I take photos, shoot video and record audio to make stories I share online. I have gone by the name Documentally since I started taking the internet seriously. Initially It assisted me in protecting my identity when covering stories during the Iraq war. I had a few death threats from Turkish extremists and felt happier keeping my given name off the web. Now I am known by more people as Documentally than by any other name and I have found this to be beneficial when people need to find me online.
My pseudonym has spread across the social platforms as I have connected and told stories.
I would like the right to choose how I should be addressed. The name I have chosen is fundamental to my identity. It’s a small freedom to grant. The names others have chosen may well be keeping them alive.
Many of the arguments as to why corporations feel our given names should be tied into our online spaces appear to forget that no matter what name we use, it’s not difficult for the powers that be to find out who is who. Our digital trails tie us to our clicks, be they posts, purchases or comments. No one is truly anonymous.
Leave us our names. We are giving you everything else. Is that not enough?
(This post mirrors a comment I posted on http://my.nameis.me/supporters/)
I saw that they have ‘officially’ now said on Google Plus that would provide a warning and 4 days to ‘fix’ any issues with the ‘name you commonly go by’. I have yet to hear what they intend to do about the people, such as yourself, who were already beaten up by the banhammer without warning prior to this official notice.http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/google_plus_tells_pseudonym_lovers_to_sh…
Hi @Kosso, I find it an insult that they think using the names we’re known by is breaking their shoddy system. Telling us to ‘Fix’ it is a kick in the identity.
Jeff Bundy says
Christian/Jonathan (also better known as @documentally @kosso)… your guns…stick to them. This too shall pass. 🙂
I often have to think about what your given & family name combo actually is.This is a big problem actually for people who have been on the Internet as long or longer than I have: our brains remember handles far better than names.
Yes @fJ and i remember Avatars even more so.
Other people suspended from G+ include.. http://www.neatorama.com/2008/05/19/10-strangest-names-evar/
The more ridiculous reasons we’re told as to why we must use our legal names, the more sinister i feel the real reasons are..
Understand your G+ feeling for ridiculous reasons we must use legal names, but what about Linked-In (?) hmmmm http://ow.ly/63hQxOk, I can see Linked-In is like a CV (what ever that is, which I really don’t care) and it’s always been a suits and ties place (lots of suits & ties), as well as understand one not spending much time on the Linked-In or FB platforms for one reason or the other. But if something is going to be said of what is wrong with the G+ real name policy and we’re still using Linked-In (even if one is there “Next to nothing”) this real name discussion, directed at G+, is a big mute argument as far as as I’m concern. Slice & dice the reasons anyway you want it’s a non argument for me at this point in time. Always enjoy your outlook on things Christian. By the way my real name is Richard. : )::looks side to side for the Really Name Police::lol Ciao4Now
It’s about choice Richard. I can be whoever I want on Linked In. I can’t on G+. it’s as simple as that.
Ian Mayman says
I don’t see what the problem is. Google+ profiles are for people, people have names. The soon-to-be launched Google+ Brand Profiles are for businesses and brands where an individuals name is either not applicable or not relevant.If you want people to find you by your brand, then you just have to wait a bit longer. I wish the two Google+ products were launched at the same time, but they’re not.It is the same with Facebook. facebook.com/Documentally loads a friend called “Docu Mentally” but the brand name is Documentally, not Docu Mentally, so that URL should load a Facebook fan page where it would not be necessary to request friendship to establish a relationship with the Documentally brand.Individuals and brands tend to have different requirements such as more than one administrator to manage the brand, which is why there are two different products, each designed to meet those requirements.
Ian, @Mayman You call Documentally a brand and that’s fine. I think of it as a name. It has been a name way longer than people started trying to brand everything a brand. i only know you as your name Mayman. Not Ian. If you were to circle me on G+ I would not have a clue as to who you are even though we have conversed many times.I picture a time in the not so distant future where I start a conversation.. “Remember when we could choose what name we wanted when we talked online?.. Those were the days..”
And the comments keep on coming.. https://plus.google.com/109179785755319022525/posts/YcvRKqJeiZi :o/
Hey I know, maybe we should all go into Google+ and call ourselves Documentally and see what happens? Will the real Documentally please stand up, please stand up? There are plenty of humans on G+ right now posing as their pets names…yes, like cats for example ..and we all know cats do not type on computers cause they are way too busy with piano lessons. So this makes no sense why G+ is social name profiling or whatever you want to call it. I usually remember people with their profile photo, but some people such as YOU stand out more then others. For me, Documentally is both a nickname and a brand image of Christian who is the British guy who makes me LOL, has a cool dog & “documents” all sorts of interesting things. It is the Documentally Show. Lights, Camera, Action!