Website Personas - Anonymous vs. Real
Open discussion about using anonymous vs. real website personas with public websites.
Many websites these days use real user names, and do not use or allow anonymous screen names.
Some people prefer to read about things submitted by and discussed by people who can be identified. Others prefer the anonymity that other sites allow, with the ability to submit, comment discuss without as much potential for personal feedback, criticism or retribution.
I agree that there is a need to provide both options, but some sites are impacted by their selection of user identification. Each approach suits some people better than others, a personal choice overlooked when a site adopts a single approach.
The idea that the use of a real name is needed to make a site truly "social" is questionable. In many social situations, expecially public ones, it is accepted that the need for everyone to be clearly identified is not a real social requirment. In a public bar or at a concert, we don't all walk around wearing name tags. Does'nt make us unsociable.
A forced need to be identifiable can and will in many situations also stifle true feedback and expression of opinions. The flip side is that sometimes an opinion or comment may hold more meaning or significance if the contributor is known.
It should be a choice, not a restriction on the use of a specific website or service. The same terms of service, privacy and user policies can still exist. A user identified by a screen name can be as easily monitored, controlled and restricted if need be, as a user identifed by an actual or supposed real name.
I would like to hear others opinions on this, and have opened this as a discussion. Use the Add Post button to add your input.
Entry Details (60047)