firecat: red panda looking happy (Default)
[personal profile] firecat
xposted from my journal

I posted this to my G+ stream and profile:

Now officially lurking on G+

I'm disgusted by the G+ names policy. I have hope that they will be forced to change it (it's clear they won't change it on their own) so I'm not going to leave just yet, and I may follow my stream, but I'm not going to participate much. You can find me on Dreamwidth.
montanaharper: close-up of helena montana on a map (Default)
[personal profile] montanaharper
Shava Nerad posted on G+:
Please repost to your circles, including on other networks, where there may be banned folks, or folks who are staying away from G+ until this situation is resolved! Linking to the dance on 7/29 is easy! :)

http://plusinclusive.blogspot.com/p/come-dance-729-and-every-friday.html

Come to Google Cambridge on 7/29 4pm and onward and I'll be there with at least a few real and virtual dance partners. Bring a cardboard or other representation of a deleted friend, specific or theoretical, to dance with, if you can.

For example, my friend Quadrapop, from Australia, got banned. S/he is a Second Life artist, parent, and teacher, and had no offense other than a name they didn't like, and has been known as Quadrapop since 1980s USENET I do believe.

This week is pretty loose and flash-mob like, and we'll be using it to plan more for future weeks. Other cities with Google offices (and from what I understand, a few without) will also be using this Friday to plan for future Fridays. We'll be dancing with absent friends until Google brings them back on three continents, that I know of!
raelynne: (Default)
[personal profile] raelynne
UK data watchdog 'looking into' Google+ mission creep

Exclusive Blighty's Information Commissioner's Office is currently "looking into" Google's recent ID verification rejig, The Register has learned.


I'll be looking for the results of this with interest. The UK and European courts have been previously successful in standing up to Big IT Business, so I'm hopeful they can do it again.

Oh really

Jul. 26th, 2011 11:02 am
musyc: Bernard from Black Books reading (Black Books: Reading)
[personal profile] musyc
Robert Scoble, one of the louder pro-realname supporters in this Google+ pseudonym debate, said something in a comment to this post by John Hardy that made me both laugh with his arrogance and boggle at his ignorance.

It's not un American, by the way. It's American to SIGN YOUR FREAKING NAME TO THINGS!


Now, setting aside the apparent evidence that Mr Scoble is unaware that the internet does not exist solely in the USA, clearly Mr Scoble has never heard of Publius, the author of The Federalist. Or, as we know today, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, who together wrote a series of essays that is considered one of the three most important documents in American history. (Someone else in the comments brought this up to him. I note that he didn't respond.)

Un-American. Pardon me while I snort with laughter.
[personal profile] alexbayleaf
Preliminary results of my survey of suspended Google+ accounts

No surprise at all: many people commonly go by names that aren't on their govt IDs, many people have serious privacy/safety reasons for using a separate name online, etc etc.

Deleting

Jul. 25th, 2011 01:34 am
azurelunatic: A glittery black pin badge with a blue holographic star in the middle. (Default)
[personal profile] azurelunatic
I have deleted my Google Plus account. I go into some detail about why, there.
indeliblesasha: Bright highlighter-pink tulips with yellow tulips in the background surrounded by bright green foliage (Default)
[personal profile] indeliblesasha
I have no idea how much good it might do, if any, but the question of pseuds is up here:

http://www.google.com/moderator/#15/e=9fe9f&t=9fe9f.40&f=9fe9f.4de278&q=9fe9f.4de278

And it certainly couldn't *hurt* to up the yes number, I'm thinking.



Also, for further reading: https://plus.google.com/116098411511850876544/posts/4t8sFLLK4hK

Has some links both in the post and the comments, and addresses a multitude of actual cases in Plus right now. Nothing new, really, just more data, another voice.
shiyiya: Shiyiya, a very pale white girl with brown hair and eyes. (Default)
[personal profile] shiyiya
Because I'm seeing reports of people being locked out of *all* of their google services and it is so not worth that. So I downloaded out my data and closed the account, and then there was this handy 'Please tell us why you're leaving' box. This is what I put in it:

You say you want people to use the name they are known by so people can find them, and then demand government identification. My friends are online. Virtually none of them even know what the name on my government identification *is*, because I am a young woman on the internet and justifiably paranoid - I've had two internet-only stalkers so far, and I'd rather not hand them information to find where I live on a silver platter. Or anyone else. If I can't use Plus pseudonymously, with the name people actually know me by, I won't use it. Which is a dreadful pity, because I was loving it. But there are all these reports I'm seeing of people being locked out of their entire Google accounts and all services, not just Plus, and I'm not risking losing my Gmail and my Google Reader and my Google Docs and my Picasa and my Google Bookmarks and everything else. Plus isn't worth the chance of that.
ysobel: (Default)
[personal profile] ysobel
I posted this publicly on G+; copying here in case it mysteriously vanishes.

In light of Google's crackdown on legitimate pseudonym usage (really, Google? You had a chance to be better than Facebook and you decided to be /worse/?), I will not be posting content to g+ any time soon. I am lucky enough to be able to use my real name online, but not everyone can safely, plus a lot of my online social circle knows me by a different name, and I strongly disapprove of g+ not allowing people to use the NAME THEY ARE KNOWN BY.

Also: http://geekfeminism.org/2011/07/19/who-is-harmed-by-a-real-names-policy/


ETA: That under my RL name. Have started a g+ account under a long-time pseudonym (Isabeau Suro -- I have been going as some variant of isabeau since 1996 or so, Suro added as a last name for those annoying sites that require last names; it is how I registered my non-gmail email account, my LiveJournal, Usenet posts back in the day, fandom stuff, Amazon and Thinkgeek wishlists, etc) just out of morbid curiosity to see how long it will last.
rainbow: drawing of a pink furred cat person with purple eyes and heart shaped glasses. their name is catastrfy. (Default)
[personal profile] rainbow
(reposted from my own journal)

i posted a headsup post on google+ a couple hours ago stating that because of their anti-pseud policies i won't be being active there; i may scroll, but will probably not be posting or using google apart from the search engine.

and gee, now that post is gone.

(i've reposted it to my extended circles; so far it's still there this time)
trouble: Sketch of Hermoine from Harry Potter with "Bookworms will rule the world (after we finish the background reading)" on it (Default)
[personal profile] trouble
Suspended Google+ Accounts

Hi, my name's Skud. I'm an activist, blogger, open-source-and-free-culture nerd, and recent ex-Googler with a strong interest in pseudonymity on Google+. I'm @Skud on Twitter, or you can find my website at http://infotrope.net/

I'm trying to collect data on cases where people's Google+ accounts have been suspended for name violations. If you have had your account suspended, please fill in this form!

If you want to edit/update your responses after submission (eg. if you get further news on restoring your account), or want to contact me for any other reason, email skud@infotrope.net

Very short privacy statement: Unless you check one of the the "ok to share" boxes at the end of this survey, I won't share the details of your answers with anyone, just the aggregate results.
xenacryst: Patrick McGoohan as the Prisoner, Obama-art style (Be seeing you!)
[personal profile] xenacryst
For those following along on the pseudonym issue, [personal profile] skud has been suspended from Google+. She is a former Google employee (via acquisition), a strong advocate of pseudonymity, and the person who started the wiki of who might be harmed by internet real name policies.

I consider this fair warning that if we are in one of those classes of people in that wiki, if we desire to not use our real names online, we are not wanted as part of the Google+ community, neither by the company, nor by the larger community and its self-appointed vigilantes who can use the "report this profile" button anonymously.
xenacryst: Patrick McGoohan as the Prisoner, Obama-art style (Be seeing you!)
[personal profile] xenacryst
Over at GeekFeminism.org, Skud made a short post and started a wiki document to list the classes of people who could be harmed by a real name/no-pseudonym policy at online sites:

http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Who_is_harmed_by_a_%22Real_Names%22_policy%3F

Feel free to add categories and examples.
elke_tanzer: autumn web (autumn web)
[personal profile] elke_tanzer
From what I'm seeing, with Second Life avatar accounts being suspended and such, and no official clarification that persistent pseudonyms are welcome... I've decided that I'm Downgrading my Elke Tanzer G+ account.

During the Downgrade process, I chose the first of two radio-button options: Remove G+ Features. I think I could have selected the latter one, to remove my entire Profile, but I wasn't 100% sure, so I've left the Profile up (removing nearly everything in it).

My Gmail is still working.

In more positive news, before Downgrading the G+ features, I saw that it is now possible to lock down the Gender field to a variety of levels of access. That is a positive step, and I thank Google for doing that.
elke_tanzer: autumn web (autumn web)
[personal profile] elke_tanzer
Google has officially announced: "Starting this week, you'll be able to set the privacy setting of your gender on the Google+ profile, just as you control other information about yourself."

Videoblog announcement from Frances Haugen: https://plus.google.com/106792630639449031994/posts/5kt9TpEb77m

Videoblog with transcript from Liz Fong: https://plus.google.com/106912596786226524817/posts/KCUbRMKQ7VP
elke_tanzer: autumn web (autumn web)
[personal profile] elke_tanzer
Kee Hinkley talks about what some people can and cannot share under legal names (g+ only): https://plus.google.com/#117903011098040166012/posts/RS7ZRt17SUf
Another reason people may not want to use a social network under a real name: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/07/10/0438252/Facebook-Helps-Israel-Blacklist-Air-Travellers
Google+'s "No-Pseudonyms" Policy is Homophobic, Not Just Anti-Social: http://blog.duh.org/2011/07/googles-no-pseudonyms-policy-is.html
Google+'s "Identity" Controversy: No Easy Answers: http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000880.html
NY Times, No Pseudonyms Allowed: Is Google Plus's Real Name Policy a Good Idea?: http://www.nytimes.com/external/readwriteweb/2011/07/12/12readwriteweb-no-pseudonyms-allowed-is-google-pluss-real-na-316.html
Goldkin Drake, an open letter to Google+: https://plus.google.com/114929190273737402078/posts/hYxTaik1iYs
CNET, Google+ faces thorny online identity issues: http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20078671-264/google-faces-thorny-online-identity-issues/
elke_tanzer: autumn web (autumn web)
[personal profile] elke_tanzer
(crossposted at https://plus.google.com/107619776564880847214/posts/eDo21AKN4Xz and http://elke-tanzer.dreamwidth.org/1083007.html, because I may be targeted as a test case, and if I can protect my friends from those with malicious intent, I will. Also... I have just done a G+ Data Liberation to make a backup copy of things in case I'm TOSed from G+, and am also in the process of backing up my Gmail messages onto a local machine as well just because it's a Good Idea. This situation really does feel quite a lot like hobbits facing Mordor.)

I have just set my Profile page to not show those who have encircled me, nor show those I have encircled; I have set those to Private. I have not un-encircled anyone, but I will do so at the request of any friends who may feel the need to do so for their own safety; please contact me privately as needed.

Some of my recent posts here on G+ have become much more high-profile, and if malicious people start coming out of the woodwork, I want their stalking to stop at me, not sweep through my connections. I have also just set my Links to my other websites in the sidebar of my Profile to be viewable only by my Circles, for the same reason.

So, for the approximately hundred or so people who either have encircled and/or are encircling me here... well... encircled friends (some of you dear friends who are also persistently pseudonymous)... most of you already know which other sites to find me on if my account is TOSed here for being a pseudonym, and/or for not having a picture of my face.

Oh, one more thing: Trying to do a Data Liberation while Multiple-Login'd to two G+ accounts? Makes things on multiple tabs get very borked; the login name in the top bar no longer accurately corresponds to the stream being presented in the middle column of the screen when it should. And yes, I am sending feedback about that.

Edit: Feedback sent: Doing a Data Liberation while Multiple Login'd to two accounts (I'll call them Elke and not-Elke for purposes of this feedback) does work while having multiple browsing tabs open on various G+ posts, but afterwards the tabs I have open for each account are all messed up as I click through to other links... trying to show my own stream as not-Elke results in a page with not-Elke as the login name in the upper left, but Elke's stream presented in the middle column of the page.
elke_tanzer: autumn web (autumn web)
[personal profile] elke_tanzer
(cross-posted to https://plus.google.com/107619776564880847214/posts/Cg4RGwi5HD7 and http://elke-tanzer.dreamwidth.org/1082873.html)

I've just posted the following as a comment to https://plus.google.com/104013835962992611989/posts/GuDVrkAdmTy (edit: because of a technical glitch, John has moved the post to https://plus.google.com/104013835962992611989/posts/j7w3CmpSUo4)


Hi John... The post you have linked to here is from July 9th; I have in fact posted more recent information, and respectfully request that you take a careful look through my more recent posts.

The fact that official Google documents are not internally consistent is a serious problem, and one that in all of my information-gathering I have not seen satisfactorily addressed anywhere.

This sentence is very unclear:
Google services support three different types of use when it comes to your identity: unidentified, pseudonymous, identified. Google Profiles is a product that works best in the identified state.

When I activated my G+ account, it was with the understanding that while G+ might work "best" in the identified state, it was also quite acceptable to participate in G+ in the pseudonymous state, and frankly, that is an important differentiating factor between G+ and Facebook for me.

Until http://www.google.com/support/profiles/bin/answer.py?answer=1228271 is clarified, it is my understanding that my pseudonymous account conforms to G+'s naming requirements, because those requirements are nebulous and unclear.

However, just in case you have not figured it out from my Profile: Elke Tanzer is a persistent pseudonym which is not the name on my passport; I have been online as Elke for over a decade. I go by my legal name in certain settings, and I go by Elke in other settings, and I have maintained that separation for over a decade.

If Google officially clarifies the naming policy such that it is clear that pseudonymous use of G+ is disallowed, I will be Data Migrating and Downgrading my account (so that I can continue to use Gmail), to comply with a clear policy. I will also have decided that G+ is quite the equivalent of Facebook (which is to say: completely insufficient for my social networking needs, because half of my social graph knows me as Elke and half of my social graph knows me by my legal name).

By speaking up about this names policy problem (rather than bowing to the chilling effects and silencing that Google's lack of clarity is causing in all of these discussions), I am facing increased risk of spurious suspension of my G+ account, until the G+ policy is clarified.

Side note: If anyone wants to save a local copy of the G+ Orientation Linkspam post I made (which many have found useful: https://plus.google.com/107619776564880847214/posts/9DqSD5QFVx1), now might be a good time to do so, because I do not know what happens to reshares while an account is suspended. I strongly suspect that someone malicious will be trying to make a test case out of me; Elke has had confrontations with misogynistic men online who I never, ever want to allow access to my legal name, and they may still be stalking Elke's online presence.


EDIT: Additional technical information from Liz Fong in the comments on this post over at G+: "while a profile is suspended, all top-level posts by that profile temporarily 404. The person's G+ profile 404s as well. However, comments that person has left on other peoples' posts, and reshares of that person's posts remain intact."
Page generated Sep. 26th, 2017 02:06 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios