[Bob Kuczewski]

What does everyone think about requiring real names for the US Hawks forum?

Let me start by quoting from http://www.paraglidingforum.com/faq.php#1:

Paragliding Forum is a real name forum

We're convinced that posting with real names gives more quality to the forum and adds extra value to the posts. Paragliding Forum was founded as a reaction to former forums where anonymous postings have destroyed any civilized conversation. That's why we insist for real names and why this is our Golden Rule.

If there's any doubt about the identity of a user, the name fields will be cleared and the user gets a warning at the next login, to fill-in the real name. Whilst the name fields are empty, the user cannot post and all posts of the user remain hidden.

Real names are only visible for registered users and hidden for search engine bots. That's why you should avoid the use of the real names in your posts.

I don't really know how to implement some of the automated features they use for hiding real names and barring posting when the "real name" field is empty. If those features were important, I could look into them.

The reality is that many of us (Bill, Sam, and Rick) already use their full names. Others (like myself and Joe) use abbreviations. Still others (like Scott and Ernie) use a "handle" but their names have been made available either by themselves in their posts or by others referencing them by name.

While I've certainly seen some bad behavior on paraglidingforum.com, I do think they make some good points in their arguments for real names. I'm not necessarily advocating one way or the other right now, but I think it's worth considering. So I'd like to open the topic for discussion and thoughts.

Thanks.

[Bill Cummings]

I’m alright having my name out there but lately my complete information, five times that I know of, has be exposed. (Not here) I mean SS # and everything) three times by mistake by three separate entities another two times by theft.

I can certainly understand anyone that communicates on the internet wanting to treat what goes out just like they would on a CB radio.

Never put out to much because as we all know nothing is secure.

At the least I would think no one should be anonymous to the website monitor. I know as a fact that USHPA does protect the real names of some members on the members only list.

There should be privacy perimeters posted describing when a moderator may be forced to cough up information by legal means.

If someone goes nuts and threatens to kill someone they need a visit from the proper controlling agency otherwise the US Hawks site will be complicit.

[SamKellner]

Hawks,

Requiring real names is fine with me.

I think forum communication will be more efficient with real names.

Building a HG assn. together. Tell me your name.

If someone wants to join US Hawks and donate $$$$$$ , and not be identified?

That would be fine.

[wingspan33]

One side to this debate -

If Bob had given himself the user name "Free Fly Forever" and made this site's name "American Hang Gliding Association" (AHGA) then certain people wouldn't have a clue as to who he really is. Possible result, . . . he wouldn't be up for being tossed out of the U$hPA.

Sometime anonymity is a GOOD thing.

Yours Truly,

J. D. Rockefeller

[Bob Kuczewski]

Hey J.D. ... could I get some help with my legal bills?

[wingspan33]

Everybody is fooled by the Rockefeller part. And leaving out one of my initials doesn't help either.

Include it and you get J. D. B., which stands for "Just Dang Broke".

Sorry.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Over the years I've gotten a lot of anonymous information, and it does have value (see topic "Jebbs still control Torrey" as an example).

But at the same time, it's really not right to have a conversation with 10 different "personalities" that all come from the same keyboard and fingertips.

So here's a thought. We could required real names in the main forum, but allow people to register with user names containing something like "anon". So "FreeFlyerAnon". "AnonHawk", "AnonymousPilot" and similar names would have the special meaning that they were intentionally anonymous. That would restrict them to the Free Speech Zone, but they would allow them to post anonymously. Then anyone with a real name could quote them in the main forum (as I did with the anonymous message I posted in the "Jebbs still control Torrey" topic). It would be understood that the anonymous posts could come from anyone (including the person quoting that post), so there is still an element of "Sockpuppetry" involved, but at least it's understood to be there (unlike what we've seen at other forums).

What does everyone think of that? What are your thoughts Mr. Rockefeller?   

[JoeF]

Requiring real names seems to imply a huge policing cost; and even upon such, one may not still have some "real name" at hand. My understanding is that one may call oneself anything wished, so long as fraud is not being committed. "Real" in some states seems to be whatever a person wants for themselves at the moment. Negotiating goods and funds with banks and the government works more efficiently when a person can be identified well, so goods and funds go to intended persons; some one name is handy for such system.
On a forum a pseudonym will get published credit relative to that pseudonym; a pseudonym is a "real" name being used by a person that may be different from the name that person uses for other realms, say Social Security Card, within family and relatives. If the pseudonym ever wants to prove that good ideas posted under the name should be credited to some other name, then that person will have the cost of proving the connection, which may be costly. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudonym

One may carefully create many email boxes with various names for various purposes. If none of the purposes is to commit fraud, then all such may be innocent. A single person might want to do good works with six different names. Or poor works. Or to have a flow of poor ideas shared. Or a flow of great ideas. Credit or merit would be spread to many names. The poster under several names would be spreading credits to several pseudonyms.
~~~~ Thomas A. Edison
~~~~ Mark Twain
(multiple personalities???)

PS: Fact: There still are some pseudonyms on ParaglidingForum. Jack does not have a fully tight ship. The problem is: What is "real" and what is "not real"? A pseudonym is a real name.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Thanks Joe for your many good thoughts contributed to the discussion. But I think there's an asymmetry problem with this:

A single person might want to do good works with six different names. Or poor works.

Most people are happy to accumulate their good works under their own names. But those who wish to do bad works will almost always want to do so without incurring the associated costs.

Humans have been social creatures for a long time, and we have a natural instinct to preserve our reputations among our peers. I believe that instinct is what helps us work together and form functioning organizations. Breaking the feedback path for one's actions can lead to pathologies in that natural system.

But your point is well made that as long as a name attaches to a person's true identity, then the name itself isn't important. What is important is that the peer group understands the association between the name and the actual person so that the feedback mechanism can function properly.

One compromise would be to allow "fake" names on the forum, but have an internal "members only" association between those names and known identities.

These are all ideas that we should think about as we're considering drafting motions (if any) on this topic.

[JoeF]

Yes, I am following the points.

On balance here are some notions:
1. Altruism? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism

2. Study of Wikipedia: Most editors are posting without legal names. Form an identity for editing Wikipedia. Post advances without getting common-life recognition for the grace added. Have more than one identity in Wikipedia for various good-works reasons; all the identities may be unbridged to each other and unbridged to common-life legal names. The content up to Wikipedia policies and guides take the dominant position of concern. The product of a giant free online encyclopedia needs no one to be recognized. One may have the self satisfaction of building the giant product.

3. "Let your light shine!" argues to keeping identity available to others. "Let your dark be brought out in the open, so correction might ensue." The tension of pride and humility battle in this mix of victory and tears.

4. How does unconditional love work into the wrestling match? Does one place a condition (recognize me) when loving another? Maybe love another via NoName or Anon? Not knowing what the giving hand is doing .... ?

5. Intentions? Why is one doing something? Sharing something? What strings are attached to a giving? How bound am "I" to my so-called or intended "gift" to another? Is the team or tribe or family or group to be seen whilst the member is not seen? How fragile: reputation! How fleeting "fame" !

6. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pride

7. Voting anonymously? Identify oneself so one gets one vote; but no one is permitted to know via the system what choice is made. Of course, there are non-anonymous voting systems.

8. Anonymous giving? Text may be what one gives.

9. When reputation within a target gift-receiving collection of people would detract from the reception flow, then one might suppress identity with the reputation baggage, so that the positive gift flows.

10. Aura of authority sometimes has weak gifts be received and held with more value than lives in the received gift. The aura might shine while the gift stays misunderstood for good or ill. Aura of poor reputation might also work to hide the value of a positive gift. What about having only the gift be seen fully detached from the aura of reputation or station?

11. Does the reputation of "Moyes" have any deleterious effect on the development of variety of hang gliders? What if just the raw gift of design stayed dominant without anyone profiting? Or does the design space race ahead best because of recognition, reputation, and the need for reward? Fuzzy bunch: we humans!