Google+ — Pseudonyms = Big Mistake
Back and forth regarding Google+ deactivating accounts using pseudonyms, and requiring users to participate via their real names. Personally think this is a big mistake.
- Twitter has pseudonyms up the wazoo. If Google+ goes the real-name only route, Twitter retains a killer feature.
- One fun part of Twitter are real people pretending to be fictional characters. I follow a bunch of folks playing at characters from Mad Men. I know this is not really Don Draper, nor is this really Betty Draper. It’s fun; does Google not believe in fun?
- Many Google+ users say real names are essential for accountability and intelligent discourse. Take a look at HackerNews or Slashdot — most users have nonsensical handles — do we care about the real name of “Commander Taco?” These users build a reputation based on their behavior within the site and it has nothing to do with a real name.
- Say an individual has earned a positive online reputation through their pseudonym. Using their real name on Google+ means they must, essentially, start over with an unfamiliar handle.
- Lastly there are valid personal reasons for anonymity — politics, avoiding certain people, avoidance of conflict between work and home, etc. To be dismissive of these reasons means being out of touch with humanity, period.
I seriously am not sure what sort of world the “real name” advocates want to live in. When you’re out in public, do you insist on seeing people’s driver’s licenses and verifying everyone’s identity before talking to them? Is your real name emblazoned on your forehead for all to see? I imagine a party where everyone is carded before entering, everyone is on their absolute best behavior, as if a camera is pointed at them, watching their every move, or they’ll be kicked out. This may sound like a situation where everyone puts their best foot forward and behaves like the best version of themselves, but personally, these situations lead to really boring, hypocritical, and fake situations where nobody is being their true selves — and the best conversation is saved for the car ride home.
Here’s hoping this real name thing just a temporary glitch and pseudonyms will be allowed on Google+. Otherwise, I’ll have to take this real name thing as further evidence (along with Buzz and Wave) that Google is incapable of understanding “social.”
It’s about money, unfortunately. They make a lot more money on your real identity, selling everything they know about you to the highest bidder. Marketing companies don’t want to buy pseudonyms.
Ugh, give me one more thing to be paranoid about. The whole “privacy is dead” mantra (which Google chants) could just be a smokescreen to get everyone to hand their identities over to corporate interests.
Well said! I use my pseudonym to compartmentalize my Internet life. The relatives are on Facebook — so I use my real name there. Elsewhere I use an alias to post my art, political comments, ets — things the relatives wound not understand or agree with.
Who is Google to tell me what I can call myself anyway?
That’s the thing, Google+ is aiming at Facebook, which also requires real names.
Hardly anyone I know younger than me on Facebook uses their real name (I’m 24). They might have their real first name but almost no one uses their real last name, using random words or forming fake “families” with a common last names. They have names like Ben Tyrannosaurus or Emily Soup. Facebook also has the option of creating a profile for a public entity, which CAN be whatever “fake” name you use.
Thanks for the insight on how younger folks use Facebook.