Use your real name

[PeterEmpowerEd]

More thoughts about anonymity ... engaging an abiding distrust for anonymous speech

I've had cause to think about this topic again recently with the sensational 'Gay Girl in Damascus' hoax bringing up the issue of long-standing pseudonyms and use of anonymity on the internet.

A very good article from The Guardian's Dan Gillmor on the issues contains this passage:

Sounding real is not the same as being real. The fake Amina's blog was especially well done, with details that sounded authentic even to native Syrians. Its unmasked author said he was telling larger truths, but we have a name for this technique: fiction.

We also have a name for the technique of identity in this case: pseudonym. This is a much-used method online – not revealing one's own name but having a consistent identifier. It's one step away from outright anonymity, where there is no accountability whatever. As I wrote last week, the lack of accountability in such cases puts more responsibility on the audience. It is up to us to cultivate an abiding distrust for speech when the speaker refuses to stand behind his or her own words – that is, by using one's own name.

We should temper that scepticism, however, with the recognition that in places like Syria, where vicious dictators are ordering wholesale killings of dissidents and rebels, standing directly behind one's own words can be literally life-threatening.

Now, clearly not many of the pseudonyms and glovepuppets posting here on PropertyTalk are in fear of their lives, and some of my favourite contributors were never 'outted' (living treasures like poormastery and Xris whose identities were never revealed). Others (not so favourite) have been revealed and marked as manipulative dissemblers of misleading statements. Still others maintain their tissue thin glovepuppet status.

I respect Dan Gillmor and agree with his view about the need for audiences/readers to deploy 'an abiding distrust' for anonymous speech. Damn right.

It depends what the pseudonym-user is saying, of course. If the communication is trivial, who cares? But if impressive claims of 'results' and 'expertise' and testimonials offered (Anonymous? Yes. Go figure) are being published ... well, distrust sounds like just the recipe to me.

As noted here and on my blog, sometimes a whistleblower needs protection from reprisals and retribution.

Tom MacMaster, the man behind the illusion named Amina, is a gifted and talented writer ... but, it seems to me, just a dishonest one.

- P

[PeterTach]

So should people be allowed to use a "Proxy" image (or sockpuppet) but only if they are being dangerous?

Is it in your opinion OK for a poster on PT to hide as long as their opinion matchs your own?
(not trying to pick a fight but rather open a discussion)

I must say I find Julian Assange to be a criminal and terrorist not some form of modern freedom fighter and I do think that people and states have the right to privacy, security and to simply be allowed to have secrets.

But if "the citizenry has a right to scrutinise the state" then we are the citizenry and Property Talk (as much as I love it) has become the state.
There is in both situations no way back to the good old days they are gone, PT cost's money to run and so is no longer "Free or Independent".
Advertising, Marketing, list leasing and personnel interest have become the new norm to the point were using a false identity has become the only safe way to post here unless you have no opinion or are happy to simply adopt the most popular one.

[TheLiberalLeft]

If the communication is trivial, who cares?

I'll drink to that.

[donna]

There is in both situations no way back to the good old days they are gone, PT cost's money to run and so is no longer "Free or Independent".

Wrong Peter.

'FREE' - You don't pay to post on PropertyTalk..and we allow you promote your own forums - so it's not all bad is it!

'INDEPENDENT' - We do not own a property related business that benefits from PropertyTalk. At the time we set up PropertyTalk Peter - there were other PI forums in NZ that were only there to promote the owners property related services.

Cheers,

Donna

[PeterEmpowerEd]

[To Peter Tach] You don't pay to post on PropertyTalk..and we allow you promote your own forums - so it's not all bad is it!

I don’t mean to appear inhospitable to 'Peter Tach' but I think whoever s/he is they are a perfect example of a sockpuppet for whom I certainly 'engage abiding distrust'. (Halfempty is another, but so what?)

It seems clear 'Peter Tach' has an agenda to explicitly denigrate PropertyTalk while using the forum itself as a platform to promote his/her own equally sockpuppety effort in direct competition with it.
Frankly, I’m amused the owners tolerate it.

I don’t care what your name is, 'Peter Tach' but I’d be surprised if it was Peter Tach.

Peter Aranyi

[Kerry Christian]

Interesting!!

I do read this Blog - but choose not to write often anymore, However.

I do not want to see a"Bluechip" happen again

If you give property or financial advise - I want to know your name - I want to know what you have done, your good and bad - and I want to be able to contact you.

[PeterEmpowerEd]

... using a false identity has become the only safe way to post here unless you have no opinion or are happy to simply adopt the most popular one.

If you give property or financial advise - I want to know your name - I want to know what you have done, your good and bad - and I want to be able to contact you.

Hi Kerry,

Are you saying you want those details for everyone posting advice/opinion/comments on a forum? That seems unlikely to happen.

An internet discussion forum is, by its nature, a bit of a free-for-all ... a bit like Jacob Weisberg said about Twitter recently:


.... anyway, sometimes people who have expertise or experience to share or none (or even just opinions) drop by to share those commodities ... of varying value .... to other frequenters of the forum. They may want to do this anonymously, and that's their right.

But it seems to me there comes a time when someone anonymously POSES as as something. e.g. someone may want to stay incognito but claim the benefit of a pseudo real-world 'reputation' or make some claim or implication of 'experience' which (they imply) means readers should put more weight on their (still anonymous) expressions of opinion than the average Joe's.

At that point, I think what Gillmor calls the 'abiding distrust' could be engaged, because they are now saying: I don't want to tell you WHO I am but you should pay attention to my opinions even though I am anonymous. [Or, with noms de plume, e.g. Bob Kane, they are effectively anonymous.]

Some of the sockpuppets who inhabit PropertyTalk play this game and over time their various alliances and agendas become apparent.

Peter Tach, whose comments and behaviour have been notable, is just one recent example. There have been plenty since I've been here with my one user ID, posting in my own name [... yes, yes, thank you, please hold your applause.]

The 'multiple personalities' of others, for example, sometimes posing as satisfied clients of spruikers-under-discussion, or those trying to pose as 'a random disinterested bystander' supposedly offended by the said spruikers being questioned so 'petulantly' etc, are just a hazard of the game, I guess.

You can tell a lot from how someone posts, IMO. I respect the reasoned analysis of posters like Xav, Mark B and others ... even though I don't know who they are. Their courteous, often patient comments/contributions (usually well-supported) contain the seeds of their own credibility.
In their case, Kerry, I personally don't need to apply your "what you have done, your good and bad - and I want to be able to contact you" criteria.

And likewise comments made by certain sockpuppets reveal their lack of credibility.

- P

[TheLiberalLeft]

I prefer not to over-analyse and take each post as it comes. I feel smart enough to judge the post on its individual merits without the need to contact the poster. There's be tumbleweeds blowing thru this site if name giving was mandatory.

Just how is that enforced anyway? The site's keepers have to sight your passport? Give me a break.

[PeterEmpowerEd]

TLL: Quite right. Life's too serious a lot of the time.
Most of the time it doesn't matter a hoot who people are ... but sometimes, well, horses for courses, I guess.

- P

[mals69]

Not a good idea using your real name imho, discussing a tenant, trying to gather information if a trade person has ripped you off etc, the people in question could have a fair idea you are talking about them.

[Neongreen]

I do read this Blog - but choose not to write often anymore, However.

I do not want to see a"Bluechip" happen again

If you give property or financial advise - I want to know your name - I want to know what you have done, your good and bad - and I want to be able to contact you.

That's fine Kerry, we don't always get what we want.

I lose nothing by not revealing my name, but open myself up to risks if I do. So why would I? To satisfy a stranger I don't really know?

You take what people say with a grain of salt on the Internet. You then go and do research to back this up, and if possible seek professional advice. Getting free advice is exactly that - free. Demanding people reveal their identities because they gave you a bit of free advice is silly. Maybe if you paid them they would.

[Momo]

Whilst I like your passion - why is it so hard to give your name?

What are you hiding is what people ask?

If you want entertainment - watch sky TV. Differences are fine. "One of the joys/gripes about PT, is that people get put off by the "flaming", "disagreements" between forumites" as per Essence, is something to minimise to ensure forums are for education, not entertainment. Too often pathetic insults, personal attacks, cheap shots and the like pervade these forums and they degrade them, and discourage people to use them. That is part of the reason why their os such a drop off in PT's use - along with the market of course.

There is something call privacy, people want to remain anonymous doesn't mean they have dirty secret to hide, the truth is that we all need to be careful on the personal information that we are sharing with othera on the internet. With your full name disclose on this forum, others can easily find all properties under your name ( this might include your home address , any companies that you are associate with it, you phone number and much more) .Does it increase ones credibility on their comments by disclosing their full name in this forum? maybe ! Will I do that by giving up my privacy for it? No.

[cube]

Comments posted on PT, anonymously or not, can lead to legal action being taken against PT - therefore I don't think it unreasonable to ask that people who wish to post criticism of others should do so under their real name so that any legal action can be directed accordingly.

Of course it would be far better (at least for those of us watching from the side-lines) if those accused defended themselves within the forums; I'm sure the discussions would be very robust. Most choose not to do so, however.

[Neongreen]

This I can respect, even though I don't fully believe in the liability transfer there. Google would be being sued in every country in the world if that were the case.

What I don't see as being realistic is forcing everyone to reveal their identities by default, so others can contact them in real life.

[PeterEmpowerEd]

Of course it would be far better (at least for those of us watching from the side-lines) if those accused defended themselves with[in] the forums; I'm sure the discussions would be very robust. Most choose not to do so, however.

Why do you think that is, Quentin? Why is the default position of many of those whose actions or statements are questioned/highlighted as dubious on PropertyTalk to threaten "litigation" against PT instead of laying out their side of the argument?

It's enough of an established pattern. Any theory?

- P