User:Christine Bush/PseudonymPolicy: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Christine Bush |
imported>Christine Bush (→Why Citizendium Needs to Modify Our Real Names Policy: Added reference to Ingram for point re: real names policy and identity provision roles.) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
#The current policy is '''reactionary''', defining itself as much by what it is not as what it is. This discourages participation rather than inviting it and serves to undermine that which it seeks to provide: a sensible, "mature" alternative. There is general agreement that CZ needs more contributors, so it does not make sense to continue enforcing an unnecessarily restrictive policy simply to avoid the opportunity costs of anonymity when '''there is a well-established third option: pseudonymity'''. | #The current policy is '''reactionary''', defining itself as much by what it is not as what it is. This discourages participation rather than inviting it and serves to undermine that which it seeks to provide: a sensible, "mature" alternative. There is general agreement that CZ needs more contributors, so it does not make sense to continue enforcing an unnecessarily restrictive policy simply to avoid the opportunity costs of anonymity when '''there is a well-established third option: pseudonymity'''. | ||
#A real names policy is '''indiscriminate''' and, in some cases, '''unfair'''.<ref name="skud">[http://infotrope.net/2011/07/22/ive-been-suspended-from-google-plus/ I've Been Suspended From Google+] by Skud.</ref> | #A real names policy is '''indiscriminate''' and, in some cases, '''unfair'''.<ref name="skud">[http://infotrope.net/2011/07/22/ive-been-suspended-from-google-plus/ I've Been Suspended From Google+] by Skud.</ref> The list of persons potentially discriminated against is not insubstantial: gay and differently gendered persons, women who must exercise caution with regard to currently or formerly abusive spouses, as well as authors, entertainers, journalists, or bloggers with an established reputation using a pseudonym.<ref name="Hinckley">[http://plus.google.com/+KeeHinckley/posts/asuDWWmaFcq On Pseudonymity, Privacy and Responsibility on Google+] by Kevin Hinckley (also [http://web.archive.org/web/20130429234807/http://www.marrowbones.com/commons/technosocial/2011/07/on_pseudonymity_privacy_and_re.html via The Wayback Machine)]</ref> | ||
#'''There are benefits''' to using pseudonyms, including the ability to leverage established virtual identities on other platforms.<ref name="York">[http://www.disruptiveconversations.com/2011/08/why-the-nym-wars-matter-preserving-pseudonymity-on-an-open-internet.html Why The Nym Wars Matter] by Dan York</ref> | #'''There are benefits''' to using pseudonyms, including the ability to leverage established virtual identities on other platforms.<ref name="York">[http://www.disruptiveconversations.com/2011/08/why-the-nym-wars-matter-preserving-pseudonymity-on-an-open-internet.html Why The Nym Wars Matter] by Dan York</ref> | ||
#A pseudonymic policy '''does not prevent contributors from using their real names''' if they choose to do so. | #A pseudonymic policy '''does not prevent contributors from using their real names''' if they choose to do so. | ||
#The main argument for enforcing a real names policy has thus far been because an organization such as Google or Facebook wants to become an authoritative '''identity provider''' to other sites. This is clearly '''not part of CZ's mission'''. | #The main argument for enforcing a real names policy has thus far been because an organization such as Google or Facebook wants to become an authoritative '''identity provider''' to other sites.<ref name="Ingram">[http://gigaom.com/2011/08/29/its-official-google-wants-to-own-your-online-identity/ It’s official: Google wants to own your online identity] by Matthew Ingram</ref> This is clearly '''not part of CZ's mission'''. | ||
#The proposition that knowledge with a provenance is somehow more valuable is very '''difficult to defend'''. | #The proposition that knowledge with a provenance is somehow more valuable is very '''difficult to defend'''. | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
<references /> | <references /> | ||
Revision as of 20:42, 7 September 2014
Why Citizendium Needs to Modify Our Real Names Policy
This is a DRAFT article, now under development. When finished, the author's intention is to invite consideration of it by the Citizendium Council.
> Caution: Bold Text Ahead. Dear Reader, please note that this article uses bold text. While its author acknowledges that in some contexts, bold text can be construed as "yelling", she also wishes to reclaim this useful text style for the purpose it served for centuries prior to the advent of online discussions, namely to draw the reader's attention to key phrases and concepts, thereby making content easier to scan.
Author Representative suggests that our current real names policy[1] should be revised to allow for users to contribute using pseudonyms.[2]
- The current policy is reactionary, defining itself as much by what it is not as what it is. This discourages participation rather than inviting it and serves to undermine that which it seeks to provide: a sensible, "mature" alternative. There is general agreement that CZ needs more contributors, so it does not make sense to continue enforcing an unnecessarily restrictive policy simply to avoid the opportunity costs of anonymity when there is a well-established third option: pseudonymity.
- A real names policy is indiscriminate and, in some cases, unfair.[3] The list of persons potentially discriminated against is not insubstantial: gay and differently gendered persons, women who must exercise caution with regard to currently or formerly abusive spouses, as well as authors, entertainers, journalists, or bloggers with an established reputation using a pseudonym.[4]
- There are benefits to using pseudonyms, including the ability to leverage established virtual identities on other platforms.[5]
- A pseudonymic policy does not prevent contributors from using their real names if they choose to do so.
- The main argument for enforcing a real names policy has thus far been because an organization such as Google or Facebook wants to become an authoritative identity provider to other sites.[6] This is clearly not part of CZ's mission.
- The proposition that knowledge with a provenance is somehow more valuable is very difficult to defend.
- ↑ Why Real Names Are Better by Sebastian and Yamakuchi
- ↑ Why We Need Online Alter Egos Now More Than Ever by Judith S. Donath
- ↑ I've Been Suspended From Google+ by Skud.
- ↑ On Pseudonymity, Privacy and Responsibility on Google+ by Kevin Hinckley (also via The Wayback Machine)
- ↑ Why The Nym Wars Matter by Dan York
- ↑ It’s official: Google wants to own your online identity by Matthew Ingram