08-01-2011 01:09 PM
52 123
tools
  1. chud's Avatar
    Here's a link to a post by Skud, with a whole lot of links to posts on the subject by a current Google Employee.

    Google is gagging user advocates | Infotropism
    Seems like a display name should be able to make people happy on this one. I know there is that field in your profile, but it's unclear as to where or when it applies. She could put her real name in the profile but the Skud moniker would be what is primarily displayed. Both names would be searchable.
    07-30-2011 08:49 AM
  2. Puzzlegal's Avatar
    That wouldn't satisfy most of the people who are upset with the "no pseudonyms" policy. If the "real name" weren't searchable and couldn't be read by other users, but google could use it for their marketing purposes, that might be a viable compromise.

    No doubt some of the people who want to use Google+ with pseudonyms are people who just want their friends to be able to find them. But some want to avoid a violent ex finding them on line. Some are into non-standard "lifestyles", they are gay, or engage in the BDSM scene, or whatever, and are afraid that they might risk their employment should their real name (known to their employer and their bank) be linked to the name their friends use. I doubt google+ has any political dissidents, yet, but people use pseudonyms on both Facebook at Twitter to complain about authoritarian regimes that might have them carted away at night were they to use a real name.

    My real name is unusual, and I'm slightly worried I might lose my account on an error, because Google thinks it's fake. I have a friend who has been posting a lot of stuff about this (the source of my links) who falls into the "alternative lifestyle" category, and is very worried that Google will pull the plug on him, but can't risk using his "real name". (Not to mention, none of his actual friends even know what his legal name is, so it would be very weird to us if he had to post using it. Even his mother uses his nickname.)
    07-30-2011 09:56 AM
  3. cordoni's Avatar
    Attachment 12734

    Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
    07-30-2011 10:05 AM
  4. wpbfjr's Avatar
    so what? quit trolling!

    private citizens agreed to the TOS for each service and app.

    employees are subject to their organizations policies and terms of employment.
    07-30-2011 10:32 AM
  5. Puzzlegal's Avatar
    Attachment 12734

    Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
    A good friend was laid off two weeks after he came out as gay at the office. It wasn't a coincidence. Lucky you if you never travel in circles where stuff like that might happen. The friend I mentioned above is into BDSM, which is weird enough to be a negative at most workplaces, I would imagine.

    FYI, my employer always peeks at people's public Facebook profile, and does a quick google search when we consider potential new hires. It's not like that stuff is secret.

    Personally, I think it's just growing pains on Google's part, and they will come up with something that will work for people like that. But I understand why people are upset that the "don't be evil" company appears to be out to "out" them.

    edited to add: Oh, but if you just meant that you aren't going to have your Android phone killed because google doesn't like your pseudonym, yeah, I agree with you. They've been pretty clear that they aren't pulling gmail accounts or anything like that over the name issue. I'm pretty sure you have to seriously violate the TOS (such as using your ID to spam 50M people with ads for penile extenders) to run any real risk of Google kicking you out the door completely. I think the name thing is pretty much confined to Google+ social networking.
    07-30-2011 10:36 AM
  6. Puzzlegal's Avatar
    so what? quit trolling!

    private citizens agreed to the TOS for each service and app.

    employees are subject to their organizations policies and terms of employment.
    Actually, the Google+ terms of service say you should use a "name that people know you by", which would be a perfectly fine policy. Folks are upset because that doesn't seem to actually be their policy. At any rate, if it is, it is being haphazardly implemented.
    07-30-2011 10:40 AM
  7. Johnly's Avatar
    Meh. I wouldn't worry about it. Did you see some people selling whole G+ accounts online? Google is just trying to keep G+ real, but I suspect only a small number of users got a G+ account terminated for abusing and breaking service agreements. Just another good reason to read any agreements you accept.
    07-30-2011 12:10 PM
  8. Johnly's Avatar
    Anyone who thinks they are entitled to non public beta services Google provides is wrong. They can terminate you freely without explanation.
    07-30-2011 12:13 PM
  9. MBeattie's Avatar
    Anything is possible but nothing worth worrying about. Google is safe and secure. Posting this Is like saying "if you delete your Google account you'll loose data" or "if someone manages to steal your debit card and guess your pin you could loose money" or if someone punctures a hole in your tires you could loose air" or......
    07-30-2011 03:33 PM
  10. MBeattie's Avatar
    Oh and your phone wouldn't become a dumb phone, you'd create a new Google account to sign into on your phone.
    07-30-2011 03:38 PM
  11. BlackHawkA4's Avatar
    Oh and your phone wouldn't become a dumb phone, you'd create a new Google account to sign into on your phone.
    It would just be a phone with Alzheimer.
    07-30-2011 04:32 PM
  12. MBeattie's Avatar
    Lol, that's a great way to put it
    07-30-2011 05:16 PM
  13. BlackHawkA4's Avatar
    Lol, that's a great way to put it
    One that likes to throw away things you paid for. Because they don't remember they want them.
    07-30-2011 05:34 PM
  14. wpbfjr's Avatar
    Actually, the Google+ terms of service say you should use a "name that people know you by", which would be a perfectly fine policy. Folks are upset because that doesn't seem to actually be their policy. At any rate, if it is, it is being haphazardly implemented.
    i see... so if your birth certificate name is "igottago bigpotty" and you only have one real world friend (including your mom), but online, 1,500 screen names know you as "ladiez_mann", google+ tos will insist you log on as "igottago bigpotty" since your mom 'knows' you, and the 1,500 screen names only know what you post.

    curiously, we fall further down the rabbit hole...
    07-30-2011 08:13 PM
  15. mycrownvic02#WN's Avatar
    I had this happen to a customers phone. Her phone came in with contacts, and left out with none. She swore up and down that i lost her contacts. Then i had her sign in her gmail online, and it was suspended. Luckily i had exported her contacts on her card before hand. Had her make a new gmail, imported contacts, then sent her on her way.
    07-30-2011 10:48 PM
  16. 6tr6tr's Avatar
    I had this happen to a customers phone. Her phone came in with contacts, and left out with none. She swore up and down that i lost her contacts. Then i had her sign in her gmail online, and it was suspended. Luckily i had exported her contacts on her card before hand. Had her make a new gmail, imported contacts, then sent her on her way.
    Yep, it happens to real people. Luckily, she hadn't already purchased a ton of apps, etc.
    07-30-2011 11:17 PM
  17. Linkchomp's Avatar
    Goodness, can Google really get away with something like that because that's a serious breach of privacy and it's just asking for a class action lawsuit.

    One of the reasons why I will never get a Google+ profile.
    07-31-2011 12:20 AM
  18. chud's Avatar
    Goodness, can Google really get away with something like that because that's a serious breach of privacy and it's just asking for a class action lawsuit.

    One of the reasons why I will never get a Google+ profile.
    ?

    Do you have a Facebook account?

    I wonder who the University of Phoenix lawyer is who started all this anti-Google+ rhetoric. I've been hearing it a lot lately and if you'll look, G+ and Facebook's TOS are like carbon copies of each other.
    07-31-2011 12:48 AM
  19. Linkchomp's Avatar
    Except Google's been known to terminate people's accounts for absolutely no reason.
    07-31-2011 03:24 AM
  20. Johnly's Avatar
    Except Google's been known to terminate people's accounts for absolutely no reason.
    proof, or hot air.
    07-31-2011 03:27 AM
  21. On3wheels's Avatar
    Google has more information about every individual customer than even the government.sure most of it is what porn you like or your favorite tv showa but that and every communication I send that is not face to face goes threw google. they can know who I know with me even knowing I know anyone. Last thing I'm worried about is losing my contacts and text messages cause they close my account.

    Sent from LG-D2 using Tapatalk
    07-31-2011 03:55 AM
  22. Puzzlegal's Avatar
    ?

    Do you have a Facebook account?

    I wonder who the University of Phoenix lawyer is who started all this anti-Google+ rhetoric. I've been hearing it a lot lately and if you'll look, G+ and Facebook's TOS are like carbon copies of each other.
    I've never heard of Facebook killing an account because they don't like the name you pick -- despite their TOS. I know several cases of actual people who had their G+ accounts killed, despite their having followed the TOS (using a name that they are actually known by). The one I've heard most about is Skud, a woman who worked for Google and was known by a large number of Google employees as "Skud", despite that not being her legal name. Other people who have had accounts killed don't even know why - some have speculated it was because they had a hyphen or some other punctuation in their name.

    I personally think that this is growing pains in a Beta service, and they will abide by their own TOS in the future, (possibly modifying it, but at least disclosing the rules) but it wasn't University of Phoenix that started the ruckus.
    07-31-2011 06:52 AM
  23. wpbfjr's Avatar
    proof, or hot air.
    +/- 2 years ago my google email acct was suspended.
    google claimed my accts emails had been reported as 'spam'.

    the issue was cleared when i added a "opt out" comment in my already long and purely made-up BS email sig:

    lol


    "CONFIDENTIAL: This e-mail and files transmitted with it are confidential, intended solely for the individual(s) or entity addressed, may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you receive this e-mail in error, destroy immediately.

    All rights, including but not limited to Intellectual Property Rights, are reserved. Permissions to forward, quote, copy, or reproduce the contents of this e-mail, outside of those to whom it is intended, are specifically DENIED.

    Additionally, this e-mail may be protected, governed, and/or subject to Department of Homeland Security Department of Homeland Security | Preserving our Freedoms, Protecting America and/or Interpol INTERPOL and/or Safe Harbor Export.gov - Safe Harbor surveillance's, dictates and/or strictures. Govern yourself accordingly.

    To be removed from future mailings, include your name and e-mail address in an e-mail titled "OPT OUT" to: ~~~~~~@gmail.com"
    07-31-2011 09:42 AM
  24. chud's Avatar
    Except Google's been known to terminate people's accounts for absolutely no reason.
    Come on man, "no reason?" The Noid isn't just going around killing accounts at random over there. The reason might not always be to ones liking but there's a reason behind it.

    I've never heard of Facebook killing an account because they don't like the name you pick -- despite their TOS. I know several cases of actual people who had their G+ accounts killed, despite their having followed the TOS (using a name that they are actually known by). The one I've heard most about is Skud, a woman who worked for Google and was known by a large number of Google employees as "Skud", despite that not being her legal name. Other people who have had accounts killed don't even know why - some have speculated it was because they had a hyphen or some other punctuation in their name.

    I personally think that this is growing pains in a Beta service, and they will abide by their own TOS in the future, (possibly modifying it, but at least disclosing the rules) but it wasn't University of Phoenix that started the ruckus.
    .............

    Um.

    Tell us more about Skud. This is the first I'm hearing about that story.............

    And my University of Phoenix comment was tongue in cheek because the people who I personally know who are against joining G+ have been using the line that "Google owns anything you post on there" while they are furiously posting their location in Formspring on Facebook, I can't help but laugh at them.

    +/- 2 years ago my google email acct was suspended.
    google claimed my accts emails had been reported as 'spam'.

    the issue was cleared when i added a "opt out" comment in my already long and purely made-up BS email sig:

    lol


    "CONFIDENTIAL: This e-mail and files transmitted with it are confidential, intended solely for the individual(s) or entity addressed, may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you receive this e-mail in error, destroy immediately.

    All rights, including but not limited to Intellectual Property Rights, are reserved. Permissions to forward, quote, copy, or reproduce the contents of this e-mail, outside of those to whom it is intended, are specifically DENIED.

    Additionally, this e-mail may be protected, governed, and/or subject to Department of Homeland Security Department of Homeland Security | Preserving our Freedoms, Protecting America and/or Interpol INTERPOL and/or Safe Harbor Export.gov - Safe Harbor surveillance's, dictates and/or strictures. Govern yourself accordingly.

    To be removed from future mailings, include your name and e-mail address in an e-mail titled "OPT OUT" to: ~~~~~~@gmail.com"
    Yeah, no reason at all for that one.
    07-31-2011 10:13 AM
  25. Puzzlegal's Avatar
    Um.

    Tell us more about Skud. This is the first I'm hearing about that story.............

    And my University of Phoenix comment was tongue in cheek because the people who I personally know who are against joining G+ have been using the line that "Google owns anything you post on there" while they are furiously posting their location in Formspring on Facebook, I can't help but laugh at them.
    A summary she recently wrote about her suspension from google+ and what she's done and what she wants
    An update on my Google Plus suspension | Infotropism

    A page mostly devoted to presenting evidence that "skud" is the name people use for her, but it also mentions her suspension from google+
    My name | Infotropism

    and a page of links about the google+ policy, with way more stuff than you are likely to be interested in reading.
    https://bentrem.wordpress.com/2011/0...s-suspensions/

    I know people who know skud, and I know people who use "persistent pseudonyms" on-line and in real life, and don't want their legal name linked to the name they are generally known by. Something like half of my google+ feed consists of people discussing this issue, and I recently got an email from a friend that included the line "I hope google will work out the name issue so I don't have to keep reading about it". So I may be more sensitive to the issue than most users. I am more optimistic than skud that it will be resolved. But meanwhile google is being pretty inconsistent. For instance, I gather they have allowed "lady gaga", whose claim to that name is similar to skud's claim to her use-name. And they are not being consistent with their stated policy, which allows a name that "people know you as".
    07-31-2011 09:22 PM
52 123
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD