Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Real Name Fallacy

blog.coralproject.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 323 posts

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#31

Post by rntz »

ChrisNorstrom wrote: post #18

I really don't want to say this but, the real names policy does help in terms of trolling behavior for certain communities. When TechCrunch switched over from Disqus to Facebook comments, the amount of trash and trolling was immediately reduced and stayed at a minimum permanently. A lot of the media outlets (Motherboard, Vice, NPR) who've disabled commenting altogether were using Disqus. I've noticed media outlets th…

Perhaps the common cause here was disqus, rather than anonymity per se? Does anyone know if there any features of disqus that might encourage trolling?

Also, I've certainly seen plenty of flaming in FB comments on news sites.

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#32

Post by Tharkun »

matt4077 wrote: post #13
wfunction wrote: post #4

Thing is, if I had to guess, I would say Facebook doesn't attempt to make you use your real name to make the community better in the first place. That's almost certainly just its pretext for everyone who's willing to fall for it. Most likely, it does that to make sure it can identify you globally and uniquely for commercial/advertising purposes. Think about how much more valuable your online identity is if you go sol…

Real names are the difference between Facebook and MySpace. I'm not friends on FB with anybody I haven't met in real life.

How does their display name affect that relationship? You can meet people in meatspace, and even know their name, without FB knowing their name.

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#33

Post by kome »

LoSboccacc wrote: post #5
kome wrote: post #2

Very thoughtful article... we are having this debate now in Italy and this would need to be translated.

do we? I'm out of the loop besides major news because there's almost no hope left, so I missed it. who's pushing it this time?

http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/premium/articoli/controlli-d...

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#34

Post by morgante »

wfunction wrote: post #4

Thing is, if I had to guess, I would say Facebook doesn't attempt to make you use your real name to make the community better in the first place. That's almost certainly just its pretext for everyone who's willing to fall for it. Most likely, it does that to make sure it can identify you globally and uniquely for commercial/advertising purposes. Think about how much more valuable your online identity is if you go sol…

Facebook doesn't need you to give your name to figure out who you are. They don't sell advertising based on your name.

Also, I think it's unfair to pretend that real names don't make a difference. They're a big part of what makes Facebook different than MySpace, Twitter, or other social networks.

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#35

Post by eriknstr »

Tharkun wrote: post #32
matt4077 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Real names are the difference between Facebook and MySpace. I'm not friends on FB with anybody I haven't met in real life.

How does their display name affect that relationship? You can meet people in meatspace, and even know their name, without FB knowing their name.

Because the opposite case of adding a random stranger might be different when everyone is using real names and you feel that you should know them irl to add them.

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#36

Post by _fh5n »

I think that this overall push towards eliminating anonimity and trolls from the internet can only have negative outcomes. Sure, nobody will ever be offended again, but at what cost? And who are these easily offended people for whom we're sacrificing freedom of speech?

It baffles me how nobody sees a parallel with 1984, here, and it's not the usual cliche claim. From: >do not say anything against someone To: >do not think anything against someone The step is incredibly short.

Moreover, how are we supposed to have true bipartisan information if we can only see one side of the coin because the other one would require to talk bad about someone?

I can see every dictator of the world smiling, as proposals like this are being considered throughout the world.

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#37

Post by morgante »

blauditore wrote: post #7

I think it largely depends on the specific community and people in it. While some try to use online anonymity as an outlet to say and do things they wouldn't dare on Facebook or IRL, others seem to want a reality-like reputation around their username/account. A large portion is probably caused simply by community rules; just see /b/ and HN... And to be fair, I've hardly ever seen serious insults on Facebook, but been…

Those norms are correlated heavily with anonymity though.

For example, while HN has no real name policy, HN users are generally substantially less anonymous than accounts on Reddit (for example). Many people openly list their personal identity in their profile.

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#38

Post by sgift »

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #24
mjolk wrote: post #9

While I agree that expecting users to use real names is a bad thing, this knocked the air out of me: > In societies including the US where violence and mistreatment of women, people of color, and marginalized people is common, we can expect similar problems in people’s digital interactions [1] > [1] Sarah Banet-Weiser and Kate M. Miltner. #MasculinitySoFragile: culture, structure, and networked misogyny. Feminist Med…

> I reject the assertion that these issues are "common" in the US On what grounds do you reject that? Do you have hard evidence that women and ethnic/sexual minorities in the US are not at increased risk of violence and mistreatment? Or are you basing this on "feelings > reality", as you put it? > Further, it's getting rather tiring that the US is always listed as an example when countries/societies exist without leg…

> On what grounds do you reject that? Do you have hard evidence that women and ethnic/sexual minorities in the US are not at increased risk of violence and mistreatment?

The burden of proof is usually on those who state that something is a problem. So .. are there reliable sources for that claim?

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#39

Post by vog »

The real name discussion is as old as the Usenet, maybe even older. I find it strange to see it re-appearing again and again every few years for almost decades.

Back then, the consensus was roughly:

1. If a community accepts pseudonyms, it is polite to use either your realname or an obvious pseudonym.

2. If a community places high value on realnames, either use your realname or a realname-sounding (i.e. non-obvious) pseudonym.

3. Unmasking someone's nonpublic realname, or other private information, is generally considered impolite if not aggressive, regardless whether the community places high value on realnames or not.

Has anything substantially changed since then?

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#40

Post by vidarh »

matt4077 wrote: post #13
wfunction wrote: post #4

Thing is, if I had to guess, I would say Facebook doesn't attempt to make you use your real name to make the community better in the first place. That's almost certainly just its pretext for everyone who's willing to fall for it. Most likely, it does that to make sure it can identify you globally and uniquely for commercial/advertising purposes. Think about how much more valuable your online identity is if you go sol…

Real names are the difference between Facebook and MySpace. I'm not friends on FB with anybody I haven't met in real life.

Most of the people I would consider friends are people I haven't met in real life.

And for many years a majority of my friend circle were people I probably never even knew the "real" name of - people in the demo/cracking scene where it was often common for people to introduce you by handle and group (e.g. say Strider of Fairlight, to take a "well known" example from the scene that I spoke to on the phone but back in the day but never met, who I can't for the life of me remember the real name of). Some of these people I'd meet in person regularly and still not use the real name of because their real name was not what people around us would know them by in that context.

My ex goes by three different names: Her "real" name from her passport. An Anglicized name that her immediate family and childhoold school friends uses, and a different Anglicized name that most of her work colleagues and newer friends uses. Many of them don't know the other names.

A lot of people have different names that are used in different contexts that are just as real as the others, just not legally recognised.

Post reply on HN