[Jerry Glenn Hartwig]

Since the recent debacle on the non-met forum, could we please have an update on the user-name issue.

For an example, I know Diana B. registered after the 'real name' requirement was established. I sopke to her prior to her registration on a photo forum, and told her she would have to use her real name. I was surprised when that proved not to be true.

I personally understand there are valid reasons for wanting to use a fictitious name. I also understand the administration at the Sphere needs to filter out trolls (a technical term for someone who would actively use different names on a forum, generally to agree with themselves in public, and make themselves appear 'correct'), as well as people who've been banned from the site.

While I agree that ridiculous pseudonyms tends to erode the air of professionalism this site was established to maintain, I see no harm in permitting fictitious names, as long as the moderators, or at least Alex and Carol, know the person's true identity, and have satisfied themselves as to the registrant's non-malignancy.

I'm here to discuss poetry, and as long as a person can do that with intelligence and restraint, I care not whether I know their real name.

I must admit, however, that after a year here as 'Robert Swagman', I began to feel dishonest discoursing with people I came to accept as friends under a false name. So I came out of the virtual closet, as it were *grin*.

If self-revelation is important, then let's require it of everyone, else trust Alex and Carol to continue acting as filters for undesirable characters.

Discussion?

[David Anthony]

But how can you tell, Jerry?
Lightning Bug sounds as false as they come, for example, but that's her real name, or so I understand.
Best wishes,
David

[Carol Taylor]

Jerry, it's a question that has no perfect answer. We do require registrants to supply their first and last name, and I'm not sure how Diane B. got in if she did so after the requirement went into effect. I will approve a first initial and a last name, but not the other way around, and I think Alex does pretty much the same. However, as David said, there is no way for me to know for sure whether your real name is Jerry Glen Hartwig or not. Even if I locate a Jerry Glen Hartwig in the Fairfield, Ohio phone book, it doesn't prove you are the same person. Registration on a bulletin board isn't a legal contract; we have to take people on face value until we find out otherwise. On the internet we can never be absolutely sure of anything.

Some people publish under a pseudonym, and some may have personal reasons for choosing to workshop their poems under a pseudonym, perhaps to get a franker assessment. But I believe most serious poets do use their own names, not only below their poems but below the advice they offer to others. My poems aren't all that good, but by golly I wrote them--I don't want Jane Doe to get the credit. And I like the idea that someone who gives me advice on my writing is willing to sign his name to it, though I may not know him from Adam.

Ten years ago I wouldn't have used my first and last name and location on a public bulletin board because in those days we all believed the internet was full of predators waiting to stalk us and loot our houses. But today the internet is a reputable place to interact and even to publish our work, just like a magazine or newspaper or anthology. Some who came here under a pseudo like Robert Swagman have decided that such a cover is no longer necessary and doesn't fit with a community of real people.

We started requiring full names because that's who we are: real life poets and people. Nicknames like Twinkletoes and Daddysgirl and Angelpoet and JamesBond don't fit the serious image we wanted people to associate with Eratosphere. But there is simply no way to screen people to see whether the name they supply us is real or not.

We do have ways to delve into the identy of people suspected of having multiple ID's, but those methods are seldom called into practice unless a problem arises or a person bears an uncanny resemblance to someone else.

Carol

[Dan Halberstein]

Well, just for the sake of always yammering about something or other, I'm glad to chime in here -

I caused the recent flap as concerns what I think is a "joke"-named poster. I don't really care, personally, but this "rule" was applied to me when I first started here. At the time I had no idea there was a flap about anonymity.

The kicker is, I did have a legit reason to want anonymity. I preferred to workshop "in private" under that name, and to go public, well, publicly. But the rule applied then, and I did make the mistake of thinking it applies now.

But it's not vital to me. As Jerry says, people can have good reasons, and it's probably best to accomodate them. I think there's a legitimate fairness issue, but in reading Carol's response, I get the impression that the policy's pretty much a case-by-case one. I don't mean this derogatorily, and I don't think the individual in question is for some reason personally "favored" by our mods.

Although in hindsight, I don't think my own "need" for anonymity was that pressing, here I am, full name and all. It just seems odd to be sharing space with puns, given that history.

.02,

Dan

[Carol Taylor]

Dan, what was your moniker? If it sounded like a real name I doubt anyone gave you a hassle over it, because how would we have known? We can't take thumbprints of registrants or require a picture ID or birth certificate. That doesn't mean the requirement for real names isn't a requirement. It just means we have to take people at their word until we have cause for doubting it, and even then we can't always be sure. We're not the FBI.

Carol

[Dan Halberstein]

Carol, I can't even remember - but it did sound like a joke name/pun name, but was not obscene, much like the one under discussion. I take your point, and am glad to leave it alone. It's a silly thing to go on about at length. So one slipped through the filter - no big deal.

Off to bed. The above isn't meant to impugn the good work you guys do.

Dan

[Henry Quince]

I noticed recently that the newest joiner was shown as Jersey O’Devil. Well, I suppose it COULD be a real name. More likely that the “filtering” process just checks for a name of two words or more. So spammers like “Earwig G. Powerboats” would pass muster.

[epigone]

I've made these arguments before, and some people find them persuasive and others don't, but here's a thumbnail sketch.

1. I do write both poetry and criticism under my real name. I am neither well-known nor powerful in the poetry world, but I want what I do on this site to be evaluated for its own worth and not based on connections or associations that people have with me off site. I may submit poetry or criticism to journals edited by people on the Sphere, and I want them to evaluate my work based on my work, not based on what epigone wrote on the Sphere.

2. I think the best form of review is double-blind review. That's how most of academia works. You don't know who reviews you and the reviewer doesn't know whom she is reviewing. I know a couple of people who post on the Sphere; I don't comment on their posts here, since I can do that elsewhere. For the rest, knowing someone's real name does not tell me anything about who they are, so my interactions with people on the Sphere are based pretty much on what we have written on the Sphere and nothing else, and that seems right to me. It would be different if I were in a community like the Powwows or frequented poetry conferences and the like. But I don't.

3. Pseudonyms are subject to abuse by trolls and others. Since I operate here under a pseudonym, I try to be mindful that I appear to have less at risk than those who post under their real names. But I don't buy that entirely. I am invested in epigone. I want people on the Sphere to think well of epigone, so that the thought and effort that I put into my posts here will carry some weight. In any case, as has been pointed out, trolls are quickly unmasked for what they are, and it's easy to come up with a moniker that looks like a real name, so I wouldn't expect that pseudonym abuse is a huge problem.

4. Pseudonyms make ad-hominem arguments quite difficult. A while back I was engaged in a forceful debate with someone, and my interlocutor argued that my position on the issue derived from my subject position -- in that case my gender. But there are people on the Sphere who think I am a woman and there are people on the Sphere who think I am a man. I am happy with my gender, but am delighted if epigone can have none.

5. I have a professional life. This is a hobby. If I were to post here under my own name, I could not do so as freely as I do now because I'd have to worry about whether it would be prudent for me to post my views on all manner of things for all the world (including colleagues, adversaries, clients and potential clients) to see.

Call me old-fashioned (hell, I've already been "grandfathered"!), but I value my private sphere just enough that I never would have joined the Sphere if I had to do so under my own name. If a decision were made to force me to post under my own name, I would -- with some sadness -- give Bartleby's response.

epigone

[John Beaton]

Epigone. I came, as "Porridgeface". Pseudonyms have plusses and minuses. Why "Epigone?"

John

[Diana B]

Originally posted by Carol Taylor:
Jerry, it's a question that has no perfect answer. We do require registrants to supply their first and last name, and I'm not sure how Diane B. got in if she did so after the requirement went into effect. I will approve a first initial and a last name, but not the other way around,

I only vaguely remember the registration process - as it was a while ago. Diana is my correct name and B is the first initial of my surname. It was approved at the time, but would be happy to provide full surname if you feel it necessary!

My registration on the photo site that Jerry mentions is exactly the same: Diana B. ( I merely decided to use the same here ).