Should Microcosm show the real identity of users?

My answer would depend. On TABS site which is that of a professional org I would like to know who thinks what (Though it is useful to log on with other names to help make the site look more used) . Otherwise anonymity is criucial

someone may have already said this... but it seems like also a strong differentiating thing for Microcosm to have. you want to make forums available to everyone, average web-users. for those that have never much used forums before, it won't necessarily be obvious what the benefit is over eg. making a facebook group/page, and pseudonyms is an obvious difference. it's also part of a trust thing, I think? saying the user is in control. whereas people feel like they are never quite in control of facebook privacy/information, and that's quite a mainstream opinion even if the average user can't really put their finger on it.

I just saw the link through to here - I voted that I wasn't bothered, but I suppose I wouldn't say anything on here that I wouldn't say in an equivalent offline environment. That said, I'm against forcing anyone to use their real name. this community, (like most that aren't so large that they lose their sense of community) is capable of enforcing its own norms and values upon its members well enough without forcing people to reveal who they actually are.

The question Ive been wondering recently is 'what is identity'?

This thread suggests real name = identity and in western society the two words are widely used interchangeably.

Should they be and are their alternatives approaches to this culture?

I've been reading about the Yanomamö tribe in venezuela who although having names are forbidden from their use, theory being this helps build group cohesiveness.
http://anthroniche.com/darkness_documents/0575.pdf

Westerners do this whenever using the name 'god' inplace of 'Jehovah'

Identity might be better defined by historic behavioural patterns.

Externally names are really just a way to identify identity.
Which asks the question, why do you need to identify historic behaviour patterns unless you intend to make a sterotypical judgement based upon them?

Internally names help identify ownership of actions and the feeling of volitional free will.

I don't agree either are positive or should be encouraged and am glad to see microcosm allows users to change their names.

It would be interesting look at if the western beliefs in volitional freewill are maybe driven by its approach to naming or vice versa.

What the flying fuck is that drivel you've just blessed this poor world with?

he's just jeezed all over the place like a right belm.

So Jeez nicked my username? WAC...

Yeah load of horse shit that.
Sorry bit it's the sort of drivel that really winds me up, all typed out on a MacBook.

Sorry.

A Macbook with no name.

http://youtu.be/HKoX98DGvNw

I'm for Pseuds as it enables me to sound more interesting than I actually am.
More seriously though, it's my understanding (and this may sound a little wet) that a large part of of the forum is made up of people who enjoy the freedom (to a degree) of riding how and where they want, away from the constraints and stress of their personal life, which carries over into their forum activity. So I would say that continuing to use pseudonyms (and an air of nonconformity) is in the spirit of the forum.

So I would say that continuing to use pseudonyms (and an air of nonconformity) is in the spirit of the forum.

That may well be, but I feel genuinely sorry for TS who now has to have his name tenuously linked not only with that old load of shite above, but also persistent stalking and trolling of women who are members of this same forum, and now racist outbursts to boot. Spirit of the forum, indeed.

Jeez = James
TS above = Tommy

James != Tommy

Jeez did not nick your username, Tommy did.

But then, Tommy didn't either, as your profile name is >>>>>> and you still have that identity. Nothing was stolen, you gave up TS to become >>>>>> and you are still that person.

I concur that Tommy did it to troll you, but using a name that is available in a system that prevents duplicates is OK from a technical perspective... so really it just comes down to "Was it an innocent thing, or a deliberate trolling thing?".

Deliberate trolling.

Would it be possible to stop people using names that have been used already?

That would stop people changing their names back to what they had before (which they feasibly might want to do for completely legitimate reasons).

I think there's a case for a permissions structure of some kind on name-changes to thwart serial abusers, though. The Facebook structure could work: you get 5 free changes then if you want to change it again it needs to be approved by some shadowy administrator.

If you are an investor and have a reserved username, you already are stopping people using your profile name.

We may make that available to "verified users" as a paid thing. Equivalent to how donations used to be, once you've pay to verify your ID you effectively own that username on that site.

Or, if someone does not want someone (anyone) else to use their preferred username they should use it themselves.

And then post under an alias from a different account, good thinking.

That would be shocking behaviour.

Does this thread not see much action because it's on page 2 of the sub-forums?

More likely because the issue is done and dusted. If individual sites want to enact a policy of real names, it's up to them.

Would it be possible to stop people using names that have been used already?

Yes that would be a good idea

Names in use cannot be used by someone else.

But if we blocked all prior names, then what would stop someone running through the list of common names to block them all out?

You can change your name as often as you want, but the catch is... you have no claim on any name you've let go of. And why would you? Even on Twitter if you change your username your old one becomes available again.

The only exception to this is for investors. Investors who helped fund this product and the company were offered a reward: We'd reserve their username. The side effect of this is that it is permanently reserved, so they have a single username that no-one else can ever use.

We have discussed, and we may, extend that kind of functionality to people. But we'll probably charge for this... the company needs to make money somehow.