Is the use of WASP in this case wholly inappropriate and clearly intended to be derogatory? Why is it tolerated and not considered a form of hate speech?
My name is only real enough to work at Facebook, not to use on the site
21–30 of 54 posts
Re: My name is only real enough to work at Facebook, not to use on the site
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Facebook is terrible. Ditch it entirely And then...? What? Try to get people to invite you to events on Google Hangouts or whatever Google has?
I just stopped caring about being invited to "events". If the event is so impersonal that it needs to be broadcast rather than two or three people organizing and then blasting a simple text message like "Hey beers at 5PM at . Come if you can!" I just don't care.
I definitely disagree with this. Facebook's utility for inviting people (even close friends) is huge to me. The messenger system is way better than text messaging, integrates well with its calendar and reminders, allows people to see who else is coming, doesn't cross platforms poorly (like group texts to Iphones + Android, in my experience), includes a map and permanent details, can be accessed online, ... etc, the list goes on a long way.
Re: My name is only real enough to work at Facebook, not to use on the site
#23Could Facebook implement a PageRank type algorithm that gets people with already verified real names (perhaps they paid for something by credit card on FB, or are registered with a .edu email that matches their initials), to then say whether their friends name was real? Surely there's a way of proving someone's real name without making them use their legal name.
I wonder if they simply want the legal name. If part of the purpose of Facebook is to sell networks of people to marketers, then being able to tie your network identity to your home loan, car loan, and credit score is going to be very appealing.
Re: My name is only real enough to work at Facebook, not to use on the site
#24Is the use of WASP in this case wholly inappropriate and clearly intended to be derogatory? Why is it tolerated and not considered a form of hate speech?
"Facebook likes to think of names as a one-to-one mapping. You have one name, and that name is how people refer to you at all times. It’s a very WASP notion of how names work, and the reality is far more complex."
Nope. Not inappropriate. Not derogatory. Not hate speech. Different cultures treat names different ways. Here, "WASP" is a reference to the dominant American culture. I didn't bat an eye when I read it.
Re: My name is only real enough to work at Facebook, not to use on the site
#25Is the use of WASP in this case wholly inappropriate and clearly intended to be derogatory? Why is it tolerated and not considered a form of hate speech?
[deleted]
Re: My name is only real enough to work at Facebook, not to use on the site
#26Is the use of WASP in this case wholly inappropriate and clearly intended to be derogatory? Why is it tolerated and not considered a form of hate speech?
It did strike me as a bit out of left field.
White Anglo-Saxon Protestants are not the inventors of names nor does it seem like that group in particular is radically defensive of how naming works.
I'm not sure it is hate speech, but it was meant to cast negativity on one group.
Re: My name is only real enough to work at Facebook, not to use on the site
#27Is the use of WASP in this case wholly inappropriate and clearly intended to be derogatory? Why is it tolerated and not considered a form of hate speech?
"Facebook likes to think of names as a one-to-one mapping. You have one name, and that name is how people refer to you at all times. It’s a very WASP notion of how names work, and the reality is far more complex." Nope. Not inappropriate. Not derogatory. Not hate speech. Different cultures treat names different ways. Here, "WASP" is a reference to the dominant American culture. I didn't bat an eye when I read it.
They could have said that without using the term "WASP". I've personally never seen this term used in a non-derogatory way before.
Re: My name is only real enough to work at Facebook, not to use on the site
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have my doubts about that since they also seem to go on spurts of banning Native American using their real names.
I don't know Native American names, but I guess the filter classifies their names as having too much entropy when compared to the other 1.1bn FB users. 1.1bn gives a pretty exhaustive list of common names for a given country region.
Well, its a known problem and their continued foolishness is a pain to people including those who do not work for Facebook but have to deal with ticked people because they are the local computer person.
> 1.1bn gives a pretty exhaustive list of common names for a given country region.
If the last name is a person with a Wikipedia entry then their pretty exhaustive list is not very exhaustive.
Re: My name is only real enough to work at Facebook, not to use on the site
#29How illegal is to provide a fake ID documents to Facebook? ("fake" in the sense of "editing it in Photoshop")
Why would it be illegal at all? Facebook isn't a government authority.
Re: My name is only real enough to work at Facebook, not to use on the site
#30How illegal is to provide a fake ID documents to Facebook? ("fake" in the sense of "editing it in Photoshop")
As someone who has done this previously, I don't particularly care.