, the lack of accountability and lack of disincentive to engage in anti-social afforded by anonymity is inherent to anonymity. There's no way to get the same level of social responsibility in an anonymous space.
        teddyh 2y ago
        > By comparison, the lack of accountability and lack of disincentive to engage in anti-social afforded by anonymity is inherent to anonymity. Possibly. One could argue that the problem is not nearly as closely linked to anonymity as you argue it is, but even if it was, we would still need to have anonymity, including all its drawbacks, in order to make participating in the public sphere possible to all, instead of being restricted to a privileged few. > There's no way to get the same level of social responsibility in an anonymous space. You do know that this very forum qualifies an an anonymous space, right?

by teddyh 2y ago

Manuel_D 2y ago

That page doesn't make a very compelling argument. Yes, bullying and harassment without an anonymous identity is potentially more damaging. But nowhere does it seem to consider that many of the bullies and harassers would only dare do so with an anonymous identity. Which has the better culture? 4chan, or professional settings and churches? Non-anonymous settings almost universally have better culture because people's behavior has an impact on their social standing in their community.

portaouflop 2y ago
How do you define “better culture”? I wouldn’t say you can compare churches and 4chan - one is an online activity with millions of people around the world joining; the other is a highly intimate affair conducted in a small community.
- Manuel_D 2y ago
  Exactly: the fact that people aren't anonymous and their behavior affects their standing in the community is a big part of why anti-social behavior isn't nearly as common as in anonymous spaces.
teddyh 2y ago
> But nowhere does it seem to consider that many of the bullies and harassers would only dare do so with an anonymous identity. Have you seen Facebook? Anonymity does not, in any way, preclude horrible behavior and harassment. Also, reducing the problem to “bullying and harassment” is frankly laughable, and gives rise to the suspicion that you at most only skimmed the page.
- Manuel_D 2y ago
  I'm sure you can find cherry-picked pages of Facebook people acting out. Likewise, you can browse /r/LinkedInLunatics. But the vast majority of interactions on these platforms are better than on anonymous and pseudonymous platforms. Anonymity and pseudonymity are big enablers of bad behavior, since it shields reputational harm that would normally be incurred by engaging in that behavior.
  - teddyh 2y ago
    I mean, public flogging also (arguably) reduces crime, but we don’t want to have it, for good reasons. Disallowing anonymity has a lot of negative effects for all but a select privileged few, as documented by the link I gave.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - Manuel_D 2y ago
      And again, I've read your link and found the arguments lacking. It doesn't consider the fact that much of the bad behavior it identifies is enabled by anonymity. I'm not sure how public flogging relates to anonymity. There are alternatives to public flogging, like incarceration. By comparison, the lack of accountability and lack of disincentive to engage in anti-social afforded by anonymity is inherent to anonymity. There's no way to get the same level of social responsibility in an anonymous space.
      - teddyh 2y ago
        > By comparison, the lack of accountability and lack of disincentive to engage in anti-social afforded by anonymity is inherent to anonymity. Possibly. One could argue that the problem is not nearly as closely linked to anonymity as you argue it is, but even if it was, we would still need to have anonymity, including all its drawbacks, in order to make participating in the public sphere possible to all, instead of being restricted to a privileged few. > There's no way to get the same level of social responsibility in an anonymous space. You do know that this very forum qualifies an an anonymous space, right?