Should TheDomains.com Require People To Use Their Real Names To Leave Comments?
This week on theDomains.com there has been a discussion of whether people should be allow to comment anonymously or should the ability to comment be limited to people who are willing to identify themselves
So I’m throwing the topic out for discussion.
Here are my thoughts;
As an attorney I have this freedom of speech thing sort of ingrained in me.
While I understand this people can hide behind can be used as a way to attack people or positions, I also understand that not everyone is comfortable with making comments using their real name.
Bloggers are used to putting our real names and taking ownership of what we are saying day after day, but not eveyone blogs and to some extent is yes people don’t want to put themseleves out there on every issue using their real name.
For example someone talking about a domain in an auction may not want to put his real name on the comment that they think the domain is overpriced, to avoid getting a call from the domain owner bitching about why he made a negative comment.
There are lots of reasons of why commentators want to hide behind a cloak of anonymity and they are all not for bad, malicious or evil purposes.
For me the biggest issue is that we are in an industry where its perfectly legal to use privacy to protect the identity of the real owners of a domain name, on the official ownership records of the central registry.
There are lots of reasons for using privacy as well and while some of these are to hide registration of TM domains or websites with malicious content and other shady issues, there are many valid reasons to use privacy.
So in an industry where its legal and perfectly acceptable not to even take “ownership” of a domain name, I think its tough to argue the same “protection” or option not to disclose your identity should not exist on a blog.
Personally I do not use Privacy and never have.
But the rules and rules and for now its still perfectly fine and dandy for someone to be the anonymous owner of a domain.
Of course things change.
TM groups have been pushing for Thick whois to apply to the existing extensions (like it will to the new gTLD;s) and the ability to register and hold a domain using privacy could go away one day.
I saw a bill for a new law floating around the UK this week that would hold blogs liable for comments made by anonymous commentators.
Of course if that was ever to become law in the US then our policy would have to change immediately, but for now I’m included to opt in favor of free speech, with the right to monitor and remove comments which I feel are abusive, well of topic, spammy or attack people quite personally having noting to do with events in the industry, that to close the channel off and silence those who are not brave enough to put their names on their comments.
I as well as you, are free to discount the authority you give such comments.
In my opinion a comment made under a real name will always in my book carry much more weight than one made anonymously, but there are a lot of relevant comments, good point and issues bought up and made by anonymous commentators.
As always I’m open minded on the topic and would like to hear what you have to say about it.
Loading ...
I think it is about responsibility.
I have a post I have been working on about anons and shill bidders. Here is a portion of it and I think you can take “Shill” out of the equation and replace it with “Slander” and worse. Anons have no rights to SLANDER just as they have no rights to be SHILLS. Same animal.
Some anon’s post responsibly on either side of any issue and I respect their rights to be private if they choose and then there are anon’s that post mean spirited bullshit that they made up. Assholes. Morons and worse. Can anyone disagree with that other than the second group?
Now let’s look at anon online bidding. Let’s just say for arguments sake that we are at 50/50 from the 2 groups above. 50% post responsible, 50% are assholes. Now when you take that equation to the next logical step, you have 50% legitimate bidders and you have 50% POTENTIAL SHILL BIDDERS!! Do you folks really want to do that just to INFLATE your prices and have folks pay more than market value?
So that is a portion of an upcoming post. But it works here too. Somewhere along the line legit folks have rights as well as those that hide behind a curtain and not posting an opinion in a responsible manner. I think that is the issue. You can’t yell fire in a movie theatre. Rights are not infinite.
See link.
It’s a very interesting question. Moot pretty much nails it all down. He obviously has a very robust and refined perspective on this, given the site he runs.
It will work either way, but the complexion of the comments will be very, very different if you demand the expression of everyone’s opinions be connected to their personal or professional lives.
all forum and blog should do that to avoid personal attacks, flaming, etc. but it’s not necessary if a blog has a low level o conflictuality between commenters
I have no respect to those people who blog behind girls’ skirts and using nicknames that have no links unlike “BullS” which has more credibility and respect.
The best solution, imo, is to monitor and remove any attacking/disparaging emails.
The important thing is the content of the post, not who is making the comments.
Remove or ban .com as there is no link to who s/he is, ball-ess commenter.
Rick
“‘Rights are not infinite”"
Well actually the courts are kind of split on this
Commentators should realize that company’s and others have sued to get the info from online publications and some have won that right through the courts and filed suit against the commentators.
So there is some degree of risk that a anonymous commentator will in fact wind up in a court of law one day and have to pay a lofty sum to defend themevles for the comments they made
So that everyone knows we do have and retain the IP address of every comment that is left.
Company’s have sued online publications to release anonymous commentators info:
http://gawker.com/5665766/youtube-comments-are-no-longer-safe-for-mean-people-on-the-internet
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090210/0337353715.shtml
However many times courts in the US have upheld commentators right to stay anonymous:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/02/06/us-yahoo-lawsuit-idUSN0661392320080206?feedType=RSS&feedName=technologyNews
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080908/0245002198.shtml
Here is a case from the UK
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/mar/01/sue-commenters-libel-daily-mail
Do you really want an answer ? Or do you not know. Of course the people that post anonymously will vote against it, and the people who do post their real name will vote for it.
Really a blogger should take the time to actually read all comments and look at what should stay and what should not.
Off topic anonymous comments should be removed.
If you are writing about a Traffic auction, then people talking about Rick running an auction is legit, talking about what he did 10 years ago not relating to the auction is not IMO.
Look it costs nothing to blog, if someone has so much to say start a blog at Blogger.com or Tumblr their free, and talk about everything and anything you like. On a blog that is not your blog, stay on topic.
Obviously, people who post in their own name have extra credibility, whereas anonymous posters deserve an extra level of scrutiny.
It is often abused, but there are legitimate uses. Employees may wish to comment without the blessing of their employers. People living under authoritarianism might be placed at risk, etc..
It is tempting to post anonymously sometimes. In particular, there is one SOB who often comments on this blog with his real name. The guy is so incredibly crass, nasty, and hypocritical –and any criticism of his actions is sure to bring a huge amount of vitriol. For example, the guy makes up rules which only apply to others. He is probably the biggest blowhard in the industry. Still, I prefer to post in my real name, even when squaring off against the guy. I can only control my own actions.
You won best blog of the year? (Congrats BTW)
So it seems nothing needs changing, just keep doing the same things you are doing.
@MHB How about switching to Facebook Comments?
I’m just fine with the way things are now with respect to nicknames & anonymous handels being used by posters and commentators…sure, some are used with malicicous & ill willed intent….but there are even more posts in this vein made by legitimate folks….MHB has done an excellent job zooming in on and analyzing the multiple perspectives and reasons for anonymous handles
BTW .. Who is LS Morgan ?
@MHB
Several are now making the case for blog insurance, here is a Bloomberg article
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aEqiwjlSjLZ4
Absolutely.
It would instantly raise the bar and take many of these comments out of the sandbox.
How would you confirm that the real name shown is a real name? Without confirmation, it’s just a false sense of security. At least allowing anonymous posting we are able to know how much weight to give a comment.
Do you want quantity of comments or quality of comments?
Quantity = anyone can post
Quality = you must be logged in to post
You can allow people to have a username that is not necessarily their real name but at least YOU know who they are.
Rob
I disagree with your premise that the majority of anonymous comments are of lower quality than those posted by people using made up names.
“You won best blog of the year? (Congrats BTW)
So it seems nothing needs changing, just keep doing the same things you are doing.”
True, if its not broke don’t fix it
I never post anywhere if I have to sign up with facebook, myspace, twitter and the like, I am not interested in joining these kinds of places just to talk.
The whole point of a username is so you don’t have to use your own name.
What would come next, you can’t have an avatar unless its your own face?
I prefer to post with my real name but don’t begrudge others to do so anonymously.
That being said, it’s a tricky situation for someone running a blog, particularly one with the traffic and comments that this one generates.
You don’t want to chill expression but I’ve noticed that there are comments that attack others’ personal reputations and defame their character. Allegations of fraud or other misconduct are also made by anonymous commenters. The question is would verification of identity prevent this. Maybe not entirely but it would likely reduce those types of comments to some extent.
Another option might be to install a plugin that allows the community to flag abusive comments. Weeding through comments to remove those that are objectionable is probably very time consuming. At least this way, you could use crowd sourcing to identify those. Still, it would require more time than you would likely prefer to dedicate to policing comments.
So, I don’t know, it’s a tough call.
I did not say that the “majority of anonymous comments are of higher quality”.
Anonymous comments are of lower quality, right?
Quality = you must be logged in to post
Absolutely not! Just moderate the comments and delete inappropriate ones.
Rob
Sorry my comment was off now adjusted
“”Anonymous comments are of lower quality, right?”"
I don’t know about that.
It would take a pretty indepth study to figure that out and to figure out how many high quality comments we would lose if people would be forced to use their real name
I don’t agree with some comments here that because you won Blog Of The Year you shouldn’t touch anything. All that award means is that you are the best of the status quo. However, it also puts you in a leadership position in this industry. By far, the most immature and assinine comments come from anonymous posts. If we really want the investment world to start treating us seriously we need to clean house.
Having an online “debate” with someone who is posting anonymously is the equivalent of having a conversation with someone at a bar who is wearing a mask.
Though I generally do not like anonymous posters, I agree with Donna Mahoney that anyone can use what appears to be a real name, but is not. I mostly agree with RH. Having my own blog, I have no problem allowing posts that may be critical of my position on a particular matter, but when they come down to name-calling or irrelevant BS, I delete it.
Mike, though your volume of posts is considerably greater than mine, I would recommend that it is content, not the name of the Poster that needs to be monitored.
Whenever I submitted a “Letter to the Editor” I was required to include my name, address and phone number – which was called to verify the submission.
I’m no more a fan of the “I can hide and say or make up anything” world than I’m a fan of the “kiss-kiss, hug-hug” online world – the one where critical analysis is withheld so as to avoid a potential loss of affinity.
Call me a jackass, and rationally explain how or why that’s so, and I promise I’ll still respect and/or <3 you – because I value honesty and sometimes I'm blind to something, veer off without reflection, etc.
You want a seat at the table?
"Name, please?"
@Howard – I believe the answer to Donna’s post is that names should be linked (like you and I do).
I use initials or an alias when posting because I do not want my comments forever indexed in search engines. I see no reason to let the world know every detail of my life.
I have also had my blog comments used against me in UDRP’s and a federal court case, including my comments here at TheDomains.
While I didn’t say anything incriminating that doesn’t mean the lawyers will not try to twist things I say and/or attempt to paint some negative picture of me. which they did try.
If I had a blog I would personally weed out those who are maliciously attacking others. I’m not talking about those who state strong opinions but those who have to resort to low blows such as name calling. Calling someone an idiot or a moron only makes you look like one.
I have seen comments from those who use their real names be more vicious towards others than those who use a alias.
If you are going to call out a no name for making attacks you should hold that same standard for those using their real names as well.
Jeff Libert makes an excellent point.
*
Freedom of Speech extends to the right to speak one’s mind in a public space, and does NOT necessarily extend to a private blog or home.
So I would say that you would be well within your rights to require potential posters to sign in before being allowed to post, AND you have the right to censor utter nonsense–that is, if you wish.
When I come to visit your blog, I should conduct myself as if I were sitting in your living room; if I misbehave (such as breaking your furniture or blighting your blog with vitriol/porn/spam), then you have the right to show me the door.
Even if you just plain don’t like me, you can evict me–it’s your right.
However, the tone of your blog will change if you apply too heavy of a hand. So it all depends on the direction you wish to take and how much you can personally tolerate.
In short, it matters not what others think you should do.
*
I read the comments on TRAFFIC and I see 2 people, Rick and Mann, who made more malicious comments than ANY no-namer.
Rick called them almost every name in the book and Mann said lets KILL THEM.
LMAO. I think you need to start putting the real namers in check before worrying about a couple trolls.
Just my opinion on this of course.
I’m guessing the friends of these two will chime in next to let me know what a prick I am for saying this.
IMHO the ability to post anon is important and valuable. Where it goes wrong is when otherwise reasonable people take the anons too seriously or let them get under their skin.
A post without a real name, saying something controversial is TROLLING
Do not feed the trolls.
They’ve been on boards and blogs since the beginning, and are not going away. The only correct response is to ignore them. No one will fault you for ignoring anon posts, and no one should feel a duty to respond to such posts.
“Having an online “debate” with someone who is posting anonymously is the equivalent of having a conversation with someone at a bar who is wearing a mask.”
If that is true then why not ban fake avatars if its not your real face?. (but how could anyone police that?, passport photo and number etc?)
In the “real world” or a bar you don’t have to know everybodies name just to have a conversation with them.
“In short, it matters not what others think you should do.”
That’s true, its MHB’s choice at the end of the day. Its his blog.
As they say, you can’t please all of the people all of the time.
Have people use their real names if you must and/or with a link to a site, but once you start censoring comments than it’s no longer a discussion it becomes someones singular viewpoint. I know of a few tyrants blog’s that I stopped reading for that very reason… they can’t take criticism or participate in discussion that oppose their viewpoint and for me it’s all about the engagement.
“why not ban fake avatars if its not your real face”
avatars are not so important like post comments with real names or a link where anyone can find the author name
I prefer anonymity.
You’ve built a strong blog, one which receives a decent amount of attention. I don’t think it would be productive to require people to use their real names. People will just find a way to get around this. In the end it would be a waste of time. Keep up the good work, who cares about these characters.
If we were all in a room having a discussion, each persons comments would be evaluated by others based on content value and in some cases, effectiveness of delivery.
If in the middle of that group discussion, a phone rang and no one in the room knew the caller on the other end YET that person weighed in the discussion with equal weight, it might be interesting to hear their view point but at the end of the day, who and where is that opinion actually coming from? What is their agenda? What is the background motivation for their comments? All this is hidden from the group yet those that are present in the discussion have all their cards fully on the table.
The anonymous caller has an unfair advantage yet subtly gets grandfathered into the discussion as if he/she is on equal footing if allowed to speak. THIS IS THE CORE OF THE PROBLEM. Anonymity brings a third element into a discussion that isn’t certified and the degradation of the discussion begins regardless of the validity of the callers comments. The structural integrity of the forum is compromised, again without even taking into account the truth and relevant validity of the comments which may or may not be right on topic point.
Alternatively, if the third party’s comments were in some way flagged and highlighted as being different and not on equal footing and the full weight of being truly “anonymous” is strongly noted, like by putting them in a different color font than the certified statements, this would possibly remind the readers that these anonymous comments don’t hold the same equal weight as the comments being presented by vetted and transparent members of the group.
Why don’t the nationally televised Presidential debates allow anonymous callers to weigh in on the issues being discussed by the candidates? Obviously because the anonymity of the caller hides their motivations and agendas. In the same way here in theses blog and forum discussions, anonymous posters needed to either be identified or highlighted as being truly ANONYMOUS and not certified. Then their comments can be put into proper context within the medium and then and only then, evaluated for their truthfulness and relevance.
I thought about posting this anonymously but I might reserve that clear advantage for later, depending on how this post is received.
Any future posts in support of this post are probably just me supporting myself anonymously. I won’t belabor the point but I think you get the gist. Anonymity presents an opportunity and unfair advantage for the poster to potentially distort the truth.
Breaking News: Google, Private-Equity Firms Mull Bid For Yahoo
–
online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204485304576646232054116582.htm
–
but the antitrust authorities NEVER can allow this deal
–
In an ideal world people could be told to use a real name and link to a site they own and all would be good.
In a real world, it takes a lot of time consuming due diligence and leg work to confirm identities…who do you expect to do this?
This is the internet people, let Mike use his time to run his blog and use your own intelligence to decide which posts you give credence to or not.
I personally think anonymity brings out the worst of our natures and stirs the inner troll. I think people should use their real names and I will henceforth use my surname in my comments too. I think it will raise the level of discussion and keep the shittiness, which has been overflowing lately, to a minimum.
In response to an email I just received, NO, I AM NOT ANONYMOUSLY POSTING AS CHRISTOPHER BON. I DON’T KNOW THE MAN BUT HE DOES LOOK A GREAT DEAL LIKE LARRY HACKMAN FROM THE TV SHOW DALLAS.
It doesn’t bother me either way. I can see the benefit of both sides.
If I post I am willing to use my real information.
However, I think some anonymous posters have good points and are trying to avoid the backlash. They have said things many others are thinking. Other anonymous posters are just jackasses, but so are many non anonymous posters.
Brad
My view on the subject is that content rather than provenance is more important. Am I to believe that people discount entirely any and all information unless the source can be fully identified? I dont think so, I certainly give consideration to whatever is out there in the world whether ‘credited’ or not. Often the anonymous ones are if not conventionally useful then can certainly be the most entertaining.
Information with a source carries potentially more value as the source may be an authority on the matter in hand. The new UK law being proposed about strict comment liability I believe has no chance of becoming law without being watered down beyond recognition. We also have the small matter of prior law defending the right to expression among other ‘human rights’, freedom not to be punished for actions outside of our control, and of course legal protection for anonymous ‘whistleblowers’.
IMO just moderate the out of line abuse, commercial spam and worthless, unintelligible or repetitive maroonity and let the rest of the comments fly.
Rick is the same guy who flips out when he finds out that Chef Patrick looked up a domain that was in privacy. He wants everyone to post under their real name. If you remove anonymous post I can guarantee that any siginificant discussion that happens through the comments will be gone. The fact of the matter is those that use real names on blogs also make anonymous posts too. Yet they want you to believe they only use their real names. Right Rick? You coward!
I decided to post with a short acronym representing my site because I want to establish it at some point in the future. I only have intentions on making contributions that are positive, insightful and opinionated in a manner that well represents my views. cdb (Chicago Domain Brokers) is easier to recollect than my proper name, Brad Miller.
Real name or not doesn’t really solve much, since you couldn’t possibly enforce it. Then you’d just have the same anonymous comments but using fake names.
The question that bloggers usually face regarding quality comments is whether or not to mandate approval of comments before they’re posted. I think that’s a better answer – it takes work but that way it won’t stop someone who has something relevant to add but wants some privacy. Eventually the people that make irrelevant comments that never get approved will stop wasting their time, or they might actually improve the quality of their comments to get them through – either way you end up without the junk ever appearing on the blog.
First I hear about financial industry trying to pull this same shit on blogs, and now the domain industry.
For fucks sake the fed wants a task force to monitor everything said about them and policies.
This country has turned into a fascist state
where those in power, corporations, and insolvent banks will do everything to prevent the
truth from being exposed. Moussalini would be proud.
Just very sad to see the top domain blog now scared of the skeptics and opinions. The federalist papers served a purpose and role in defining the character of this country, and anonymously speaking without fear of retribution is paramount to preventing us from going fascist to full fledged communism.
I say fuck you to all of you once middle class now wealthy. All you care about is preserving your wealth and will do anything to prevent others from voicing opinions that could jeopardize your standing.
Sorry for the rambling but seeing the domain industry turn towards fascism is revolting and eye opening.
Occupy wall street and then some. Don’t forget your roots mhb and recognize what your wealth is turning you into.
I prefer using my real name.The domain biz is small but won’t be for long.This is where you learn from the guys thats been there and done that.Cheers, Kevin Davis
I read the blog regularly and it seems the spammiest comments originate from the .co guys and obscure conspiracy ramblings come from BigLie. They identify themselves in their links.
I agree that valuable comments are often made by anonymous sources.
I’d say keep it the way it is. Readers can quickly identify and filter abuse or spam.