The recent outbreak of Google+ Social Networking policy dissents are staggering. The dissents are all trying to persuade Google to officially allow pseudonyms to use the service. Execs and G+ leads continue to ignore calls by the community to allow the ‘nyms’ to officially stay.
Google continues to suspend some pseudonymous G+ users, and people with weird-sounding, 100% legal names. Select security experts critique Google for their unsafe names policy.
Botgirl Questi, Prokofy Neva, Tateru Nino, Wizard Gynoid and Gwyneth Llewelyn are some of the people who fully support the use of pseudonyms on the Internet. All five of them are established pseudonyms with several years’ worth of history.
Of the five individuals I mentioned, Botgirl Questi seems to be most
vocal “comical”. Mock interviews with a fantasized Google employee and comic-style cartoons/posters used to emphasize the issue.
Google+ community manager Natalie Villalobos writes:
You do not need to use your last name or even your “real name” but a name that you are commonly known by. You can put “Natalie V” with no symbol, as we no longer support symbols in the names fields.
(Link to Source - scroll down to read the comment)
However, Google’s official policy seems to contradict Ms. Villalobos’s statement, albeit a little hazy on what constitutes a ‘real name’.
On the other end of the scale, Forbes magazine contributor Benoit Raphael is in full support of Google’s names policy. He argues that the new Internet requires the use of your Real Life identity to function properly.
[New Internet? What’s that? Is it even here yet?]
[Benoit Raphael also seems a little perplexed at people using “avatars” on Today’s Internet].
The Forbes Contributor/Blogger asks:
now that Facebook, Twitter and Google+ have become public spaces where people can meet to share or to protest, is there a danger in housing theses public places in the exclusive hands of private companies? If “Internet” is a new country, then who will protect freedom in its public places ?
[On-line Privacy issues are not discussed, oddly. Privacy is utmost important to those in favour of Pseudonyms]
[Follow-up post(s) coming soon]
2 years ago