Removing monikers

Rev Hellfire

While the Blizzard move to the use of real names might be unpopular in some quarters it is not without merit. There's certainly a different level of behavior from people once one layer of their supposed anonymity is removed.

So is it something that should be considered for boards.ie or at least a section(s) of it, for example under the society category? Naturally in those forums where anonymity is useful, anonymous posting should remain requiring post approval.

By way of reference, this is the policy applied on some martial arts forums I frequent, and it works very well there.

Spear

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

While the Blizzard move to the use of real names might be unpopular in some quarters it is not without merit. There's certainly a different level of behavior from people once one layer of their supposed anonymity is removed.

So is it something that should be considered for boards.ie or at least a section(s) of it, for example under the society category? Naturally in those forums where anonymity is useful, anonymous posting should remain requiring post approval.

By way of reference, this is the policy applied on some martial arts forums I frequent, and it works very well there.

My 2cents, for what little its worth, but I value my privacy more than I value helping others, and as a result I won't post even the most innocent things under my real name. The chilling effects on speech from this are far worse than the cost of cleaning up trolls/spam/sundry other crap.

Besides, how is boards.ie meant to confirm real world identities in a non-invasive and reasonable manner, let alone the increased exposure to data protection issues.

Rev Hellfire

Spear wrote: »

My 2cents, for what little its worth, but I value my privacy more than I value helping others, and as a result I won't post even the most innocent things under my real name. The chilling effects on speech from this are far worse than the cost of cleaning up trolls/spam/sundry other crap.

That's true, but I think when you have forums where 'advice' is getting offered, 'advice' and opinion which can have very tangible effects in the real world its not unreasonable to ask that those offering it provide their real identities and not hide behind some mask.

Spear wrote: »

Besides, how is boards.ie meant to confirm real world identities in a non-invasive and reasonable manner, let alone the increased exposure to data protection issues.

I'm certain that clever individuals than I can resolve issues like that, things like using credit/debit cards to associate identity while not fool proof might go someway towards it. But lets assume for argument it can be done at a nominal cost.

Spear

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I'm certain that clever individuals than I can resolve issues like that, things like using credit/debit cards to associate identity while not fool proof might go someway towards it. But lets assume for argument it can be done at a nominal cost.

Even performing the simplest auth checks on credit cards will mean arranging a merchant facility for such, and that means dropping some few tens of thousands of euro in guarantees/deposits/bonds/insurance and exposing boards.ie to PCI compliance audits and the like. And the first mention of wanting credit card details will be another off putting aspect to people.

Rev Hellfire

Spear wrote: »

And the first mention of wanting credit card details will be another off putting aspect to people.

I think if people wish to participate on the more serious forums its not unreasonable to seek some guarantees from them. Those who don't can be limited to having their posts their require mod approval.

I'd even go further and suggest that perhaps admins for the site should no longer be using monikers. As the primary representatives of board.ie they should use their real names.

I'm not sure that moderators would need to, but perhaps on some of the forums it might be a worthwhile addition. Now applying such a thing retrospectively to existing users would be unfair, but perhaps to new users and provide the facility to subscribers/moderators.

Ickle Magoo

Are guarantees not already sought in the form of the charters? I don't think having posters real life names is a good idea and I'm not sure what else it would guarantee other than people will be more wary of what they post because posters can seek them out in real life...and I can't imagine that is really the kind of behavioural motivation boards wants to encourage.

Nevyn

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I'd even go further and suggest that perhaps admins for the site should no longer be using monikers. As the primary representatives of board.ie they should use their real names.

They are not staff they are volunteers.

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I'm not sure that moderators would need to, but perhaps on some of the forums it might be a worthwhile addition. Now applying such a thing retrospectively to existing users would be unfair, but perhaps to new users and provide the facility to subscribers/moderators.

The day I am forced to use my real/legal name is the day I quit boards.

Gordon

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I'd even go further and suggest that perhaps admins for the site should no longer be using monikers. As the primary representatives of board.ie they should use their real names.

Why not Mods too? They're representatives, so are CMods. Boards employees are the only employed representatives, they have their proper names as their username.

I wouldn't expect any unpaid person to reveal their full/partial name, I wouldn't even expect a paid person to, although it'd be nice if they did.

However, Rev Hellfire, lead by example, why don't you change your username to your real name and you can start the revolution Maybe something that can be floored is a system whereby if someone wants to change their username to their real name then they don't need to be a subscriber, they can be a "verified account" and get a name change for free. So are you going to change your username if this idea gets legs?

Rev Hellfire

Thaedydal wrote: »

They are not staff they are volunteers.

That is immaterial, they are the ultimate authority for boards and by virue are one of the main representatives for this company. It makes perfect sense for them to use their real names.

The day I am forced to use my real/legal name is the day I quit boards.

Why? I'm talking about particular forums, not site-wide.

Beruthiel

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I'd even go further and suggest that perhaps admins for the site should no longer be using monikers. As the primary representatives of board.ie they should use their real names.

I log onto Boards while at work. Allowing my employers know who I am on this site would be dumber than a bag of hammers.

There isn't a hope in hell of me ever telling anyone on this site (bar those I have met in person and my fellow Admins) what my real name is or who I am.
That would be suicidal.

Rev Hellfire

Gordon wrote: »

Why not Mods too? They're representatives, so are CMods. Boards employees are the only employed representatives, they have their proper names as their username.

Perhaps they should for particular forums.

Rev Hellfire

Beruthiel wrote: »

I log onto Boards while at work. Allowing my employers know who I am on this site would be dumber than a bag of hammers.

Whether you or others comply with your terms of employment is immaterial.

Beruthiel wrote: »

There isn't a hope in hell of me ever telling anyone on this site (bar those I have met in person and my fellow Admins) what my real name is or who I am.

Why, unless people are not prepared to stand by what they say its not an issue.

Gordon

Beruthiel wrote: »

I log onto Boards while at work. Allowing my employers know who I am on this site would be dumber than a bag of hammers.

There isn't a hope in hell of me ever telling anyone on this site (bar those I have met in person and my fellow Admins) what my real name is or who I am.
That would be suicidal.

Everyone knows your name is Bru Nunn.

Bru is short for Brutus right?

Gordon

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Why, unless people are not prepared to stand by what they say its not an issue.

Being a boards representative yourself, I'd expect that argument to be at least backed up by you having your real name in your profile, why do you not stand by what you say?

Beruthiel

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Whether you or others comply with your terms of employment is immaterial.

I think you will find that all the Admins on this site log on during working hours. Were we not to do so, this site would be without most of its volunteers duing the working week.
I think you will find that for the people who own this site, that fact is not immaterial.

Even if I were to only log on outside working hours, I would still rather people not be able to access me at will.
I value my privacy and would only give that up were I actually paid to do this job as it would be part of the terms of employment.

Why, unless people are not prepared to stand by what they say its not an issue.

It is a privacy issue.

Sparks

Speaking from the point of view of someone who uses his real name (in the profile, the moniker is an old nickname going back to secondary school) on the internet (here, in my blogs, in public comments on other blogs, and generally all over the place), and who has done so for a decade now, I vehemently disagree with the proposal.

I chose to use my real name. Taking that choice away is undesirable. Taking any choice away is undesirable. The privacy even mild anonymity gives can be an enormously useful thing; for a real-world example I'm familiar with, it has allowed for open and honest criticism of how we run target shooting sports in Ireland without risk of retribution against the complainant (which has happened in the past with top shooters who dare criticise facilities or policies being blackballed from any future matches by the petty-minded who had a duty to try harder). We've seen real change in the last few years because of that anonymous channel, for the better. So taking it away would do harm.

It is also unnecessary. The only eventuality where disclosure of someone's identity should be mandatory is where a crime has been committed, or is being investigated. Boards.ie already will disclose any and all information when presented with the appropriate court order, and between boards.ie and the ISP involved, the true identity of a poster can be determined very quickly.

But - and this is important - that identity is divulged only to the proper authorities who have a duty of care to keep it confidential until such time as a case is brought (if one is brought at all). If poster X is accused or suspected of crime Y, then poster X is identified, but if it turns out the suspicion or accusation was in error, then poster X's identity is not announced to the masses.

All of which is utterly academic... so long as boards.ie is never hacked, and neither is any other site where your password was the same as it was here. Now Conor is very very good (I've known him for years and we're in the same industry, so that's a professional opinion from a qualified observer, not a pat on the back), but (a) no site is ever 100% secure until you unplug all the servers and weld the cases shut; and (b) Conor only looks after this site, not any other site you might use, nor your home computer, nor the notebook you wrote the password down in...

Rev Hellfire

Gordon wrote: »

Being a boards representative yourself, I'd expect that argument to be at least backed up by you having your real name in your profile, why do you not stand by what you say?

If I managed anything more serious than a role-playing forum I'd be happy to do so. Its a discussion so at this point indicating my willingness to do so myself is sufficient in my view.

Beruthiel wrote: »

It is a privacy issue.

Which is fair enough, what I was suggesting was not everyone having to present their real names, but rather unapproved interactions in specific forums.

Keep in mind this has become more normalized thanks to the likes of facebook etc. Its not that far out anymore.

Gordon

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

If I managed anything more serious than a role-playing forum I'd be happy to do so. Its a discussion so at this point indicating my willingness to do so myself is sufficient in my view.

I see, so you want to but you aren't doing it at the moment.. ok. While two people that have their real names on full show (Gordon is my real name) are discussing against enforcing real names onto representatives, someone that doesn't have their real name on show is debating for enforcing real names on representatives. I think I've seen it all now!

Rev Hellfire

Gordon wrote: »

I see, so you want to but you aren't doing it at the moment.. ok. While two people that have their real names on full show (Gordon is my real name) are discussing against enforcing real names onto representatives, someone that doesn't have their real name on show is debating for enforcing real names on representatives. I think I've seen it all now!

I'm not sure how its relevant, but since clearly you do I'm happy to oblige my name is eoghan.

_blank_

I use my real name.

Why? Well, when I started the football team some of the lads kept calling me Seán, which was annoying and stupid.

Gordon

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I'm not sure how its relevant, but since clearly you do I'm happy to oblige my name is eoghan.

You totally missed my point dude, that's exactly not what I want

Hi, my name is Gordon, I'm a boardsoholic :pac:

therecklessone

IIRC there is at least one case of a user of boards being identified by their employer and instructed to cease all discussions related to their employment/employer and to get all references removed.

That's made a hell of a lot more common by using real names.

Recruits to the PSNI and Gardaí are routinely warned about online activities, and in the former case with the current increase in dissident activity there is a bloody good reason for them to retain their anonymity. The same applies to members of our Defence Forces.

This measure would gag a lot of boards users, and drive others away.

Oh, and asking Admins/CMods/Mods to lead the way...haven't we had cases of Mods being harassed off-site in the past? Wouldn't that be made easier?

I know my employer would be very interested in the contributions staff may have made to this site in the past. If it became general policy site-wide I'd be done with site.

Sparks

Gordon wrote: »

Hi, my name is Gordon, I'm a boardsoholic :pac:

A good point raised in jest there.
What happens if we had an AA forum?

In fact, forget that hypothetical, focus on the current state of play: What if we had forums which dealt with nightmare personal issues; or being gay/lesbian/bisexual in a country which frankly, demonises it; or which dealt with exploring sexuality, which again, we tend to demonise in this country; or which dealt with discussing political or religious views, where a job applicant might post an opinion that was in direct and passionate disagreement with the views of the boss at a company he was applying to; or a forum where people went to witter away to blow off steam, or one where they went to vent nothing but the basest of insults for the same purpose?

How would mandatory disclosure of identity affect those forums? How would that impact the people who currently use those forums as an outlet, as a source of information, as a support group, as a touchstone to remind them that they're not utterly abnormal/useless/worthless/idiotic/etc?

Your proposal could do real harm to these people Rev, so what's the benefit of what you're talking about? What's the pro to those cons?

Sparks

therecklessone wrote: »

Oh, and asking Admins/CMods/Mods to lead the way...haven't we had cases of Mods being harassed off-site in the past? Wouldn't that be made easier?

Off-site, on-site, verbally and physically. And not one or two isolated cases either (though thankfully it's rare for there to be a physical, off-site element to it).

oscarBravo

I'm with Sparks. My real name is public knowledge, but that's a decision I made a long time ago, on Usenet, and have stuck with since. I don't care whether my boss knows I'm on here, he's a plonker anyway.

I'm not convinced of the merits of the proposal. We have mechanisms in place to try to keep the quality of discussion as high as possible in the serious forums. How much extra would be gained by requiring verified identities, and at what cost?

5starpool

In the past I have got a pm from an admin who signed their PM with their first name. This was not the same as their username, but was the same as another different admins username, but for THAT admin that was not their real name as I found out in a different PM.

Now that is confusing, and must have caused some havoc in admin HQ I'd guess. Totally irrelevant, but there you go.

As for the OP, that would be asure fire way to kill a lot of the traffic on the site, or those areas you think it should be done on anyhow. Also, I doubt is it possible on vbulletin to have a user account that has 2 names which are different depending on forum, and which cannot be linked together by anyone curious as to which non identified poster an identified poster is.

Nevyn

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Why? I'm talking about particular forums, not site-wide.

What forums and why?

There really is not such thing as things being separate between public/restricted access forums and the site, anything posted in one forum can be accessed by anyone or by enough people to make it public.

As for why personally, I have been stalked enough with out putting my legal given name out there so much so it makes me damn careful about connecting it with my online name.

I have kids and that makes me extra careful last thing they need is some nutbar having a go at them cos thier Mammy banned them and no this isn't paranoia alas.

Also while I may disclose things on this site no one can google my legal given name and connect those things with me that way, they have to know who I am on here and I can choose if or not I tell them.

Tallon

My name is Tallon

Dav

It is my opinion that this would be a bad idea. I'd agree with what Sparks has written above - you can choose how much of yourself you tie into your online identity. Obviously enough, this username is my name. However, over the years here as a member of the site, I never made any real secret that Kharn was a guy called Dav Waldron either. Would I be happy to have that under my username? I don't think so. Yes, I appreciate the double standards that point presents.

I honestly think we have a nice balance here - it's at a member's discression as to how much they lower the barriers between their online persona and their real life. I would hate to impose a restriction on that and I definitely think it would stiffle our growth.

I am, on the other side of this arguement, a believer that everyone who uses the Internet in Ireland should have a digital identity tied into their PPS number that is kept in trust at an ISP / governmental level, but I don't trust any of the current lot we have in power or at the helm of ISPs to manage this safely It's an Idealist view on what would be a perfect world scenario - I can have dreams!

LoLth

as for real names:

no from me. people with unusual surnames would be instantly exposed to google searches (first step any internet miscreant does to get info on a target). Whatever about the user, I'd be concerned about the users family/wife/children etc. People with more normal names would be only a little bit harder to locate.

Imagine it:

admin/cmod/mod Joe zyzagmummery sitebans a muppet for being aggressive and trolling. muppet gets annoyed so he/she searches for Joe's name and , at a guess, limits the results to Ireland.

muppet gets Joe's phone number (not that hard depending on Joe's online activities) and starts ringing the phone (a home number) at all hours doing nuisance calls as revenge. except its not just Joe being called, its everyone else in the house.

And thats just mods/cmods/admins. How many times have we seen a post made in anger threatening another user? How many ridiculously over the top reactions have we seen from posters of all ages reacting to imagined slights?

Anonymity does bring out the muppet in a lot of internet users but it also allows a lot more to be up front and honest without fear of any ridicule or abuse that goes beyond a single domain on the internet.

Why give ammunition when you dont have to? As already pointed out, its not just a user's identity on boards.ie that would be at issue, it would be that user's identity on the internet and also that user's security both on the internet and financially (online accounts like Ebay, Paypal etc).

LoLth

Dav wrote: »

I am, on the other side of this arguement, a believer that everyone who uses the Internet in Ireland should have a digital identity tied into their PPS number that is kept in trust at an ISP / governmental level, but I don't trust any of the current lot we have in power or at the helm of ISPs to manage this safely It's an Idealist view on what would be a perfect world scenario - I can have dreams!

wasnt there a similar idea put forward with IPv6. Give everyone on the planet an IP address that you use for all communications , mobile, online etc. So any post made would be [uniqueIP][ISP IP]

a mobile phone number that could be called anywhere in the world no matter what device you were using... an actual "internet account"...

then they started discussing how it could be abused and what the security requirements would be and the idea sort of...went away...