in reply to Evan Prodromou

mastodon - Link to source

Third spruce tree on the left

I reject any call for mandatory real-name policies on any internet platform. Private associations? sure. Government? of course.

I understand and acknowledge the challenges in moderation/enforcement vs evildoers without them; It does helps minimize casual asshats. But the real evil ones, spewing horrific content or hate - they're motivated to find ways around it anyways.

Motivated LEO can find you now despite not knowing your real name. All RNPs do is cut out one of x bench warrants.

in reply to Evan Prodromou

mastodon - Link to source

mattlqx

a work setting is vastly different than a social network, especially one where there’s no barrier to someone setting up a server of their own and becoming their own “authority”. Consider how that might play out: server A has a real name policy and validates IDs, server B has a real name policy and doesn’t. How many people would know the difference? Would they believe the validity of either is equal? What difference would it make to the rest of the Fedi that doesn’t have a policy?
in reply to Evan Prodromou

mastodon - Link to source

lakelady

how do you define "real". My name here has been my online moniker since at least 2003. I had another before this one (back in CompuServe days). Other than a specific instance where my legal name online is a matter of public record I have never used my legal name online for a variety of reasons. The most basic is that I grew up with an appreciation of privacy that that I believe in to this day. However I also consider my current moniker as "real" as my legal name.
in reply to Evan Prodromou

mastodon - Link to source

Jessamyn

I said few because I can see a few small exceptions to what I generally feel which is that requiring real names is a policy that specifically hurts marginalized folk the most and, as such, I am against them. Someone asked about this in a talk I was giving today and while I am often in favor of a *consistent* identity (just to avoid rampant sock puppet issues the likes of which plague Wikipedia) that doesn't have to include real names (whatever those are).
in reply to Evan Prodromou

mastodon - Link to source

Marty Fouts

In the United States any name you choose to use is a legal name and thus your real name, so long as you don’t use it to commit fraud.

Also, I know people who have birth certificates, drivers licenses and passports all with different names and aren’t called any of them IRL.

Besides, the administrative databases that store such information would become major hacking targets.

Don’t store PII and you won’t have to defend it against hackers.

in reply to Evan Prodromou

ActivityPub - Link to source

Cy

You start from a disingenuous premise. It is a lie that "real names" exist. Not calling it a "legal name" is shifty and two-faced, and grants false legitimacy to the surveillance state. How are they to ensure our legal name is real, if not to monitor us at all times to make sure we're always using it? Your enforcement would aid nobody except those who want to manipulate people through spying on them, who can easily do so if we're stopped from using the name (and identity) we want.

It's also disrespectful and hateful to use "a real names policy," because many people were forced to take a certain legal name by their terrible government and/or their terrible parents. If you yourself force people to use these "dead names" then you're somewhere between a bully and a supremist.

Other than that, knock yourself out if you want to use legal names! I think everyone should have one profile they use for public stuff, though I STILL think using the legal name is inadvisable, even if it's easy to connect to your profile.

This website uses cookies. If you continue browsing this website, you agree to the usage of cookies.

⇧