Aliases vs. Real Names

[keith_van_hulle1]

I'm bringing up the specter (again) of the use of screen names and

whether the elves see this as a problem and whether anything could be

done about it.

 

I guess I'm taking the tack that, while anyone should probably be

free to use the site regardless of how they are registered, posting

in the forums might be limited to those people who use their real

name (possibly with an automated mail verification?).

 

Not sure that the whole concept is even feasible but thought I'd

bring it up. I know it was discussed way back. I'm wondering if

people might show a little more restraint/intelligence if they know

their name is attached to what they post?

[nikos]

Even if for some reason real names would be required (which I neither support nor find a reasonable expectation) how would the site administration verify the authenticity of the names. Just because I have a valid email and a name that looks like first name and surname, that doesn't imply this is actually my name. It is actually, but you've got to trust me on this, you can't find out for yourselves. So in terms of identification validity, 'Nikos Moraitakis' is as good as 'Donald Duck' or 'LADIDA-LALALA' All three are character strings associated with an id and an email and nothing sort of extensive cross-referencing could tell you if any of these is what is written on my passport.

[sk_arts]

As a person who uses an alias, I do not see the point, and you do not give one.

 

What diffence is it if i go by the name "cosmo" (my nick name) or "shawn" (my real name) "zoey" (my feminine name) or, as i am here, "anno"? What do you, and the site gain by this? I am perfectly content by being adressed as Anno, and I see it not a concern of anyone else!

 

when I started here I was very particular about giving out my real name, in fact still I do not hand out my full name nor have any intentions to. I do have a reason for this, albeit slightly paranoid, I do have the right to be paranoid if I wish!

 

I do not see why my and others privacy must be stepped on in order to satisfy what so far appears to be nothing more than a pet peve?

[bobatkins]

The use of a "handle" is seen as:

<p>

<ul><li>Pretentious. Who do you think you are? Only "stars" have one name like Bono or Madona

<Li>Suspicious. Why should anyone listen to you if you hide behind a fake name.

<li>Stupid. Kids and CBers use fake names. Serious people enganged in serious discussions don't use fake names. I'm not going to take comments from "rubby ducky" seriously, even if I bother to read them.

</ul>

It doesn't matter what you say, I'll give less weight to it if you use a fake name.

<p>

I'd ban the use of nicknames altogther if it weren't for the fact that those people could simply call themselves "John Doe" (or "Jane Doe") and nobody would know they were faking it. May as well let them call themselves "daffy duck" so we know who's opinions and posting to ignore.

<p>

This may not be fair, but it's the way human nature operates. You'll never get any respect here hiding behind a fake name. You may not get any respect with a real name either, but the odds are slightly greater.

<p>

Bottom line is that if you want to be taken seriously, use your own name. You can change your screen name at any time, and the new name will appear on all you old postings.

[RobertChura]

Thank you Bob, you said it well. I was taught if you are proud of what you do or say- sign your name to it. Otherwise it is a sham.

[bob_mccready]

As a former victim of identity theft, I'm afraid I disagree. While it is true that it is extremely unlikely that anyone would pick me at random out of all the people on photo.net as a target for exploitation, anyone who knew my real name could Google and find out where I live, where I work, my phone number, etc. With that much information, I have no doubt you could dig up much more if you really wanted to.

 

I can certainly see why a professional would want their name out in the open; more exposure = more work, wider reputation, etc. But as an amateur, listing my real name is of no benefit to me. I believe that my identity belongs to me, and I will try to maintain as much control over it as I can in the Information Era. I don't see any reason why I should expose myself to every person in the world with a computer if I don't want to.

 

Or try this as an analogy: how many people would feel comfortable walking around in public with their full name ALWAYS displayed on a name tag?

[lex_jenkins]

My only request is for ID tracking. Some folks change their handles so often that my head is spinning. I don't care whether or not they change 'em, let 'em do so to their heart's content. But track the changes along the same lines as classified ads are currently tracked to document changes.

 

Granted, this won't prevent rascals using multiple accounts. I'm not concerned about that because not much can be done to prevent it. But some folks are changing their photo.net IDs, within a single account, at whim, some days using their full names, other days a first name only, next week their initials. I don't know whether they're experiencing personality crises or what but it's becoming more difficult to know whether I've chatted with "ZZ" before and whether he/she used to be "Anecdotal Evidence" or was the mate rater formerly known as "Bear Eft Ofconscience."

 

Of course some folks enjoy playing these hide-the-ID games but these tendencies are usually revealed when they also start trolling, flaming and generally wreaking havoc.

 

I'd just like to see ID tracking for the folks who wish to remain honest but also enjoy the occasional change of handle.

[bobatkins]

"Bob" is an example of why we don't ban fake names. If he doesn't tell us, we don't know it's fake. So he'd escape the ban and "anno" would get axed.

<p>

Like I said, I wish everyone who wanted to remain anonymous would pick a name like "rubber duck", so we would know who they are.

<p>

I accept the privacy argument as valid, if unfortunate. I suspect many people would feel "cheated" if they know the people they were sending messages to or helping in the forums were hiding behind fictious names, even though people feel that there are valid reasons to do so.

<p>

I don't think there's anything photo.net can do about it, and I'm not sure photo.net wants to interfere if users want to remain anonymous. It would be nice to know who the anonymous users were though. Perhaps we could give them all an icon when we find them.

<p>

<img src="http://www.bobatkins.com/emoticons/qm.gif"> - This user prefers to remain anonymous.

[sk_arts]

If anyone can tell me what damage is being done to photo.net as a whole by people using handles, I will change my name. I see no harm in it, but if there is, let me know.

 

Not being taken seriously isn't my problem, it's yours. I try to post good information to the best of my ability, I got a little carried away for a while but i am more selective now. If you cannot respect that regardless of my name, there is no reason I should respect your requests to use my real name.

 

If you have specific issues with me personally, please stay on topic and email them to me.

[sk_arts]

<<It would be nice to know who the anonymous users were though>>

 

Bob, this is exactly why I chose "anno".

[bobatkins]

It degrades the environment. If you went to party and some introduced themselves as "Tom", then you later found out their name was "Mike", how would you feel. Or if they said they weren't going to tell you their name, but you could call them "teapot", you'd probably just back away.

 

Feel free to use any name you like. Just let us know if it's fake, and we'll take the risk and accept the potential loss of not taking you seriously.

[mbb]

Man should stay behind his words (very old proverb � Chinese I believe). Those who hide behind fake names usually don�t, and don�t have a pride or courage as well. They don�t have a face or they have a lot of faces :).

 

Yes, for the reason listed above (I'm wondering if people might show a little more restraint/intelligence if they know their name is attached to what they post?) the real name should be required.

[keith_van_hulle1]

Some good points above. I was prompted to post this, not as an attack against anyone in particular, but rather for junk like <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0060ts">this</a>. I even thought about cranking up Mailstorm to show my displeasure against his mailbox but it probably wouldn't be worth the effort being a throw-away account.

<p><p>

Then again, I could see the above poster as being a harvester (if they're willing to keep doing this) since we've had some issues with that lately. They look to be an e-storeforent or business trying to sell Praktica products and such.

<p><p>

Hell, I dunno. Maybe they'd like their site redirected to xxxporn.com or a neo-nazi site (yeah, that'd go over well in Germany).

[sk_arts]

Bob-

 

I do like your idea for a marker of anonymous names. I personally think it is unnecissary, but at the same time I see no harm in it.

 

It seems like plenty of people though feel it is, and for this I advocate it. I think if people voluntered that they are using an alias most would comply. Unless you come in with a name like Fox Talbot saying "I'm back from the dead" there is no reason why someone would lie about this. I thought I made it fairly clear that this is not my real name.

 

As far as what you said about a party, I personally could care less if his name is tom, george, fred or even teapot. I call people what they prefer being called.

[lex_jenkins]

To clarity my remarks, I don't care if someone uses a fictitious name, handle, pseudonym, whatever. One of my favorite online folks has a name that, for more than a year, I'd assumed was a fictitious online name used to protect her privacy. Turns out it was her real name! She just happened to have a wonderfully silly given name. (Yeh, not normal...like, say, Lex.)

 

Nope, what gripes me is people who keep changing their IDs. One day they're Tom, the next day they're TZ, a week later they're Veruca Salt. Hey, you wanna pseudonym, be my guest. It's a long-established part of online communications. Heck, it was part of the CB radio culture. But don't go changing handles every 15 minutes like you're hoping for another quarter-hour of fame.

 

And if that can't be prevented then at least add ID tracking. That way I'll know that when I'm flirting with Veruca I might actually be coming on to Tom.

[julianradowsky]

I have been a photo.net member for a number of years, and I can honestly say that the best advice/information on this site has always been provided by those who SEEM to use their real names (after all, Bob Atkins COULD be an alis, but I seriously doubt it [no insult intended Bob])<br><br>I am more accepting of comments and suggestions from people who are willing to use their real names as opposed to handles (whether the real name is an alias or not, I cannot say unless it is quite obviously an alias).

[bacsa]

My sister was once questioned by authorities, for new citizenship reasons, between others also about names of persons who she met at university, and who live now in a certain other country. Believe me, she only knew 2 full names, and the rest of ~20 were nicknames like "teapot" (yes Bob exactly "teapot"), "chippie", "kuka" and others. Did the officials take her seriously? well, they had to. Did she take those persons seriously, during several years they were meeting day by day, but never really being interested in a stupid name? Yes she did.

 

She does know the full name of her husband, tho'.

 

Or, isn't the former president of the US called "Bill"? Wasn't he more serious than the current one who has even a famous name and an extra initial that sounds soooo good?

 

To take one seriously or not, i decide upon the way he/she is acting, answering my silly questions, not upon the name. If it's a BS answer, it can be signed by the most elegant and serious name, it's still a BS answer.

 

just my 'coffee break enhancement' above.

[bacsa]

Anyway,...a name with a "(I'm a PITA?)" inset does not sound to me more serious than a name like "donald duck" so i guess seriousity wasn't Keith's point, but more like "responsability for what you type" and being able to press people to act more like in real life. I think i do agree with that.

[brainbubba_motornapkins]

Czab,

 

I'm the only one allowed to give "BS" answers around here. Why did my father, "Straight" name me "Back"? It was a cruel joke, but as soon as I grew old enough to hold a gun, I delivered some 'poetic' justice...

 

Yours in BS (as always)...

[bacsa]

BS, you misspelled my (real,by the way) name.

<br>As always.

<br>:o)cheers!and have a good light all.

<p>

By the way, I do take seriously,for instance, everything that Bob Atkins posts, although <a href="http://www.photo.net/shared/portrait.tcl?user_id=14630">his "portrait"</a> could work against this. Isn't that a bit contradictory with his theory about real names? Or, names are important, but faces are not(on a photo forum site!!!) ?

[stephen_w.]

I started this thread on the Leica Forum:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005xxO

[bobatkins]

How do you know it's not me? You humans are so easily fooled...

<p>

<em>Cartoon by Peter Steiner, reproduced from page 61 of July 5, 1993 issue of The New Yorker, (Vol.69 (LXIX) no. 20) only for academic discussion as stipulated under Title 17 U. S. Code.</em>

[rich815]

Myself and a few others I know pretty much ignore the postings and images of people who only use aliases. Or at least give them less credibility. What's the point? Privacy? Of what? I personally think hiding behind an alias is silly and pointless.

[bobatkins]

I do too. If I see a thread with a questionable title posted by some one called "sdefer icromany", I ignore it.

 

As a moderator I'm also more likely to delete it, or at least not give it the benefit of the doubt if deletion is in question. Probably that's not fair, but who said life was fair.

 

On the other hand I'm MORE likely to answer a question asked by a subscriber, and MORE inclined to give them the benefit of any doubt in a moderation or deletion decision.

 

While this certainly isn't site policy, it's human nature. If I have a finite amount of time to answer questions and administrate, I have to decide who gets the "benefit" of that time (or who suffers from it, depending on your point of view). I'll sometimes answer a "dumb" question from a subscriber which I'd ignore from anyone else.

[sk_arts]

Well, Bob, it is after all your job to be fair... You can ignore whatever you want, but if I said "Yeah boss, this ad looks like crap .. but who says the world is full of well done products" I am pretty sure I wouldn't have a job in the advertising industry for very long.

 

Of course you are a volunteer (i think), so more of it is up to you to do a good job.

 

Bob, you have provided a lot of good services to this site and what i am hearing from you is very much not what I have come to expect from you... I guess Lex was right when he said I have no right to make such assumptions having only been here for a few months :::shrugs:::

 

That said, I do respect you, and you do post very good information.