4 ms·

I understand her discomfort with harassers, but it seems to me that it's a trade between crude come-ons from people with real names attached and murder/rape thr

by dictum 13y ago

I understand her discomfort with harassers, but it seems to me that it's a trade between crude come-ons from people with real names attached and murder/rape threats from people without their real names attached. I prefer a web where pseudonyms are allowed, but if anything, real names could reduce harassment.

amagumori 13y ago
the issue is not the visibility of the harasser's names but hers. using your real name gives people the ability to find your phone number and address fairly easily.
AndiS 13y ago
What Amagumori said -- I can block/delete harassing comments (and do, on a regular basis), but I am far more concerned with murder/rape threats from people who know where I live. I'm a big girl, I can deal with crude come-ons appropriately (which is to say, snort/fume depending on the content, then report, block, and delete.) What concerns me is the unwanted linking of trackable personal information, through a service that had been repeatedly declined by the user in question. I'm thankful that I am not in compliance with Google's "real-name" policy, or else I'd potentially have harassers showing up at my door -- and that's a shitty, uncomfortable, violated feeling to be experiencing, because Google broke my trust after I told them that I didn't want to share that information, and they shared it anyway, without giving me a chance to opt out. In this case, no actual harm was done. However, it illustrates the potential for harm very clearly -- when you require "real names" (and, in some cases, enforce that with requests for drivers-license scans, etc., as has happened a number of times since the G+ nymwars started), you must respect your users' privacy choices about how they want those names to be shared with the public. All it takes is one stalker, one violent ex, one deranged family member, and their real-name policy, combined with the collapse of walls that users set up for self-protection, is a recipe for preventable tragedy.

by dictum 13y ago

amagumori 13y ago

the issue is not the visibility of the harasser's names but hers. using your real name gives people the ability to find your phone number and address fairly easily.

AndiS 13y ago

What Amagumori said -- I can block/delete harassing comments (and do, on a regular basis), but I am far more concerned with murder/rape threats from people who know where I live. I'm a big girl, I can deal with crude come-ons appropriately (which is to say, snort/fume depending on the content, then report, block, and delete.) What concerns me is the unwanted linking of trackable personal information, through a service that had been repeatedly declined by the user in question. I'm thankful that I am not in compliance with Google's "real-name" policy, or else I'd potentially have harassers showing up at my door -- and that's a shitty, uncomfortable, violated feeling to be experiencing, because Google broke my trust after I told them that I didn't want to share that information, and they shared it anyway, without giving me a chance to opt out. In this case, no actual harm was done. However, it illustrates the potential for harm very clearly -- when you require "real names" (and, in some cases, enforce that with requests for drivers-license scans, etc., as has happened a number of times since the G+ nymwars started), you must respect your users' privacy choices about how they want those names to be shared with the public. All it takes is one stalker, one violent ex, one deranged family member, and their real-name policy, combined with the collapse of walls that users set up for self-protection, is a recipe for preventable tragedy.