Given the amount of harassment, disinformation, fraud, soliciting of minors and just general bullying and shitposting, would you support any legislation that requires people to use their real names and be confirmed by the social media platform or online publisher.
I just wonder if more people had to stake their actual identity to the things they say and do online, would it turn down so much of the fervor we see and get the US back to being a more civil place?
Pollyana? Sure. But would you support it? Why or why not?
EDIT: Whether you support the idea or not, do you think it would have a significant impact on how people engage with one another online?
yes
Given the amount of harassment, disinformation, fraud, soliciting of minors and just general bullying and shitposting, would you support any legislation that requires people to use their real names and be confirmed by the social media platform or online publisher.
I just wonder if more people had to stake their actual identity to the things they say and do online, would it turn down so much of the fervor we see and get the US back to being a more civil place?
Pollyana? Sure. But would you support it? Why or why not?
EDIT: Whether you support the idea or not, do you think it would have a significant impact on how people engage with one another online?
it's an interesting topic and i would parse it out a little.
"would you support any legislation that requires people to use their real names and be confirmed by the social media platform or online publisher." here's your quote. i am not tech savvy so i may get a bit wrong here. use their real names AND be confirmed by the online publisher. I don't think this should be required to post for myriad reasons. foremost that people are nuts and will come shoot you, call your work, steal your kids, whatever. but i think that you should have to use your real name that is verified in order to sign up so that the platform has your actual information. i had never heard of discord but we want the fbi to be able to message them and have the third party publisher say yes here is the party. now, my tech ignorance, i don't know if you can sign up for something like discord with a fake name or not. i don't know how to police that. @arthur-dent might.
doing the above would still comply with section 230. wouldn't chill speech. still preserves publisher immunity. but allows for authorities to access information like whatever the shooter was posting on discord.
so not a very articulate response but the germane part is to have the tech so that these publishers can verify who is signing up as a condition to participation
When the WC started we all had to put our actual email in our signatures. Some of us added our actual names as well. It was a far more civil board back then even though we had many of the same differences we have now.Given the amount of harassment, disinformation, fraud, soliciting of minors and just general bullying and shitposting, would you support any legislation that requires people to use their real names and be confirmed by the social media platform or online publisher.
I just wonder if more people had to stake their actual identity to the things they say and do online, would it turn down so much of the fervor we see and get the US back to being a more civil place?
Pollyana? Sure. But would you support it? Why or why not?
EDIT: Whether you support the idea or not, do you think it would have a significant impact on how people engage with one another online?
I'm honestly not sure. I think it goes without saying that people feel a lot more free to say and post things when they can hide behind anonymity. Maybe it'd make online discourse more civil, I don't know.
In most cases, law enforcement is able to find the person behind an internet persona already. I would not support making that information available to the public.
When the WC started we all had to put our actual email in our signatures. Some of us added our actual names as well. It was a far more civil board back then even though we had many of the same differences we have now.
I actually liked that. I'm generally an open book and try hard not to post anything I wouldn't say to someone in person. For the most part, I've 'known' many of the people here for the better part of decades and don't really worry about them knowing who I am.
Given the amount of harassment, disinformation, fraud, soliciting of minors and just general bullying and shitposting, would you support any legislation that requires people to use their real names and be confirmed by the social media platform or online publisher.
I just wonder if more people had to stake their actual identity to the things they say and do online, would it turn down so much of the fervor we see and get the US back to being a more civil place?
Pollyana? Sure. But would you support it? Why or why not?
EDIT: Whether you support the idea or not, do you think it would have a significant impact on how people engage with one another online?
I don't think this should be required to post for myriad reasons. foremost that people are nuts and will come shoot you, call your work, steal your kids, whatever.
I understand this point, but I think not requiring your legal name causes it to fall short of my intended outcome, which is more civility.
@unclemark what if it's civil tho. ages ago had a case where our client owned a business. on youtube a customer kept posting a video that made the business look horrible. really impacted it. sent demands. google said f off. over and over. finally said fine will sue you. forum policy at youtube was to just remove the movie. well they'd just repost it under a different handle. over and over and over. google was a third party publisher so no recourse there. wouldn't turn the identity over of the publishers. civil. nothing authorities could do. so you could really harass the fck out of someone and their businesses
@unclemark what if it's civil tho. ages ago had a case where our client owned a business. on youtube a customer kept posting a video that made the business look horrible. really impacted it. sent demands. google said f off. over and over. finally said fine will sue you. forum policy at youtube was to just remove the movie. well they'd just repost it under a different handle. over and over and over. google was a third party publisher so no recourse there. wouldn't turn the identity over of the publishers. civil. nothing authorities could do. so you could really harass the fck out of someone and their businesses
Charlie Kirk said the price you pay for the 2nd amendment is some gun deaths. Same principle applies.
@unclemark what is the principle/ i don't see your point. i'm multitasking so spell it out. i'm talking about 230 being used as a shield to destroy people and their businesses civilly. what good is a defamation suit if it's a perpetual john doe defendant. i'm not talking about garden-variety political speech like kirk's content you quoted
@unclemark what is the principle/ i don't see your point. i'm multitasking so spell it out. i'm talking about 230 being used as a shield to destroy people and their businesses civilly. what good is a defamation suit if it's a perpetual john doe defendant. i'm not talking about garden-variety political speech like kirk's content you quoted
I'm saying that's the price you pay for anonymous free speech.
I understand this point, but I think not requiring your legal name causes it to fall short of my intended outcome, which is more civility.
Two of the most "civil" posters here are Mas and dbm. Should they be readily identifiable?
I would only require linking a screen name here with those at rivals. #showyourselvesGiven the amount of harassment, disinformation, fraud, soliciting of minors and just general bullying and shitposting, would you support any legislation that requires people to use their real names and be confirmed by the social media platform or online publisher.
I just wonder if more people had to stake their actual identity to the things they say and do online, would it turn down so much of the fervor we see and get the US back to being a more civil place?
Pollyana? Sure. But would you support it? Why or why not?
EDIT: Whether you support the idea or not, do you think it would have a significant impact on how people engage with one another online?
There are tremendous possible advantages, such as minimizing fake social media accounts and widespread disinformation or shitposting, such as by Russian bots.
But then you are also susceptible to total nutjobs, like the poster on here who assured me that he knows where I live and where I work-- he promised to show up-- I forget the exact threat --- but the gist of it was that he or his goons would beat me to a pulp.
Too many St. Louis crazy looney tunes types around.
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
Latest Post: Kevontay Hugan (Freshman DL) Not with the Team Our newest member: Campbell Manahan Recent Posts Unread Posts
