par_avion: collage of intl air mail stickers (Default)
[personal profile] par_avion posting in [community profile] googleplus
Wow, that was non-intuitive, but I found the link: Toward a more inclusive naming policy for Google+

With Google+, we aspire to make online sharing more like sharing in the real world. And during the Google+ signup process, we've asked users to select the name they commonly use in real life.

Since launch we've listened closely to community feedback on our names policy, as well as reviewed our own data regarding signup completion. The vast majority of users sail through our signup process -- in fact, only about 0.1% submit name appeals.

When we analyze the set of all name appeals on Google+, we find that they generally fall into three major categories:
- The majority (60%) of these users want to simply add nicknames.
- About 20% of appeals are actually businesses (who are inadvertently trying to set up their business as a Profile, rather than using Google+ Pages which were intended for this purpose.)
- And the remaining 20% would either prefer to use a pseudonym or another unconventional name.

Today we’re pleased to be launching features that will address and remedy the majority of these issues. To be clear - our work here isn’t done, but I’m really pleased to be shipping a milestone on our journey.

Nicknames and Names in Another Script

Over the next week, we’ll be adding support for alternate names – be they nicknames, maiden names, or names in another script – alongside your common name. This name will show up on your Google+ profile and in the hovercards which appear over your name. In the next few weeks, we’ll be displaying it more broadly as part of your name in other areas of Google+ as well. So if you’re Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, Jane Doe (Smith), or Saurabh Sharma (सौरभ शर्मा), you can now communicate your identity the way you want to.

To add an alternate name, go to your Google+ profile, click Edit Profile, select your name and click on “More options.” (See attached photos)

It’s important to remember that when you change your name in Google+, you’re changing it across all services that require a Google Profile.

Other Established Identities

On Google+, we try to flag names which don’t represent individuals, such as businesses or abstract ideas which should be +Pages. Sometimes we get this wrong, so starting today we’re updating our policies and processes to broaden support for established pseudonyms, from +trench coat to +Madonna.

If we flag the name you intend to use, you can provide us with information to help confirm your established identity. This might include:

- References to an established identity offline in print media, news articles, etc- Scanned official documentation, such as a driver’s license
- Proof of an established identity online with a meaningful following

We’ll review the information and typically get back to you within a few days. We may also ask for further information, such as proof that you control a website you reference. While a name change is under review, your old name will continue to be displayed. For new accounts without an old name, your profile will be in a non-public, read-only state during the review. Either way, you'll be able to see the status of your review by going to your profile.

For more details, check out the Google+ Names Policy: http://support.google.com/plus/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1228271

To reiterate, the features described herein will be rolling out over the next couple days.

Today is a small step towards improving the ways in which you can communicate your identity on Google+. We will be listening to feedback from the community and will continue to refine all aspects of how we handle names and identity over the coming weeks, months and beyond.

Thanks for your continuing feedback and support.

Bradley and Team G+

EFF Response

This shared version of the above post (shared by +Yonatan Zunger) has a lot of interesting discussion in comments. Also, this version shared by +Natalie Villalob0s has some discussion.

Interesting discussion by a G+ user: https://plus.google.com/102376799902430080799/posts/Jdwyt2m1E16

Date: 2012-01-27 07:46 am (UTC)
copracat: Spencer from Pretty Little Liars (spencer)
From: [personal profile] copracat
I think they might be undercounting the number of users who want pseuds. Like I was going to contact them knowing their attitude. Not to mention the fact that of the sixty plus fandom friends and acquaintances who opened their G+ accounts after the launch, only one is still using is regularly, and that's someone who used their wallet name from the start. And doesn't talk fandom on G+.

Date: 2012-01-27 01:38 pm (UTC)
libskrat: (Default)
From: [personal profile] libskrat
Exactamundo. And I don't think they understand the impact on the use of G+ either.

Online folks aren't as naive as they used to be about their online behavior. Discourse limited to that acceptable to bosses, neighbors, distant family, partners, clients... is pretty bloody boring, not a draw to the service at all. And the way G+ implemented circles, circles don't solve the unintended-disclosure problem.

I'm sticking to my forecast: G+ will shortly be a backwater in much the same way FriendFeed is now, though with a different hanger-on population. (Disclaimer: I'm one of the last FF hangers-on.)

Date: 2012-01-27 03:10 pm (UTC)
hrafn: (Default)
From: [personal profile] hrafn
If G+ is purely a networking tool for people on a professional level, then this bland, Real Names (tm) crap makes sense, sort of. It does seem like they're not interested in supporting any other kind of social interaction.

I don't see how their new policy is really significantly better than the old one, since they still require proof of identity for names that don't fit one particular cultural naming scheme.

Date: 2012-02-23 03:49 pm (UTC)
azurelunatic: Azz and best friend grabbing each other's noses.  (Default)
From: [personal profile] azurelunatic
From what I can tell, if I got challenged on "Azure Lunatic", I could become "Jane Smith" and not compromise my wallet name/internet name separation; it's just that Certain Populations get freaked out by things that don't look like their expectation of names.

Date: 2012-01-27 05:07 pm (UTC)
aedifica: Photo of purple yarrow flowers. (Achillea millefolium)
From: [personal profile] aedifica
ENORMOUS comment thread about these issues on Yonatan Zunger's post about the issue. The thread is huge, but there's some really interesting stuff in there, particularly his explanations of why they made the decisions they did, and also his responses to other people's comments in the thread.
Edited (forgot to close html) Date: 2012-01-27 05:07 pm (UTC)

*sigh*

Date: 2012-01-28 12:21 am (UTC)
elke_tanzer: autumn web (autumn web)
From: [personal profile] elke_tanzer
I've re-activated my Elke Tanzer G+ account because of this policy change, but after skimming a good number of the 112 accounts that had added my account to their circles, I have yet to find any which are actively posting on G+ (with the exception of an actual Googler or two).

Basically, there was a TON of momentum at the beta launch, almost everyone I knew wanted in to G+ (with a few vocal exceptions), and we all dove in... only to figure out within a few days that our persistent pseuds weren't welcome... and then it looks like people either closed their G+ accounts (which I did) or just let them sit there unattended. Now there's no traffic there and I'm in no hurry to put any content into my Elke Tanzer account there... I don't feel a pressing need to chat or do video hangouts, and Dreamwidth and AO3 meet all of my fannish social networking needs just fine, without any of the Google-nymwars-bullshit.

Oh, Google, you had such potential. I mean, really, I felt more welcome on Diaspora, which I've never deactivated but just haven't taken the time to keep up with it.

Profile

googleplus: G+ mobile logo: a black square with g+ in white text and colored tabs across the top (Default)
Google+

May 2013

S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
121314 15161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Dec. 20th, 2014 01:36 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios