End internet anonymity

[Forsher]

Having witnessed people trolling just as hard on facebook, where their real name is right there, I don't think that anonymity is the cause of trolling.

They are, effectively, anonymous.

Sure, you know, probably, their real names and what they look like, but unless you know them, it's basically the same as some random builder shouting stuff at you from the third floor of a construction site. In this sense, then, it's probably distance that enables trolling or, perhaps, it's proximity that makes people behave respectfully to each other.

As another counter example, compare and contrast long-term users of usernames/handles... they've built something up in a particular "brand" and by behaving in a way that isn't in line with the brand image they would destroy the brand's equity. This is a way of interacting with other users of the internet which simulates proximity rather than yelling at people down on the street.

[Imperializt Russia]

Having witnessed people trolling just as hard on facebook, where their real name is right there, I don't think that anonymity is the cause of trolling.

They are, effectively, anonymous.

Sure, you know, probably, their real names and what they look like, but unless you know them, it's basically the same as some random builder shouting stuff at you from the third floor of a construction site. In this sense, then, it's probably distance that enables trolling or, perhaps, it's proximity that makes people behave respectfully to each other.

People have lost jobs over Facebook comments.

I still have lying around somewhere in my dropbox a series of screengrabs I wanted to dunk someone into hot water with their company in, over the Lee Rigby murders.

[Alvecia]

They are, effectively, anonymous.

Sure, you know, probably, their real names and what they look like, but unless you know them, it's basically the same as some random builder shouting stuff at you from the third floor of a construction site. In this sense, then, it's probably distance that enables trolling or, perhaps, it's proximity that makes people behave respectfully to each other.

People have lost jobs over Facebook comments.

I still have lying around somewhere in my dropbox a series of screengrabs I wanted to dunk someone into hot water with their company in, over the Lee Rigby murders.

That's probably more people not realizing that their personal life and working life can overlap.

[Imperializt Russia]

People have lost jobs over Facebook comments.

I still have lying around somewhere in my dropbox a series of screengrabs I wanted to dunk someone into hot water with their company in, over the Lee Rigby murders.

That's probably more people not realizing that their personal life and working life can overlap.

Well no, it's almost universally someone going back in time and dredging old posts to wave at their employer, or in the case of public office, the public.

[Dakini]

Having witnessed people trolling just as hard on facebook, where their real name is right there, I don't think that anonymity is the cause of trolling.

They are, effectively, anonymous.

Sure, you know, probably, their real names and what they look like, but unless you know them, it's basically the same as some random builder shouting stuff at you from the third floor of a construction site. In this sense, then, it's probably distance that enables trolling or, perhaps, it's proximity that makes people behave respectfully to each other.

As another counter example, compare and contrast long-term users of usernames/handles... they've built something up in a particular "brand" and by behaving in a way that isn't in line with the brand image they would destroy the brand's equity. This is a way of interacting with other users of the internet which simulates proximity rather than yelling at people down on the street.

I think it's just that people act differently when they're talking to a person than when they exchange text combined with the ease of responding immediately. It's too easy to forget that there's a person on the other side of the computer screen.

[Imperializt Russia]

They are, effectively, anonymous.

Sure, you know, probably, their real names and what they look like, but unless you know them, it's basically the same as some random builder shouting stuff at you from the third floor of a construction site. In this sense, then, it's probably distance that enables trolling or, perhaps, it's proximity that makes people behave respectfully to each other.

As another counter example, compare and contrast long-term users of usernames/handles... they've built something up in a particular "brand" and by behaving in a way that isn't in line with the brand image they would destroy the brand's equity. This is a way of interacting with other users of the internet which simulates proximity rather than yelling at people down on the street.

I think it's just that people act differently when they're talking to a person than when they exchange text combined with the ease of responding immediately. It's too easy to forget that there's a person on the other side of the computer screen.

Yeah. Arguing with a unicorn or a satanic symbol or a political cartoon, I just assume that's what I'm talking to and not the voices in my head.

[The Alma Mater]

I think it's just that people act differently when they're talking to a person than when they exchange text combined with the ease of responding immediately. It's too easy to forget that there's a person on the other side of the computer screen.

Yeah. Arguing with a unicorn or a satanic symbol or a political cartoon, I just assume that's what I'm talking to and not the voices in my head.

So.. does that mean you treat people with a photograph as avatar differently on the forums ?

[Imperializt Russia]

Yeah. Arguing with a unicorn or a satanic symbol or a political cartoon, I just assume that's what I'm talking to and not the voices in my head.

So.. does that mean you treat people with a photograph as avatar differently on the forums ?

I hoped it was clear I was being sarcastic.

I scan over the avatar to see if I recognise it. I rarely look at the names, except in quote trees. If I recognise the avatar, I tend to think about what I'll say more. Not because I may like that person, but because knowing that person's opinions, humour and background, it can influence what I'll write. I can wheedle out a shared joke, prod for experience or clarify a question.

Obviously, when someone changes an avatar, I'm usually pretty fucked until I realise.

If I flat-out don't recognise an avatar, or don't know a poster, I'll just unload, if appropriate.
I know that a person is on the other end, partly due to the principle of "do unto others" (which I'm still pretty bad at), and partly because forgetting that would lengthen my already-lengthy moderation history.

[Uxupox]

You've all seen how some people behave -- trolling, personal insults etc.

What if we ended internet anonymity by requiring each internet customer to have a special ID number sent to everywhere you visit with your name and address?

That way, if you go to a website, you would have to prove your RL identity and have it displayed online. It might cut down on such activities.

Or perhaps a law requiring internet companies to disclose the real life identities of those who abuse their internet access.

Nah how can I be bigoted and hateful online if I don't get to keep my anonymity.

[Washington Resistance Army]

You've all seen how some people behave -- trolling, personal insults etc.

What if we ended internet anonymity by requiring each internet customer to have a special ID number sent to everywhere you visit with your name and address?

That way, if you go to a website, you would have to prove your RL identity and have it displayed online. It might cut down on such activities.

Or perhaps a law requiring internet companies to disclose the real life identities of those who abuse their internet access.

Nah how can I be bigoted and hateful online if I don't get to keep my anonymity.

Wear one of those funny KKK hats, nobody will know who you are.

[Uxupox]

Nah how can I be bigoted and hateful online if I don't get to keep my anonymity.

Wear one of those funny KKK hats, nobody will know who you are.

I'd be weird if I wore one of those with my skin color. Probably get called uncle Ruckus or something.

[Minoa]

Understandably tempting due to the trolling controversies, but it could end badly due to identity theft and press freedom concerns.

[Salandriagado]

Having witnessed people trolling just as hard on facebook, where their real name is right there, I don't think that anonymity is the cause of trolling.

They are, effectively, anonymous.

Sure, you know, probably, their real names and what they look like, but unless you know them, it's basically the same as some random builder shouting stuff at you from the third floor of a construction site. In this sense, then, it's probably distance that enables trolling or, perhaps, it's proximity that makes people behave respectfully to each other.

As another counter example, compare and contrast long-term users of usernames/handles... they've built something up in a particular "brand" and by behaving in a way that isn't in line with the brand image they would destroy the brand's equity. This is a way of interacting with other users of the internet which simulates proximity rather than yelling at people down on the street.

Almost everybody's facebook profiles contain enough public information to track down their home address.

[The Isles of Lux]

Why would you want to silence trolls? Do you have no concept of freedom of expression? All of you people go on about how it would be nice because you want to shut up the trolls and racists and whatever, while saying that the problems would be "loss of personal freedom" and identity theft. It makes me wonder how many people in this thread have a grasp of what freedom of speech actually is.

[Esternial]

They are, effectively, anonymous.

Sure, you know, probably, their real names and what they look like, but unless you know them, it's basically the same as some random builder shouting stuff at you from the third floor of a construction site. In this sense, then, it's probably distance that enables trolling or, perhaps, it's proximity that makes people behave respectfully to each other.

People have lost jobs over Facebook comments.

I still have lying around somewhere in my dropbox a series of screengrabs I wanted to dunk someone into hot water with their company in, over the Lee Rigby murders.

It's becoming standard practise to take a look at people's Facebook during the evaluation procedure.

A friend of mine got hired because he had a bunch of silly pictures and they thought he "looked like an amicable person".

[Esternial]

Why would you want to silence trolls? Do you have no concept of freedom of expression? All of you people go on about how it would be nice because you want to shut up the trolls and racists and whatever, while saying that the problems would be "loss of personal freedom" and identity theft. It makes me wonder how many people in this thread have a grasp of what freedom of speech actually is.

"muh freedoms" is possibly the least compelling argument. You'd still be free to express whatever the hell you want, but you just wouldn't be able to do so anonymously. We're talking about whether or not you have a right to anonymity, not whether or not you have a right to freedom of expression.

The most compelling argument, in my opinion, is the fact that there are people that need anonymity. Like people that would be prosecuted or sentenced by their government if their names were tied to some of the things they say online.

Imagine if Erdogan got the names of all the Turks that are talking shit about him on the internet, to name just one thing.

[Sanctissima]

Why would you want to silence trolls? Do you have no concept of freedom of expression? All of you people go on about how it would be nice because you want to shut up the trolls and racists and whatever, while saying that the problems would be "loss of personal freedom" and identity theft. It makes me wonder how many people in this thread have a grasp of what freedom of speech actually is.

"muh freedoms" is possibly the least compelling argument. You'd still be free to express whatever the hell you want, but you just wouldn't be able to do so anonymously. We're talking about whether or not you have a right to anonymity, not whether or not you have a right to freedom of expression.

The most compelling argument, in my opinion, is the fact that there are people that need anonymity. Like people that would be prosecuted or sentenced by their government if their names were tied to some of the things they say online.

Imagine if Erdogan got the names of all the Turks that are talking shit about him on the internet, to name just one thing.

Frankly, if anyone online stirs up too much trouble and a government wants them taken down, it can be done. It's actually not that hard to find out their identity. All it takes is time and effort.

As a matter of fact, Assad has been doing it for quite some time throughout the civil war. If I recall, he has a kind of vigilante hacker group called the Syrian Electronic Army doing most of his online dirty work, and their track record for finding Syrians posting anti-government stuff online is pretty good. I imagine Erdogan could do the same, if he felt like it.

The real question though, is general anonymity. Whether you really want your name showing up on sites of a more anonymous flavour and what right you have to keeping your identity hidden. My opinion is that a person does have that right, and that it's unreasonable to ask internet providers or even websites to reveal their users' identities. If governments want to find out who's posting what, they're more than capable of doing so behind closed doors.

[Esternial]

"muh freedoms" is possibly the least compelling argument. You'd still be free to express whatever the hell you want, but you just wouldn't be able to do so anonymously. We're talking about whether or not you have a right to anonymity, not whether or not you have a right to freedom of expression.

The most compelling argument, in my opinion, is the fact that there are people that need anonymity. Like people that would be prosecuted or sentenced by their government if their names were tied to some of the things they say online.

Imagine if Erdogan got the names of all the Turks that are talking shit about him on the internet, to name just one thing.

Frankly, if anyone online stirs up too much trouble and a government wants them taken down, it can be done. It's actually not that hard to find out their identity. All it takes is time and effort.

As a matter of fact, Assad has been doing it for quite some time throughout the civil war. If I recall, he has a kind of vigilante hacker group called the Syrian Electronic Army doing most of his online dirty work, and their track record for finding Syrians posting anti-government stuff online is pretty good. I imagine Erdogan could do the same, if he felt like it.

The real question though, is general anonymity. Whether you really want your name showing up on sites of a more anonymous flavour and what right you have to keeping your identity hidden. My opinion is that a person does have that right, and that it's unreasonable to ask internet providers or even websites to reveal their users' identities. If governments want to find out who's posting what, they're more than capable of doing so behind closed doors.

I completely agree *nod*

[Siburria]

You've all seen how some people behave -- trolling, personal insults etc.

What if we ended internet anonymity by requiring each internet customer to have a special ID number sent to everywhere you visit with your name and address?

That way, if you go to a website, you would have to prove your RL identity and have it displayed online. It might cut down on such activities.

Or perhaps a law requiring internet companies to disclose the real life identities of those who abuse their internet access.

I do not support cutting freedom worldwide to promote better behavior.

[The Isles of Lux]

Why would you want to silence trolls? Do you have no concept of freedom of expression? All of you people go on about how it would be nice because you want to shut up the trolls and racists and whatever, while saying that the problems would be "loss of personal freedom" and identity theft. It makes me wonder how many people in this thread have a grasp of what freedom of speech actually is.

"muh freedoms" is possibly the least compelling argument. You'd still be free to express whatever the hell you want, but you just wouldn't be able to do so anonymously. We're talking about whether or not you have a right to anonymity, not whether or not you have a right to freedom of expression.

The most compelling argument, in my opinion, is the fact that there are people that need anonymity. Like people that would be prosecuted or sentenced by their government if their names were tied to some of the things they say online.

Imagine if Erdogan got the names of all the Turks that are talking shit about him on the internet, to name just one thing.

One of the main reasons that the Internet allows for such use of (and abuse of) freedom of speech is the factor of anonymity it has. If not for that same anonymity then people would not be able to say "whatever the hell they want", because there will of course be real world repercussions from everyone knowing exactly who said what.

[Imperializt Russia]

Why would you want to silence trolls? Do you have no concept of freedom of expression? All of you people go on about how it would be nice because you want to shut up the trolls and racists and whatever, while saying that the problems would be "loss of personal freedom" and identity theft. It makes me wonder how many people in this thread have a grasp of what freedom of speech actually is.

"muh freedoms" is possibly the least compelling argument. You'd still be free to express whatever the hell you want, but you just wouldn't be able to do so anonymously. We're talking about whether or not you have a right to anonymity, not whether or not you have a right to freedom of expression.

The most compelling argument, in my opinion, is the fact that there are people that need anonymity. Like people that would be prosecuted or sentenced by their government if their names were tied to some of the things they say online.

Imagine if Erdogan got the names of all the Turks that are talking shit about him on the internet, to name just one thing.

I thought he already did that.

[Republika Drpska]

Internet anonymity is great.

[Internationalist Bastard]

Anonymity is very important to expressing yourself. Hell I was terrified of revealing anything about myself when I first joined this site. It lets people express themselves without fear of physical persecution.

[The Isles of Lux]

Anonymity is very important to expressing yourself. Hell I was terrified of revealing anything about myself when I first joined this site. It lets people express themselves without fear of physical persecution.

Exactly. It is one of the main things driving the mass expression of information and exchange of ideas in this era. It has basically become a benchmark of 21st century freedom of speech rights, and taking it away from everyone because you're annoyed with some people feeling empowered enough by it to be jackasses isn't a good idea.

[Esternial]

"muh freedoms" is possibly the least compelling argument. You'd still be free to express whatever the hell you want, but you just wouldn't be able to do so anonymously. We're talking about whether or not you have a right to anonymity, not whether or not you have a right to freedom of expression.

The most compelling argument, in my opinion, is the fact that there are people that need anonymity. Like people that would be prosecuted or sentenced by their government if their names were tied to some of the things they say online.

Imagine if Erdogan got the names of all the Turks that are talking shit about him on the internet, to name just one thing.

One of the main reasons that the Internet allows for such use of (and abuse of) freedom of speech is the factor of anonymity it has. If not for that same anonymity then people would not be able to say "whatever the hell they want", because there will of course be real world repercussions from everyone knowing exactly who said what.

Sure, but having anonymity isn't intrinsic to your freedom of expression. If you're too afraid to speak your mind when people know who's speaking it, that's your prerogative. You're always free to speak it, and if people punish you for it that would be impeding your freedom of expression.

Taking away anonymity would not. It's not something you have a legal right to (or maybe there is some right to anonymity, I dunno), but something people should have nonetheless, because there will be people that'll try to punish people for expressing themselves, like Erdoganj.