Personally I'm more on the Anon side of things, although not extremely so.
(Bigger image can be found here: graphjam.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/fun... )
Overall I think I agree most with the Anon side. I think our identities prevent us from being who we are because we are afraid of repercussions. Afraid of being ourselves because we don't want to take the fall for our dumb and controversial opinions and whatnot. I see the facebook one identity idea as trying to indirectly promote politeness which isn't necessarily legitimacy.
Hmmm here is maybe how I see it. Being anonymous is like being drunk. When you're drunk/anonymous you're not going to do (or say) something that you'd never normally do (or you're not capable of doing). You will however be more likely to do things that you'd be more likely to refrain from doing.
Although much of that pic seems to make me think of corporate vs independent and whatnot.
Overall I think I agree most with the Anon side. I think our identities prevent us from being who we are because we are afraid of repercussions. Afraid of being ourselves because we don't want to take the fall for our dumb and controversial opinions and whatnot. I see the facebook one identity idea as trying to indirectly promote politeness which isn't necessarily legitimacy.
I agree. In particular for me, right now I could say something like "My douchebag commander decided..." (I wouldn't name the individual since that wouldn't be in good taste and isn't necessary to get the point of the story across, plus it's just not fair if I'm remaining nameless) but if I had to post with my actual name and the wrong person came across it, that could become very very bad for me. In fact, there was just a discussion in the Army forums about whether or not it was ok to take legal action for something a soldier said on Facebook.
Now I'm not here to rant and rave about my work, but I do like being able to voice my opinion once in a while without fearing the repercussions.
*thinks about why the founder of Facebook might want internet transparency*
*debates responding*
*wanders out*
For me, Mad Jack is my one internet identity... I use the same handle or some variation on it on all four of the main places I hang out online which have forums - here, on the cam chat site I belong to, the Reaper Miniatures forum and the other more-adult-oriented forum I belong to.
However, aside from mentioning my general geographical location, I never put my personal details online, and rarely ever put up pictures of myself where people could recognize me.
I also actively refrain from voicing my more volatile or controversial opinions and thoughts both online and in real life simply because I'm an intensely private person and also greatly dislike drama - there's already far too much of it in the world and I'm actively attempting not to add any more to it than I absolutely need to.
Also, there's no such thing as a rational discussion with an extremist, so I don't even bother talking to most people who are very vocal and strident about their personal views.
In any event, anonymity and accountability are two entirely different things, and lack of the first doesn't necessarily guarantee the second - as evidenced by the astounding number of wellknown/famous/important people walking around in real life with absolutely no personal regard at all for the consequences of their actions and no fear of any repurcussions that may occur.
I personally hold myself accountable for what I say and do online, and don't need complete internet transparency as an attempt to do it for me. I also see no need to provide my personal details to people who I don't know and have no need to know them.
The day where I'm required to log onto the net with the name given to me at birth and have all my personal information available to the world at large is the day that I unplug permanently and actively become a Luddite.
Or to put it another way "it takes all kinds."
That said, as I've said before, an internet handle, if used long enough, becomes it's own identity. An online identicy can have a unique presence, an accountability, an "authenticity". It's not necessarily transparently connected to a birth name, but it's got it's own weight to it, if you understand my meaning. And it's not like the use of a psuedonym is anything new. It's a longstanding commonality to the world of authors, who use pen names like J.D. Robb or Mark Twain to write works under a name they thing will sell better or don't want associated with their real name.
... which is to say, unless you can somehow create, and mandate the use of, a unique non-repudiatable bio-signature, people will always find a way to express themselves in a way that shields their real names from repercussions, whether it's because they don't want EscherEnigma to be associated with the occasional gay porn-comics that Villain42 has drawn, or just because they think it's funny to poke sleeping tigers that ought not be poked.
... which is to say, unless you can somehow create, and mandate the use of, a unique non-repudiatable bio-signature, people will always find a way to express themselves in a way that shields their real names from repercussions, whether it's because they don't want EscherEnigma to be associated with the occasional gay porn-comics that Villain42 has drawn, or just because they think it's funny to poke sleeping tigers that ought not be poked.
[...] whether it's because they don't want EscherEnigma to be associated with the occasional gay porn-comics that Villain42 has drawn [...]
Don't listen to this man. He's just trying to slander my name.
[...] whether it's because they don't want EscherEnigma to be associated with the occasional gay porn-comics that Villain42 has drawn [...]
Don't listen to this man. He's just trying to slander my name.
I'm intrigued. No, not about the gay porn comics. There seems to be a bit of playful banter going on here. Might this be the SO?
[...] whether it's because they don't want EscherEnigma to be associated with the occasional gay porn-comics that Villain42 has drawn [...]
Don't listen to this man. He's just trying to slander my name.
I'm intrigued. No, not about the gay porn comics. There seems to be a bit of playful banter going on here. Might this be the SO?
Smooth Operator?
Think about this. I can present an idea for everybody to see, and nobody has any idea where it came from. They don't know my sex. They don't know my age. They don't know my race. They don't know my class. They don't know my nationality. They don't know my sexual orientation. They don't know my religion. They don't know anything about me at all. And because of that, the idea can stand on its own. That's so ****ing beautiful that I could cry.
I'm intrigued. No, not about the gay porn comics. There seems to be a bit of playful banter going on here. Might this be the SO?
I plead the nineteenth.
Judging from the bandage on his nose, EE's SO is clear a battered spouse.
I will neither confirm nor deny that beating may or may not occur when I am alone with my SO and/or DeVinciDilemma.
[...] whether it's because they don't want EscherEnigma to be associated with the occasional gay porn-comics that Villain42 has drawn [...]
Don't listen to this man. He's just trying to slander my name.
At first I thought the poster was some random dude. Then I read the line you quoted. Then I remember back some time. Then I had a "I see what you did there" moment. Good stuff.
And I'm always using a weird nickname that makes me difficult to think of as a person paired with an avatar without a face and make myself more or less nebulous in my posts.
So take a wild guess.
I also feel that if you aren't comfortable being associated with your words, don't express them. However, that's how I choose to be. I don't expect others to hold themselves up to that.
I think thats my new philosophy on life, Whatever.
Nibiru is taking us all out in 2012 anyway.
If transparency promotes shameless promotion and anonymity promotes shameless... rebelliousness? Dissent? Can't think of the right word here, but I'd rather a system that removes the shameless part. And neither viewpoint really addresses that in my mind.
Can I vote for "neither"? As I see it, full transparency becomes a problem when there are overwhelming means of retribution- not just "whistle-blow and you're fired/get your legs broken/just disappear", but things like "everyone knows your home address and that you're not in right now and so you're robbed". To the other end, full anonymity becomes an equal problem precisely because there is no means of retribution, and there is a strong incentive to not take responsibility for anything you do.
If transparency promotes shameless promotion and anonymity promotes shameless... rebelliousness? Dissent? Can't think of the right word here, but I'd rather a system that removes the shameless part. And neither viewpoint really addresses that in my mind.
+1
On the other side, I frequent 4chan quite a bit. I love how simple it is to just post my opinion, with no sign-up or baggage or commitment. It allows for disscussions that are just pure CONTENT. Opinions are everywhere, but it doesn't matter who said it, it just matters that it's there. And you can add anything at any time, and it doesn't throw your lot into the thing, it just throws more CONTENT. Not to mention how I sometimes long for the frontier justice of being able tell people off without it being held against me.
But even on 4chan anonimity isn't always the answer. For example, on the /tg/ (traditional games) forums, there has been a long-running project to create a Legend of Zelda tabletop RPG. Various posters use names and trips (essentially a password system), because it's important to know sometimes that the person responding to you is the ACTUAL person you were talking to, like if they are the ones who are building a certain part of the system, or have been doing a certain kind of playtesting.
Both styles have a time and a place and a use. I think anyone saying "Yay X! Down with Y!" might not be looking at the bigger picture.
My girlfriend on the other hand is a community lead, and she goes through work mostly anonimous (on the web anyway, not in the office obviously) because she works with volunteers and players, and they do the same thing.
(Also you can buy and sell pretty anonimously through PayPal if I'm not mistaken)
(Also you can buy and sell pretty anonimously through PayPal if I'm not mistaken)
PayPal told me KGM's name.*
______________________________
*But so did the package of cookies.
On the whole I'm definitely in the top percentile of savvy net users in the sense that I have multiple net identities that I do a reasonbly good job at keeping apart from each other in order to use them for different purposes. Obviously now that I've started a web show there's a certain amount of bleed between a couple of the personas, including who I am IRL, but for the most part I'm a pretty moderate person and I don't hold a whole lot of opinions that I'm unwilling to publically take credit for. Beyond that I feel like I do a decent job at guarding my sensitive personal info.
Bad paypal.
Nah, I set it up that way because I do see the value of using my name when running a business. I've had that PayPal account forever, though.
And yeah, it's pretty mutable, really. Like most things, it's not beneficial to be 100% one way or the other - moderation in all things, right? ;) But people do like to polarize and make opinions and compare/contrast stuff.
I can see the benefits of each things, and I enjoy being anonymous and known in different capacities. *shrug*
Like most things, it's not beneficial to be 100% one way or the other - moderation in all things, right? ;) But people do like to polarize and make opinions and compare/contrast stuff.
People need to learn the 3E's. Excess, excess and excess! .... I mean ... yeah moderation ...
Hmmm what would moderation in excess be like? Now that has me thinking about excess in moderation....
Hmmm what would moderation in excess be like?
The ORCs
/COLDBURN
The question I ask myself is: am I or will I be in a position that my private identity is actual worth protecting? I will not go in politics, so he answer is no.
Yes. Because I am told that if any women there would have been out of my league two months ago suddenly start hitting on me, I should suspect that she's a foreign spy out to use me to steal government secrets.
So, to better ensure that any woman that would have been out of my league two months ago that starts hitting on me is hitting on me for reasons unrelated to stealing government secrets I must protect my physical identity from my online identity, with which I have been loose with that information, while my physical identity does not have as strong a connection (currently) to one that may have access to governmetn secrets.
Not that there's any hot women that have managed to get into my league, but, y'know. It's the principle of the thing.
The question I ask myself is: am I or will I be in a position that my private identity is actual worth protecting? I will not go in politics, so he answer is no.
Yes. Because I am told that if any women there would have been out of my league two months ago suddenly start hitting on me, I should suspect that she's a foreign spy out to use me to steal government secrets.
So, to better ensure that any woman that would have been out of my league two months ago that starts hitting on me is hitting on me for reasons unrelated to stealing government secrets I must protect my physical identity from my online identity, with which I have been loose with that information, while my physical identity does not have as strong a connection (currently) to one that may have access to governmetn secrets.
Not that there's any hot women that have managed to get into my league, but, y'know. It's the principle of the thing.
I never really thought about it before, but the comment about foreign spies hitting on you has got me thinking that youre into some bigtime hush hush stuff.
They got you working on the Time Machine dont they!?
Or so I'm told. The pilots I've met all seemed nice enough. I just wish those jumpsuits showed a bit more...
I dunno. Once the security check gets further along they'll know for sure1, but the only place where I was even able to indicate (however vaguely) was under "cohabitant" which would work as well for a live-in boyfriend as a close friend that I live with because we're besties and not because it's convenient.
Sides, as I said, standard spiel. It's not tailored to it's audience. I mean, humor aside, it gets the point home whether the specific scenario is likely to ever come up or not, no?
________
1Seriously. I've been living with the same guy for 5 years with only one bed between us, have him listed as my emergency contact, he left his job and moved 700 miles to stay with me, I have a photo of us together in my wallet, and if anyone asks we say "yeah, we bang." It's not exactly on the down-low.
... what? Pent-up annoyance and the way it vents doesn't have to make sense.
Escher, you crazy.
