OPINIONS PLEASE: Should PN stick with the "real sounding names" rule?

[joshroot]

<blockquote>

<p>the names of subscribers must match that of the credit card they used to pay their first subscription.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That would defeat the whole purpose of allowing people to participate under a pseudomym. Which, as I have already pointed out, is important for many PN users. So that wouldn't work.</p>

[joshroot]

<p>As the president and supreme ruler of Photonetkistan, I have to point out that this is not a democracy. However, FWIW, the current tally is aprox 19 for keeping the "real sounding names" and 2 for "nicknames allowed". Which is a pretty strong trend.</p>

<p>I'll probably keep this thread around for 24 hours or so to allow others to contribute.</p>

[ben_goren]

<p>One more thing —</p>

 

<p>This site welcomes photography and artwork that huge swaths of the human population would

instantly denounce as vile, obscene, disgusting, and the like. The nudes section alone would be

grounds for corporal punishment in much of Asia and the Middle East.</p>

 

<p>Why do we welcome art without concern for respectability, but reject artists because their chosen names

aren’t themselves respectable? Shouldn’t we apply the same standards to people as

to pictures?</p>

 

<p>Somebody who posts obscene pictures won’t get much respect (from those who

consider said pictures to be obscene), but neither will somebody who posts under an obscene

nickname get respect for those words. And that’s as it should be: let each person and each

picture stand or fall on the particular merits.</p>

 

<p>Cheers,</p>

 

<p>b&</p>

[walter_degroot]

<p>I prefer real names or, as you said JR or josh r, or j root.<br>

I agree that celebrity names are out, but your real name may be same as a cel contrived names are sort of dumb<br>

but if there is a problem- l;ike religious or political correctness police in some countries , there should be a way to give them a pass.<br>

it would be helpful to post the country, people in the UK ( spell color differently)<br>

but sources for film and other products are very different<br>

as Is availability and prices of cameras.<br>

also the rich countries should be careful when suggesting sonmething in another nation where things are expensive<br>

" well it only costs $300.00 " is a no no</p>

[orias]

<p>Real names provides for more accountability.</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>Ben: Patently obscene nicknames (as measured against contemporary culture in the U.S., where this site is based, and where at least most of its users reside) have an indirect problem. Such text is spotted by Google (et al) and indexed. That text impacts search rankings, and impacts the way all sorts of filters do or don't allow the site to be seen.<br /><br />For example: if you sit down with your laptop in a Panera restaurant to have a tasty, if slightly over priced sandwich and to use their free WiFi ... you agree to the terms of their web proxy software and TOU. It would be a shame for PN to be blacklisted from their network because of a spike in the appearance of deliberately offensive text on the site's pages. But it happens. You'll find such sites getting blocked at all sorts of corporate firewalls (preventing cubicle-dwelling photographers from surfing to PN during their lunch break), government networks at all levels, and even schools/libraries. <br /><br />Yes, there are images hosted here that would be a bad fit, flashed up on a display, in any of those settings. But most users know how to avoid them when they're in that situation. But if the site's pages start to fill up with deliberately salty/vulgar handles, and the moderators take the position that it just is what it is ... then you have factors that will greatly reduce the visibility and accessibility of this tremendous resource for a lot of people.<br /><br />Keep the language/handles (reasonably) PG-rated, folks, and that will help to keep it visible for a lot more people.</p>

[william_livingston]

<p>real names</p>

[mark_chartrand]

<p>Real names, also.</p>

[gabor_szabo3]

<p>I'll be the first to admit I use a Pseudonym, and do so for some of the reasons Josh mentioned .<br>

For the past few months since I registered , I've found this site to be extremely valuable . Almost everything one needs to know is somwhere in one forum archive or the other. Post a question and almost immediately someone chimes in with their expert knowledge. You get to know the regulars pretty quickly. Reading quips and torts in the OT forum is a form of entertainment that's hard to beat. <br>

As an artist and part-time photog and camera dealer I have little need for gallery critiques and such. Should I become a paying member ( very likely ) and utilize the features that come with the dues, a more recognizable and true-to-nature user name will be selected (though my real name is a bit more preposterous than my nom de guerre). </p>

[photogorilla]

<p>While I agree there is a sense of respect and legitimacy when using what appears to be a real name, I think it is derived more from the persons actions rather than any convention we attach to the name they use.</p>

<p>Content is king. If I am respectable, helpful, and knowledgeable, then the name attached to the account doesn't matter.</p>

[Jeremy Stein]

<p>Real names, with the use of initials or shortenings permitted if the user wishes to obscure their real name somewhat. And, by all means, NO duplicate names (and that means not allowing both "john r" and "John R")<br>

I also think that users who either have bogus email addresses or never look at their email should be dropped. If you are not interested enough in p.n to be reachable, then maybe p.n should not be interested in keeping you on the books.</p>

[beartooth1]

<p>I'm on board with the real name program and also like the idea of some real bio info...it would really add to the validity of the responses.</p>

[Bill J Boyd]

<p>My vote is for REAL NAMES!</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>What's a "real sounding name" - really?<br>

Put me down as profoundly neutral, but what we have seems infinitely preferable to lots of names like Ruffstuff or Tiddleywinks or the like.</p>

<p>Signed,<br>

The Red Baron</p>

[va3uxb]

<p>I'm comfortable with a real name or real-sounding-name rule. I've always used my real name on the internet (I guess I'm not creative enough to come up with a 'cool nick'), and am a user of another (non-photography) forum which enforces a real-name-only rule.<br>

Having said that, I can understand and appreciate where pseudonyms can be useful or necessary, and where people may be uncomfortable in using their real names. Though a serious photography site IMHO ought not be the sort of place where people are uncomfortable to be themselves.<br>

Cheers.</p>

[williamting]

<p>I am against restricting our choices to real sounding names only.</p>

<p>I judge posters based on the text of their post. Even if they have a real sounding name, if their thought process is all over the place or without logic I tend to disregard the poster.</p>

<p>Does their name affect my decision? Possibly if it's an obscene name, but it has very little influence. Judging someone based on their name is equivalent to judging someone by their clothes, or a book by its cover, etc.</p>

<p>On a side note, just because I don't want my real name published does not mean I have done something wrong or something I'm not proud of. Since when did choosing privacy imply guilt?</p>

[archaeoImages]

<p>I see no reason to bring in an unecessary rule change. Wouldn't be very happy if I were required to change the name I've been using with no problems for several years now.</p>

[eric merrill]

<p>Josh:</p>

<p>Matters not to me one way or the other.</p>

<p>I wouldn't rule out "celebrity names". What about the poor fellow who happens to share his name with George Bush? I've personally known a Michael Jackson.</p>

<p>I'd say let people choose whatever "decent" names they want. (What's decent? You'll know it when you see it. I wouldn't try to define it any more than that.)</p>

<p>If an obvious joker chooses Barack Obama or FotoBoy or whatever, does it make his posts any less obnoxious if he called himself John Smith? Personally, I don't put much value into names for the names sake. If somebody reliably posts good information, chances are that he's worth reading. If he posts crop, chances are that's a good one to ignore.</p>

<p>It would be nice to have a feature to "ignore this user." Click it, and then never be bothered with seeing that person's posts again. :)</p>

<p>Eric aka Eric</p>

[joshroot]

<blockquote>

<p>I see no reason to bring in an unecessary rule change. Wouldn't be very happy if I were required to change the name I've been using with no problems for several years now.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Technically, you shouldn't be using that name. The proposed rule above is no different from the existing guideline except that we wouldn't be asking people to pick a name that sounds like a name.</p>

<p>Business names aren't allowed because this is a community where we talk to each other as people. Talking to a business is impersonal feeling and for most people just comes off as a promotional attempt rather than a honest interest in being part of a community. After all, people don't say "Hey Archaeo Images, do you want to go out for a beer later" when they are talking to you on the street corner, why should that happen here.</p>

<p>Unless, of course, your opinion is that anything should go for a username.</p>

[starvy]

<p>perhaps a first name only rule should suffice. names allow us to identify each other and keep track of conversations.<br>

names are interesting phenomenons. i remember presenting a research paper on bedouin names a few years ago at a conference. at first there were no names. names were simply not needed within a tribe. however, if someone from a different tribe wandered over there was an active need to impose a system of referring to this new arrival. that is how names came about. eventually, there would have been so much migration and individuals moving around, in particular the tradesmen, that a naming system for each and every individual became necessary.<br>

perhaps this site is all about migrations and all of us trying to remain individuals through having names. the oldies would of course resist change. the reality is that google searches, as you alluded to in the original post are dangerous. let us embrace the new world.</p>

[jimmckinnon]

<blockquote>

 

 

<p>Real names. I thought that was the rule when I signed on (maybe I didn't read very closely, no surprise there)</p>

 

 

</blockquote>

<p>I'm with Tom. I understood that to be the rule when I joined. Have been very surprised to see some of the "handles" here.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Technically, you shouldn't be using that name. The proposed rule above is no different from the existing guideline ...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Josh, with your response in mind (and I mean no disrespect - just asking), how did some of these nicknames slip through?</p>

<blockquote>

<p> A google search for "Josh Root" returns my PN page very close to the top ...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thanks for the tip. I Googled my name - which is very real, whether that's good or bad - and found my P.Net page to be the 8th listing. There are certainly more interesting/important Jim McKinnon's than me!</p>

<blockquote>

<p> I am less inclined to take someone seriously if they use some sort of (silly) nickname.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'm right in line with Patrick on this one. It may be all psychological, but I don't trust someone who doesn't give me their real name.</p>

<p>I would actually prefer only real names, but understand the need for some to use a pseudonym. Please count me as a <strong>YES </strong>to the real-or-real-sounding-name rule.</p>

<p>... SillyAmateurPhotographer - - er, ahh, Jim</p>

[archaeoImages]

<p>"Technically, you shouldn't be using that name."<br>

I've been a member of PN for the past 3 years & until today I had absolutely no idea there was anything wrong with the name.<br>

I'm not a "business", just an interested amateur who chooses not to have my real name plastered all over the internet. Rarely turn down the offer of a beer but as I believe we're on different sides of the Atlantic it's a bit of a non-starter. On the wider point, I can't believe you don't see the difference between an on-line "community" & going down the boozer with yer mates... <br>

Provided a name is not obscene, illegal or otherwise deliberately insulting you've pretty much summed up my opinion - anything goes.</p>

[jerry_schuler]

<p >“I keep wondering when I'll wake up one morning and <em>really</em> wish I wasn't using my actual name ... and it just continues to not really matter (in a bad way). It's also a great way to make you think once, twice, maybe even three times before shooting one's mouth off too wildly in an OT politics thread!”</p>

<p ></p>

<p > </p>

<p >My personal rule is I would not say anything here that I would not say to somebody vis-à-vis. </p>

<p ></p>

<p > </p>

<p >Some people get carried away with a virtual reality such as web forums. They say things that they would never say in person. Unreal names could turn it into a fantasy land, and less social get carried away with their mouth. We could end up with an online quake game because there is no repercussion to the actual person. " I wonder who was 'King of Photostan' really?" As far as employers background checks, competitors looking for information to ruin, or lunatics stalking you, it’s just something we have to deal with.</p>

[joshroot]

<blockquote>

<p>I've been a member of PN for the past 3 years & until today I had absolutely no idea there was anything wrong with the name.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>As I said in my original post:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>We do have a few "fake" names that have slipped through and become entrenched in the community enough that we haven't bothered to ask them to change, and they don't seem to cause a problem. But at the moment, they are the overwhelming minority.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Your is obviously one of those that avoided notice long enough that we didn't bother with changing it (and likely won't unless you request it). We're just humans who run this place and are as perfect and imperfect as anyone. We do the best we can.</p>

<p>However, it is worth noting how your fellow community members view users who don't at least make an attempt to have a normal name. I'd say that overwhelmingly photo.net users trust and choose to interact more with people who they feel like they are talking to as another person. Business (sounding) or CoolCidCrafty type names don't seem to elicit the same sort of community for them.</p>

[patricklavoie]

<p>I personnaly dont really care how other call themself..I prefer using my real name when i think it help me and the other knowing i can be trust AND im responsible for everyhting i said.</p>

<p>The good thing about it too, for me, is when you type Patrick Lavoie on google, im #1 because of PN, and #2 because of my own web site..so whatever people search Patrick Lavoie or espacephotos..im on top of the result..really cool for someone who use the web to find me.</p>

<p>Im proud of my name, and i have nothing to hide, and i think that many people prefer having a inteligente answer from someone with a real name, or at least one that sound like a real name.</p>

<p>I would refer that you keep the real / sound like real name..enough place use funky name and it just look cheap and childish..it loose the pro level i think PN have developed over the years, and the main reason why i only come here.. (no im not on any other forum, enough to keep myself busy here ; )</p>