PseudoAnonymous

Yes it's my creation.  Title: House of Cards.  Now go away copyright police.

As promised in my last review, here is a partial list of some sites that advocate for the right to use pseudonyms on the web and some reasons why folks choose to do so.  Read 'em and get an edumacation if you are one of those who have a knee-jerk reaction such as, "We'll all be kinder, gentler people if we use our real names on the Net" or "Why would anyone want to be pseudoanonymous?  They must be bad, trolls, criminals, or have something to hide.  If you are already in the know, you can read them anyways or skip on to other stuff.

sapphoq reviews continues in a heated vein: And I will say it again.  Deciding that people have to use their wallet names or the average-looking name that others "call you" on G+ or any other site is in my opinion, FAILBOAT.  Regardless of the intentions of any service, there are activists whose lives are in danger because of censorship.  Some of those activists may be using G+ as the platform that is still currently available in their country or via a proxy.  Although there are many activists and other seriously oppressed people on Twitter, not everyone has the ability or inclination to par their message down to 140 words.  When it comes to human rights violations, the idea is to get the message out to as broad an audience as possible.

I believe in my heart of hearts that all this hoopla over using our wallet names is so that Google's advertiser base can find us easier.


http://my.nameis.me/

http://techcrunch.com/2011/07/24/google-plus-has-a-problem-fear-not-i-have-a-solution/

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/07/case-pseudonyms

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/12/2011-review-nymwars

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/01/google-pseudonyms-step-right-direction-not-end-road

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/01/right-anonymity-matter-privacy

http://infotrope.net/2011/07/25/preliminary-results-of-my-survey-of-suspended-google-accounts/

http://liv.dreamwidth.org/354658.html

http://elf.dreamwidth.org/435804.html

http://geekfeminism.org/2011/07/08/anti-pseudonym-bingo/

http://metaverse.acidzen.org/2008/pseudonymity

http://metaverse.acidzen.org/2008/pseudonymity-internet

http://www.physorg.com/news66401288.html

http://disabledfeminists.com/2010/04/14/on-refusing-to-tell-you-my-name/

http://www.historiann.com/2009/07/31/an-object-lesson-in-pseudonymity-and-internet-privacy/

http://www.zdnet.com.au/googles-real-names-a-real-disaster-339321277.htm

https://disqus.com/research/pseudonyms/

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/08/randi-zuckerberg-runs-wrong-direction-pseudonymity

http://my.nameis.me/348/hisham-almiraat/

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/punctuated-equilibrium/2011/jul/25/1

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dawn-teo/famed-anonymous-anti-pali_b_180313.html

http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/49962/exposing-irresponsible-anonymous-blogger/ed-whelan

http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2009/06/stay-classy-ed-whelan.html

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2009-08-19/news/17933742_1_liskula-cohen-blogger-google

http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/projects/guide/

http://www.talesfromthe.net/jon/?p=2918%23comment-179952

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2388640,00.asp

http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000880.html

http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Who_is_harmed_by_a_%22Real_Names%22_policy%3F

http://cityofnidus.blogspot.com/2011/07/google-and-future-of-avatar-identity.html

http://coffeeandink.livejournal.com/901816.html

http://kateharding.net/2007/04/14/on-being-a-no-name-blogger-using-her-real-name/

http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2011/08/04/real-names.html

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2388626,00.asp

http://gomiso.blogspot.com/2011/07/g-and-beyond-whats-your-target.html

http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/2011/07/11/follow-up-google-confirms-real-names-a-requirement-for-profilesplus-mostly/

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20059247-17.html

Google Takes at Least One Step Backwards with the New Google Plus

I've been trying out Google Plus [commonly referred to as Google+ or G+] and it's okay.  I like the circles, how everyone's +1's show up as one feed so I don't have to go site-hopping in order to comment, and the photo albums.

I don't like and I seriously object to the idea that we are supposed to use our given legal names in order to use Google + .  There is no anonymity on the internet anyways.  That I know.  Why I find Google +'s policy on this to be pigheaded [in my opinion] is for several reasons.

(1).  Google has a ton of personal information on us, its' users.  Any information we provide is theirs for as long as they exist.
(2).  There is no allowance for the use of a pen name.  Folks who operate on the internet under an alias for
whatever reason-- folks who have been stalked, folks who are hiding from abusive partners or family members, folks who don't want an ex-boyfriend to find them, folks who are writers (as I am), folks who are members of Anonymous and who need to network in that fashion) can be kicked off of Google Plus.  Anyone whose name is not believable to the Google employee or committee who goes through "the name people used to sign up list" also risks being kicked off of Google Plus and will have to prove their identity in order to be reinstated.  Google + is not a service that we pay for with money (yet?) or credit card (yet?) which is the only reason why I can understand the demand for a legal name.
(3).  If Google has decided this on the basis of "a kinder gentler internet" or some such rubbish that folks who use their real names will somehow not be (gasp) cyberbullies-- that's just stupid.  If Google has decided this on the basis of their marketing needs, desire to sell our names to mailing lists (hey, the V.A. does it) then we should have the option to opt out.
(4).  If someone is looking for my legal name, I want them to have to think about it first for at least a minute.

So Google Plus, you fail.
so saith sapphoq reviews books and more