I think this also speaks volumes about the "dangers" of using large general-purpose social networks. Think about it for a second: if I'm ostracized (using my n

I think this also speaks volumes about the "dangers" of using large general-purpose social networks. Think about it for a second: if I'm ostracized (using my name or a pseudonym, it doesn't matter) from a `Club 3.14: Raspberry Pi Hackers` message board; I can find other message boards with a surplus of R-Pi hackers. If I say something stupid on Facebook... where am I supposed to go in order to replace Facebook? The issue with Google+ is (<-- replace with your favorite defunct social network) that it's a graveyard. (I say that facetiously; I actually use G+ and quite like the service. That being said, I can't deny that it is missing 95% or so of my Facebook friends.) So the issue here isn't so much the ability to have pseudonyms, IMHO. The issue is that Facebook is quickly becoming a "monolith", and that fact _combined_ with an inability to escape your ostracism via "moving" your online presence to a new identity is where the problem lies. I feel the real problem is that Facebook is all-encompassing. They want to be _the_ platform for online community. Therein lies the problem, if you're only allowed _one true identity_ on their platform, your baggage follows you to every sub-community _on that platform._