Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Any thoughts on the whole situation with Facebooks recent increase in enforcing their 'real name' policy?
I'll try to find an article to post... or maybe just cut past text from one... so far stuff I'm finding isn't too family friendly...
Personally I am angry with Facebook. Some people need the pseudonyms. They've genuinely built whole lives/livelihoods out of them. Some people need the pseudonyms to LITERALLY survive. I'm not just talking about making money to live but I'm talking about avoiding harm to live.
There is an argument that social media is free, whatever rules Facebook wants to enforce, its their right. I don't think it really is free though when you consider that they collect data from you; 'currency' isn't always dollars and cents.
Really, my eloquence with words is soooo lacking... I'll try to find a article/piece on it... maybe they can explain things better than I can (haha actually 'definitely' not 'maybe'). I did have an article the other day to share but when I looked for it today... POOF... gone...
Don't like it? Don't use facebook. It's a private business, not some kind of mandatory government thing.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
Peregrine wrote: Don't like it? Don't use facebook. It's a private business, not some kind of mandatory government thing.
I can kind of see that... and maybe years and years ago when it was first starting out that could be plausible. I don't really know if that's an 'out' considering how meshed in it is with a lot of things. Also its been a helpful networking tool for certain entities. To have the rug pulled out from under them kind of sucks.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: What I'd like to know is...how the hell can they enforce a "non anonymous pseudonyms" rule?? Do they demand proof of ID when a person signs up?
Actually what's been happening recently is that some parties have had their facebook profiles locked due to pseudonyms being used. and in conjunction Facebook is asking they provide Government issued identification.
EDIT: Personally I don't recall having to come up with something like my Social Security ID, lets say, to open my profile. Email and name were enough. I'm not sure if its because it wasn't in place to do so when I was joining, or maybe its something that they just weren't as strict about upholding.
EDIT: Here's an article that might be okay to post here (I'll try to work on getting a 'quote' of what the article says, in the meantime here is the link):
What happens when a culture interweaves a social media outlet into virtually every part of the human experience -- and then that platform makes a dramatic change? That's one of the questions on many people's minds with what is being referred to as a "name change" policy on social media giant Facebook.
Several days ago, a large percentage of individuals operating personal profiles on Facebook under pseudonyms, stage names, or any name not matching their legal name received this message when logging onto their Facebook accounts:
While this policy implementation, which is reportedly not new but seems to have been rarely enforced before now, is affecting a wide-range of people (both queer and not), a specific portion of the lesbian, gay, biseuxal and transgender (LGBT) community are facing an entirely new set of challenges as a result: performers, entertainers and drag queens. With this policy in effect, it is virtually impossible to find an entertainer -- or anyone who self-identifies with a name that isn't legally documented -- on Facebook unless that individual operates a separate fan page.
"The focus of my work is activism and charity," prominent Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence member Sister Roma told The Huffington Post. "I share photos and promote my events, but mostly I use my personal profile page to to raise awareness about civil rights issues, especially as they pertain to the LGBT community... I do this work as Sister Roma and that is how the Facebook community knows me and who they look for to get news about these issues and events. If you ask anyone what my name is, in or out of drag, they will tell you it's Roma. No one knows Michael Williams."
Sister Roma is currently working with openly gay San Francisco politician David Campos to organize a face-to-face meeting with Facebook. In the meantime, Roma has scheduled a protest called #MyNameIs at the Facebook headquarters in San Francisco on Tuesday, Sept. 15 at 11 a.m.
"If people want to use an alternative name on Facebook, they have several different options available to them, including providing an alias under their name on their profile, or creating a Page specifically for that alternative persona," a representative of Facebook told The Huffington Post. "As part of our overall standards, we ask that people who use Facebook provide their real name on their profile.”
However, queer performers aren't the only individuals affected by the Facebook "name change" policy. New York drag performer and artist Untitled Queen, who was forced to change her name this week, told The Huffington Post, "I feel this is a larger security issue for transgender people who are often unable to secure legal proof of their name changes, as well as those that need protection from stalkers or other aggressors." Campos echoed this statement on his Facebook, claiming "...the ability to self-identify is a matter of health and safety. Not allowing drag performers, transgender people and other members of our community to go by their chosen names can result in violence, stalking, violations of privacy and repercussions at work."
Additionally, other individuals operating under pseudonyms, like writer James St. James, are also faced with finding a way to navigate this unique set of challenges. "I’m a writer. James St James is the name I am known by," St. James told The Huffington Post. "I’ve spent the past thirty years building that name as a brand, and they took that away from me just like that?... It’s remarkably tone deaf, especially coming from a company that just recently gave us 58 gender options."
With the majority of this forced "name change" occurring over the past week, the end result remains unclear. However, Sister Roma seems hopeful that those affected will be able to achieve a positive outcome.
"I don't think Facebook hates drag queens or is targeting gay people," Sister Roma continued. "I hope that we can meet with Facebook for an open dialogue with the community this affects directly. I'm hopeful this policy will be revisited and a compromise will be found."
Automatically Appended Next Post: There was a meeting Wednesday but I can't seem to find what exactly were the results/takeaways from the meeting... I'm thinking not good because some of the people I follow on twitter have expressed things along the lines that they are unhappy with how the meeting turned out... but I couldn't find any specifics yet. If I get something I'll update this thread or something.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2014/09/18 20:57:39
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: What I'd like to know is...how the hell can they enforce a "non anonymous pseudonyms" rule?? Do they demand proof of ID when a person signs up?
Yeah, if you say your real name is Dim Scrubadubdub, than how could Facebook know it is otherwise?
I heard about this issue on the radio yesterday. The argument that revealing real names could endanger members of the LGBTQ community is compelling considering the violence members of that community continue to face daily. One thought I had while listening to the radio program was Facebook moving those personal profiles to fan pages instead, since profiles are typically used by individuals and pages are typically used by businesses/organizations. Seems it would be the best solution within Facebook's current system.
More likely, Facebook will devise a way to charge for anonymity through "premium" profiles that allow users to use whatever moniker they desire.
Facebook employees at the firm’s Menlo Park headquarters may look out their windows Tuesday and see people in drag protesting.
The issue: Facebook’s apparent crackdown enforcing its policy requiring people to use their real names.
Unlike Twitter and services like Snapchat, Facebook requires users to use their real names, arguing that people should be who they are on the site for safety reasons. But some have been using a pseudonym anyway.
According to Sister Roma, a drag queen who is part of the performing and activist group, the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, Facebook has been cracking down on violators. Last week, the service automatically logged her out of her account, which she has used since 2008.
She told the Daily Dot she “was instructed to log in and forced to change the name on my profile to my ‘legal name, like the one that appears on your drivers’ license or credit card.’ ”
Worried her account would be suspended, Sister Roma changed her name to her legal name, Michael Williams on her Facebook page. She took to Twitter using the hashtag #MyNameIsRoma.
Sister Roma isn’t alone in her complaint.
Over the years, victims of sexual abuse, activists and others have raised concerns. A Change.org petition with more than 12,000 signatures accuses Facebook of forcing performers to use their real names and demands that the policy be changed.
Facebook told The Guardian:
If people want to use an alternative name on Facebook, they have several different options available to them, including providing an alias under their name on their profile, or creating a page specifically for that alternative persona…As part of our overall standards, we ask that people who use Facebook provide their real name on their profile.
That isn’t sitting well with Sister Roma and others.
Facebook has a financial incentive for its real name policy, the Wall Street Journal reports. It needs “detailed, accurate information about its users.” About 11 percent of Facebook user accounts are misclassified, alternate identities or fake, the Journal says.
On the protest’s’ Facebook page, supporters are called to show up in drag, (Even if it’s your first time!) and catch buses from San Francisco to Facebook’s Menlo Park headquarters.
Some suggested drag characters include “Tech Executive Realness, Social Media Starlet.”
Facebook has always been based on identity. Unlike other social networks, which let you pick pseudonyms and have varying degrees of anonymity, Facebook holds you accountable to reality. You are your name. It’s how people find you. But now the network’s commitment to real names is being tested—and not just by popular anonymous apps.
Facebook recently began cracking down on well-known San Francisco drag queens who use their performer names on the network instead of their birth names, going so far as to delete profiles, which has caused widespread outrage in the city’s LBGTQ community. Facebook reps met with some of the affected drag queens and city Supervisor David Campos Wednesday night, but it doesn’t look like the network will be changing its policy any time soon.
That’s unfortunate. It isn’t just drag queens who eschew their birth names on the network. There are plenty of reasons you might want to use a different moniker or a variation on your given name. What if you have a stalker or a crazy ex? What if you’re trying to escape an abusive situation? What if you don’t want prospective employers evaluating your Facebook instead of your job application? Sure, you could lock down your account’s privacy settings, but now that you can no longer hide your account from Facebook’s search, people can still find you, message you, and send you friend requests.
For drag queens and transgendered Facebook users, names aren’t about hiding; they’re expressions of identity. Regardless of why you choose a name other than the one you were assigned at birth, you shouldn’t have to provide legal documentation to Facebook to use that name. The network earlier this year announced more gender options after meeting with LGBTQ advocacy groups and figuring out that the male-female binary was excluding many of its users. That policy doesn’t extend to names, apparently.
The network’s solution for drag performers is to create separate fan pages or use their drag names as aliases. But that’s not good enough. I know plenty of people who use made-up names to avoid being found in search, but they’re not drag queens so Facebook doesn’t bother them. A Facebook rep told TechCrunch that an algorithm had found the drag queens, causing the mass crackdown, but a user on Secret is taking credit for reporting users, making the situation seem even nastier.
Facebook has restored the deleted profiles, but is requiring all drag queens to start using their real names within the next two weeks. There’s also some talk of another meeting, perhaps with people who have more power at Facebook, but it doesn’t look like the network plans to change its policy. Drag queens are now waging a social media campaign against Facebook using the hashtag #MyNameIs.
If Facebook is examining anonymity in response to popular apps usurping its place in the phones of teens, the least it can do is look at its real names policy and see how it can make the network more inclusive. Your identity is more than your birth name.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: What I'd like to know is...how the hell can they enforce a "non anonymous pseudonyms" rule?? Do they demand proof of ID when a person signs up?
If they feel like your name is a pseudonym they can lock your account until they're satisfied that it isn't. Most likely this would be enforced when someone reports a person for using a pseudonym, though they might try to add a filter on signup to catch obvious "not a name" words.
djphranq wrote: I don't really know if that's an 'out' considering how meshed in it is with a lot of things.
Facebook isn't "meshed in" with anything vital. It's a silly time-wasting option that has some value in doing a bare minimum of keeping up with distant acquaintances, but it isn't an essential service that would cause true hardship if it disappeared.
To have the rug pulled out from under them kind of sucks.
Of course it does, and I'm not denying that facebook is probably going to have some unhappy customers to deal with or that this change might cost them users. But it's ridiculous to present this as some kind of "right" to use a pseudonym. It's just another potentially stupid business decision.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
djphranq wrote: There was a meeting Wednesday but I can't seem to find what exactly were the results/takeaways from the meeting... I'm thinking not good because some of the people I follow on twitter have expressed things along the lines that they are unhappy with how the meeting turned out... but I couldn't find any specifics yet. If I get something I'll update this thread or something.
From what I can find Facebook hasn't budged on their stance, but they did reinstate the shut down profiles for two weeks. Those users can decide to change the profile or have it go dark again after the two week grace period.
One is that Facebook is in fact free for you to use as long as you agree to their rules. They can change the rules anytime they want and as soon as you no longer agree with them you can quit Facebook.
Facebook makes money by selling access to you and your data. Part of that might mean that they want to make sure that you are really you in order to make your data more marketable. Known accounts might bring more money than fake accounts.
Facebook is used by a lot of shady characters. Criminals randomly friending people using fake profiles so that they can data-mine or stalk them to find out when they won't be home. Ex-partners using fake profiles to stalk their old partners and harass them. Pedophiles using fake profiles to collect pictures of children and to stalk out new prey or using fake profiles to circumvent court ordered restrictions.
It's their playground, it's their rules. Some of the rules might have good reasons and also stupid reasons.
Facebook isn't "meshed in" with anything vital. It's a silly time-wasting option that has some value in doing a bare minimum of keeping up with distant acquaintances, but it isn't an essential service that would cause true hardship if it disappeared.
For some its actually a bit more than just some place to waste time. There is some legitimate networking that takes place for some. It may not be evident to some folks... but the being 'meshed in' with other things considered by some to be vital is indeed there.
Really, people who want to stay anonymous should just use the names and likenesses of their enemies, instead of psuedonyms. They are real names so the problem solves itself right?
daedalus wrote: Really, people who want to stay anonymous should just use the names and likenesses of their enemies, instead of psuedonyms. They are real names so the problem solves itself right?
Haha maybe that could work... like a Face/Off type of thing...
Ultimately the push behind this is the same push that Blizzard launched when switching their forums over to real names (did they ever go through with that?)
It's really about all the negative press. Think of GamerGate and how that's errupted into a war across social media. While it's not FaceBooks fault that happened, it is hurting their image. Social media sites have always tried to make policies to reduce flame wars, and the idea that "people would be less douchy" if they weren't anonymous is kind of the mythical unicorn* they're chasing.
*People aren't douches because they're anonymous. They're just douches. This has been the 5 O'Clock News, with Hats
DarkTraveler777 wrote: The argument that revealing real names could endanger members of the LGBTQ community is compelling considering the violence members of that community continue to face daily.
Is it?
Wouldn't it be more compelling to suggest that if people are worried about the things they are sharing publicly over social media causing them problems later, that maybe they should reconsider what they choose to share publicly over social media?
One thought I had while listening to the radio program was Facebook moving those personal profiles to fan pages instead, since profiles are typically used by individuals and pages are typically used by businesses/organizations. Seems it would be the best solution within Facebook's current system.
That certainly seems like the obvious solution for those using 'stage names' to promote themselves.
It's not like pages are hard to maintain or use either. I keep my photography stuff (and associated "name") to a page and my regular Facebook on my real name.
djphranq wrote: According to some folks, pages have some communication limits that personal profiles don't.
What are some comparable alternatives to Facebook that you think people can use?
Socializing and networking IRL. ....
Google+
Setting up own forums.
Dunno there's options depending on what you want to use FB for. Most of the time FB is just a giant competitive game where the aim is to collect as many likes and friends as possible while sharing random and pointless information.
LInkedin is going the way of Facebook too in that requests to link are being made by people who have no relevance or expertise to help you and your business. Its just braggadocio.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/19 07:33:07
Some people don't necessarily need a platform but they just want a place they can 'be'... but maybe G+ will pick up speed given the situation. I spoke to many friends... they're scrambling to collect their pictures/posts/writings/whathaveyou from facebook to move them over.
