“Lastly, I really do regret I that spoiled ‘Ciaran Laval’ s night away from the pub. The way this election is going he may find me there before long.” – Sir Norman Tebbit, April 19th 2010.
The above quote is relevant in the name stakes because it demonstrates I have a persistent online identity outside Second Life circles, although what I was ever doing on The Torygraph blogs whilst sober still remains a mystery, what Sir Norman was referring to is that I’d stated on another blog post of his that I was stone cold sober and agreeing with him, it was a scary evening.
Which brings us to the latest episode of the nym wars and Google +, which rears its head in the shape of form of Google’s Bradley Horowitz suggesting a new and more inclusive naming policy is being r0lled out. Now before you get too excited you need to tread carefully here, Violet Blue, who was very involved in the nym wars because her name was considered to be fake (it isn’t) has posted over at Zdnet suggesting that pseudonyms still aren’t welcome. However Violet seems to be getting a tad confused, Bradley Horowitz is talking of one name nyms, rather than normal looking nyms and this is where it all gets confusing.
Google’s updated naming policy states:
“Use your common first and last name. By using your common name, you’ll be able to connect with people you know and help them find you. Indications of membership in professional, educational, societal or religious entities, such as “Dr.”, “Rev.” or “Professor” are not allowed in the first or last name fields.
Violation examples: Doctor Stan Livingston, Bill Smithwick DDS, Rev. Jim Copley, S. P.
Most people use their legal name, or some variant of it, in the real world. We recognize that this isn’t always the case and allow for other common names in Google+. If we challenge the name you intend to use, you will be asked to submit proof that this is an established identity with a meaningful following. You can do so by providing links to other social networking sites, news articles, or official documents in which you are referred to by this name. Note that this name and your profile must represent you, and not an avatar or other secondary online identity. Profane or offensive names are not allowed.”
The confusion is going to come with avatars and secondary online identities, for many Second Life users who blog, tweet and whatever, their Second Life name is now long enough established for them to consider it a common name beyond being an avatar name, some will even do business as their avatar name.
The shape of the arguments against Google’s real name policy hasn’t shifted that much, Violet Blue is absolutely spot on there. However there does seem to be a bit more wiggle room now. So here’s how the land lies for me, I now have:
Facebook Page (albeit as a fictional character but Facebook don’t allow wiggle room).
My roleplaying sim now has:
How this will all end up I don’t know, however I wouldn’t suggest investing too much time in Google + just yet, because I’m not sure they quite know what they mean on their naming policies, it is an evolving policy. I’m happy enough with my Facebook pages as I know there’s no grey area there, I don’t have a Facebook profile, I don’t need one to create pages, which is actually a bonus for Facebook.
The other issue of course is time, on top of these pages there are other websites, blogs, forums, Twitter, Flickr, going in Second Life itself as well as Star Wars: The Old Republic, World Of Warcraft, Football Manager 2012, exercising and reading novels, which I’m currently enjoying greatly, I have rediscoverd my love of reading novels, largely due to Robert Jordan’s Wheel Of Time series.
The nym wars are far from over, indeed for some the battle is just beginning but there does appear to be wiggle room, just don’t be surprised if that chink of light gets plastered over as policies are confirmed.