Originally posted by maplestone

What exactly would you do with my real name if you had it?

oh baby.

I'll pee it on the walls in my room and then make sweet lo...(I don't know where the moderation line is so I'll stop here with this sentence). (...more graphic details...). And you'll never find out, know or care.

so nothing that'd matter I suppose.

huh. Well played, sir.

Originally posted by Quizzical

Why do people ever behave well, whether online or in real-life?  More often than we might like to think (though far from always), the answer is because we fear the consequences if we don't.  Would you steal if you knew absolutely for certain that you wouldn't be caught?  Maybe not at first, and maybe not ever, but it would sure be a lot more tempting if we saw other people commonly doing so and getting away with it.

Anonymity online greatly diminishes the harm that can come to us if we behave badly, which is why it provides a glimpse into how people are likely to behave if there were no consequences.  But attaching real names to what you say online isn't the solution; the flip side of a lack of consequences for behaving badly online is that we really can't do that much damage.  I'd sure rather have some idiot launch into a tirade against me on an online like this one and then have to block him than have someone come to my apartment and stab me.  Take away anonymity and the person inclined to cause trouble may be able to find where I live and do far more harm.  We can cite the occasional example of someone who committed suicide after being bullied online, but that's a drop in the bucket compared to over 10000 murders annually in the United States.

The problem is that if you are a jerk online, you likely never again have any contact with whoever you wronged.  He can't take revenge or meaningfully shun you.  That's still true if you attach your real name to your posts.  It's also true with meeting random strangers on the street in a large city, provided that you don't behave badly enough for the police to get involved; it's no coincidence that small towns where everyone knows everyone else tend to be friendlier than large cities with millions of people.

If you're in a small community online, and talk to the same people frequently, then you get a reputation for whatever you do (whether good or bad), and that can harm you if you behave badly.  That works out about the same whether you attach your real name or not.

I don't believe that political arguments are an example of bad online behavior leaking into the real world.  Between the rise of television news in the 1960s and the rise of conservative talk radio in the 1980s (which had previously been banned by the "Fairness Doctrine"), the American right wasn't able to get its message out very well, which allowed the left to pretend that they didn't exist.  This is perhaps an odd fluke of history, as all three major TV networks had a left of center political bias.  If political arguments are more heated today than they were 30 years ago, it's only a reversion to the norm throughout American history, and not a new phenomenon.  Outright slandering your political opponents goes all the way back to colonial times; indeed the US Constitution explicitly defines treason and soon added the First Amendment precisely in order to allow this sort of verbal roughhousing in our politics.

1. Trying to hide behind what is, at best, obscurity of your identity, is a poor solution for dealing with bullies and criminals.  Again, if we all need to sit around and worry that someone online may find out who we are and come stab us, then it's time for some real soul searching as to the nature of our society in general. 
2. I used political discussion as an example because I get involved in a lot of poltical debates.  People seem to have license to say whatever they want about those who disagree with their own ideology, and I have watched the nature of this discourse become worse and worse online.  I saw so much dehumanizing of the opposing political parties on Facebook, emails and so many other sources during this last election that it blew my mind.  I'm not talking about disagreeing vehemently on the issues here.  I'm referring to dehumanization. You know, the kind of things we learned the Nazi's did back in the day to justify their actions against "lessor" peoples. If you think that doesn't spill over into the real world, I'd like to know how you came to that conclusion.

I'm not necessarily a fan of using real names- but I have NO qualms with you having to stick with one name (presumably account name), so that you can't just make a new character with a new name and start all over again. If that is a possibility, it should be made extremely difficult.

The goal, here, is to make your reputation important- a perfect example can be found in the Minecraft community, where server owners share lists of people who grief or are assholes frequently, so as to ban them before they even start.

Originally posted by NorseGod

Originally posted by MindTrigger

Originally posted by NorseGod

Originally posted by steamtank

If words over the internet hurt you... don't use it.

 

Everyone has to be so PC all the time its no wonder people freak out and act up on the internet. Anonymity isnt the issue. The issue is the real worlds ever tightening stranglehold on the list of things that are acceptable.

 

We over medicate our kids for acting like kids. We expect 13 year olds to act like 35 year olds online.  We suspend students who draw zombies and trees on fire. We suspend kids for facebook comments. We suspend kids who to school for 8 hours and come home to 4 hours of homework nightly and dont manage to get it all done. We suspend kids for not saying the pledge. We suspend kids for talking about hunting or the shooting range.

 

Then there is work

 

You get fired for any slight against anyone not of your race/gender/sexual orientation real or imagined. You have to be so overly sensitive to everyones feelings you can't even think about work anymore.  Equal rights in the work place now means pander to every person not in the majority or risk lawsuit. Companies fire you for what you say on your own time on social media sites.

 

Any time you have to put real information on the internet the powers that be can and do use it to make your life harder. We are observed non stop from the second we leave the house to the second we get home to make sure we are politically correct in all things.

 

Why do people wonder that the internet is an escape mechanism to blow off steam. Sometimes blowing off steam is screaming pure vitrol.

 

People need SOMEWHERE that isnt a politically correct nursing center or they will eventually flip out.

That's the goal. They want to control everyone with fear and intimidation in order to force you to conform to their beliefs....or else.

You are aware of their intentions, so plan accordingly.

Who is this "they" you are talking about, because I'm only referring to your own peer group, community, society, etc.  This is nothing new, and this is how humans have worked together for millions of years.  Do you believe the internet should be a free for all?  Please explain.

"They" are the community that I don't belong to or care to. So yes, I know exactly what you were referring to. And I'm telling you that society is a collection of different communiies, make up of like-minded individuals.

Humans working together for millions of years is something new to me. You are simply wrong here.

Yes, the internet should be a free for all. Think of the internet as a society. Think of a website as a community. Think of a member as an individual. Don't go where you are not welcomed. Don't force your beliefs on others if you do. Stay among like-minded individuals.

I'm wrong about what?  Do you believe humans evolved as lone creatures?  That's not the anthropology I am aware of.  Perhaps I should have said hundreds of thousands of years instead?

Sorry to burst your bubble, but there are no such clear barriers on the internet. In fact, there isn't really even a clear barrier between the internet and real life anymore.  There's no way to fence everyone off from one another, and there never will be.  We have to work together, even on the internet. 

Originally posted by KaylettaJade

What if, instead of your real name, you had to be maplestone, everywhere on the internet, forever.

Including work, banking, family?   If so, wouldn't that make Maplestone my real name and my birth name just a relic,  like a maiden name?  But let's say you restrict it just to games and game websites, that no matter where I talk about games or what games I ever play, I will always be forced to go by the unique pseudonym "Maplestone".  Then, even in this restricted case, my original question still stands: what exactly are you intending to do with my name?

Originally posted by maplestone

Originally posted by MindTrigger

I never said your real name should be available to me or anyone else.

I'm having a very hard time reconcilling this statement with the title of this thread.

 

 

Then you didn't read my entire post.  All I'm saying (and maybe it wasn't clear enough), is that more and more people are using this false internet anonymity to hide behind so that they can be as disgusting as they want to other people.  I have no idea what the solution is.  The "real name" example came from me watching how Google is trying to push their users in this direction.

I do believe, however, that Google and other organizations have the right to require you to use your real name if they so choose.  On that same token, we have the right to not use their service and to find one with rules we prefer.

Also, I corrected the title to be more in line with my point.

Originally posted by MindTrigger

Originally posted by Quizzical 

I'm referring to dehumanization. You know, the kind of things we learned the Nazi's did back in the day to justify their actions against "lessor" peoples. If you think that doesn't spill over into the real world, I'd like to know how you came to that conclusion.

 

Wow, I did nazi see that one coming.

So, how is asking for our papers so you can identify people that are not like you to keep them in line any different?

How will this turn out any different than forcing lawful firearm owners to register their firearms, then posting their names and addresses to the public like that newspaper did in New York (the same newspaper that has to have armed guards at their office and homes now)?

Just tell us what you intend to do with this personal information.

Originally posted by NorseGod

Originally posted by MindTrigger

Originally posted by Quizzical  I'm referring to dehumanization. You know, the kind of things we learned the Nazi's did back in the day to justify their actions against "lessor" peoples. If you think that doesn't spill over into the real world, I'd like to know how you came to that conclusion.

 

Wow, I did nazi see that one coming.

So, how is asking for our papers so you can identify people that are not like you to keep them in line any different?

How will this turn out any different than forcing lawful firearm owners to register their firearms, then posting their names and addresses to the public like that newspaper did in New York (the same newspaper that has to have armed guards at their office and homes now)?

Just tell us what you intend to do with this personal information.

 

Taking me out of context... I'm referring to many things I saw online where people from one political party were reducing people from their opposing political party as sub-human.  If you know anything about propaganda, you will get my meaning.  Additionally, the discussion you quoted was about why I used the increasingly nasty tone of political discourse in the US as an example of how hateful internet discussions spill into our real world lives and affect the world.

You don't know me, so I'll just tell you.  I'm registered as an Independent non-partisan voter in the US, and I value my civil liberties.  I do like to have stimulating conversations about complex subjects though, and I tend to make an effort to understand opposing views.  In fact, I chose to be indy so I wouldn't have to follow a party line.

Originally posted by maplestone

Originally posted by KaylettaJade

What if, instead of your real name, you had to be maplestone, everywhere on the internet, forever.

Including work, banking, family?   If so, wouldn't that make Maplestone my real name and my birth name just a relic,  like a maiden name?  But let's say you restrict it just to games and game websites, that no matter where I talk about games or what games I ever play, I will always be forced to go by the unique pseudonym "Maplestone".  Then, even in this restricted case, my original question still stands: what exactly are you intending to do with my name?

 I wouldn't need to do anything with it. I would merely be able to recognize you across multiple forums, websites, games, etc. When you can't just adopt a new identity at the drop of a hat, your actions mean something to you.

For most people this doesn't matter and wouldn't affect them, but you take Anonymous Internet Troll #1 and make him keep his identity across all platforms where everyone knows what a jackass he is and he'll feel the sting when no community will even take him in or let him participate. When no one will talk to him, guild him, or even give him a chance to troll, he'll get the message. And then, not only will be be forced to own his words, he won't be able to just hide from it by deleting his account and making a new one.

People would be defined by their actions. Those actions wouldn't be deleteable or no longer apply with the click of a button; banning would mean something. Imagine it... a world where people actually have to take responsibility. Amazing!

Being upset over comments on the internet isn't a strong enough reason to lose anonymity.  Who gets to say what is acceptable or not?  Corporations?  Governments?  Special interest groups?  People are hooked too much on things like Twitter, Facebook and all that other social media hot garbage.  I think its better people use whatever aggressive thoughts and emotions they have and type them out rather than act them out.  As someone else asked, what exactly would you do if you knew my name and where I lived?  Phone me?  Phone my employers?  Come to my house?  The links below are reason enough to keep online activties anonymous.

http://wow.joystiq.com/2007/10/24/16-year-old-girl-stalked-from-wow-to-her-high-school/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/13/world-of-warcraft-stabbing-jordan-osborne_n_1671234.html

Originally posted by MindTrigger

Originally posted by NorseGod

Originally posted by MindTrigger

Originally posted by Quizzical  I'm referring to dehumanization. You know, the kind of things we learned the Nazi's did back in the day to justify their actions against "lessor" peoples. If you think that doesn't spill over into the real world, I'd like to know how you came to that conclusion.

 

Wow, I did nazi see that one coming.

So, how is asking for our papers so you can identify people that are not like you to keep them in line any different?

How will this turn out any different than forcing lawful firearm owners to register their firearms, then posting their names and addresses to the public like that newspaper did in New York (the same newspaper that has to have armed guards at their office and homes now)?

Just tell us what you intend to do with this personal information.

 

Taking me out of context... I'm referring to many things I saw online where people from one political party were reducing people from their opposing political party as sub-human.  If you know anything about propaganda, you will get my meaning.  Additionally, the discussion you quoted was about why I used the increasingly nasty tone of political discourse in the US as an example of how hateful internet discussions spill into our real world lives and affect the world.

You don't know me, so I'll just tell you.  I'm registered as an Independent non-partisan voter in the US, and I value my civil liberties.  I do like to have stimulating conversations about complex subjects though, and I tend to make an effort to understand opposing views.  In fact, I chose to be indy so I wouldn't have to follow a party line.

So, how is asking for our papers so you can identify people that are not like you to keep them in line any different?

How will this turn out any different than forcing lawful firearm owners to register their firearms, then posting their names and addresses to the public like that newspaper did in New York (the same newspaper that has to have armed guards at their office and homes now)?

Just tell us what you intend to do with this personal information.

The only thing that astounds me is that people get their knickers in a twist over some no mark they don't know being pissy to them on an internet forum.

"Oh noes, Bigdikx1337 just told me to die in a fire! Quick pass me the antidepressants!".

Originally posted by Ginaz

Being upset over comments on the internet isn't a strong enough reason to lose anonymity.  Who gets to say what is acceptable or not?  Corporations?  Governments?  Special interest groups?  People are hooked too much on things like Twitter, Facebook and all that other social media hot garbage.  I think its better people use whatever aggressive thoughts and emotions they have and type them out rather than act them out.  As someone else asked, what exactly would you do if you knew my name and where I lived?  Phone me?  Phone my employers?  Come to my house?  The links below are reason enough to keep online activties anonymous.

 

http://wow.joystiq.com/2007/10/24/16-year-old-girl-stalked-from-wow-to-her-high-school/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/13/world-of-warcraft-stabbing-jordan-osborne_n_1671234.html

You are the 4th person I think to bring this up, and I'm hoping you will respond to my reply.

Are you saying that having a false sense of anonymity online is more important than dealing with the bullies?  In theory, the bullies and attackers should be in the vast minority.  If this is the case, why wouldn't we address their actions as the problem rather than try to hide people from them?

Again, I'm not advocating people's real names are online as a catch all solution, but I'd like to hear more about your logic on this matter.

Originally posted by NorseGod

Originally posted by MindTrigger

Originally posted by NorseGod

Originally posted by MindTrigger

Originally posted by Quizzical  I'm referring to dehumanization. You know, the kind of things we learned the Nazi's did back in the day to justify their actions against "lessor" peoples. If you think that doesn't spill over into the real world, I'd like to know how you came to that conclusion.

 

Wow, I did nazi see that one coming.

So, how is asking for our papers so you can identify people that are not like you to keep them in line any different?

How will this turn out any different than forcing lawful firearm owners to register their firearms, then posting their names and addresses to the public like that newspaper did in New York (the same newspaper that has to have armed guards at their office and homes now)?

Just tell us what you intend to do with this personal information.

 

Taking me out of context... I'm referring to many things I saw online where people from one political party were reducing people from their opposing political party as sub-human.  If you know anything about propaganda, you will get my meaning.  Additionally, the discussion you quoted was about why I used the increasingly nasty tone of political discourse in the US as an example of how hateful internet discussions spill into our real world lives and affect the world.

You don't know me, so I'll just tell you.  I'm registered as an Independent non-partisan voter in the US, and I value my civil liberties.  I do like to have stimulating conversations about complex subjects though, and I tend to make an effort to understand opposing views.  In fact, I chose to be indy so I wouldn't have to follow a party line.

So, how is asking for our papers so you can identify people that are not like you to keep them in line any different?

How will this turn out any different than forcing lawful firearm owners to register their firearms, then posting their names and addresses to the public like that newspaper did in New York (the same newspaper that has to have armed guards at their office and homes now)?

Just tell us what you intend to do with this personal information.

I'm not going to address any more of your posts because you aren't reading what I am writing.  I never asked for anyone's papers, nor did I specifically advocate anyone puts their names online.  In fact in no less than ten posts on this thread I have said that I used real names as an example of how Google is dealing with the issue.  Why don't you write a strongly worded letter to Google and ask them that question?

OP, awesome write up.

This subject is incredibly complex.  Beyond affecting entire nations or just the world, this subject has deep philisophical, ethical and economic factors to consider.  The lay couldnt begin to grasp all the considerations you would have to take in order to form a worthwhile opinion.

This leads me to ask one question, why did you take the time and effort to make this contribution to THIS SITE?  I wish there were more people like you who contributed posts of this quality more often, but look at the responses.  Beyond the fact that, at most, 20% of responders completely read your OP and attached article, but it is clear they could even come close to grasping such a subject. 

This is why we cant have nice things people.  We have someone who makes an effort to contribute in a real way, and it is shit over with trolling and a 3rd grade level of reading comprehension.

----------------------------

To actually respond to your OP, I dont think I know enough to really offer an opinion.  I did, however, read anarticle some time ago that basically stated anonimity might not last because of needed security upgrades.  They spoke specifically of the death of the password and that possible replacements would be biometrics.  The article was more of a warning against measure to collect more info on those who surf the internet, though a common theme seemed to be that you would no longer be anonymous.

EDIT:  I guess I could be a little more civil on these boards.  I will make the effort to do so.

Originally posted by Maephisto

OP, awesome write up.

This subject is incredibly complex.  Beyond affecting entire nations or just the world, this subject has deep philisophical, ethical and economic factors to consider.  The lay couldnt begin to grasp all the considerations you would have to take in order to form a worthwhile opinion.

This leads me to ask one question, why did you take the time and effort to make this contribution to THIS SITE?  I wish there were more people like you who contributed posts of this quality more often, but look at the responses.  Beyond the fact that, at most, 20% of responders completely read your OP and attached article, but it is clear they could even come close to grasping such a subject. 

This is why we cant have nice things people.  We have someone who makes an effort to contribute in a real way, and it is shit over with trolling and a 3rd grade level of reading comprehension.

----------------------------

To actually respond to your OP, I dont think I know enough to really offer an opinion.  I did, however, read anarticle some time ago that basically stated anonimity might not last because of needed security upgrades.  They spoke specifically of the death of the password and that possible replacements would be biometrics.  The article was more of a warning against measure to collect more info on those who surf the internet, though a common theme seemed to be that you would no longer be anonymous.

EDIT:  I guess I could be a little more civil on these boards.  I will make the effort to do so.

Thanks for your reply and your kind words.  I've been reading about the death of the password as well.  I know some of the big online companies are doing research into biometrics as well as haardware type devices.  Passwords aren't going to cut it in the future, and longer pass-phrases won't work because of the difficulty with typing on moble devices.

I know it was risky to post this here, but the subject of the degrading nature of the MMORPG.com community has been hot lately.  The main thing I wanted to point out, I suppose, is that this is a larger societal problem, not just one here on this site.  It is an extremely complex subject, and one that works in layers of society ranging from the individual all the way up to the global community moving forward.

We will have no choice but to face these and many other important issues as technology becomes more ubiquitous.  As I said in another post here, even the lines between internet and "real world" are quickly fading.

Originally posted by FARGIN_WAR
There are already ample tools to avoid bullies and misanthropes on the internet. If you are not using these tools then you are part of the problem. Asking for a blanket penalty where the majority is punished due to the bad behavior of a minority, is a child's view of morality.

Interesting.  Please list some of these tools, preferebly in order of their estimated effectiveness if you can. 

By the way, love your name and the images in your sig.  That movie always cracked me up, particularly that character...haha.