Google is still reportedly enforcing a policy around banning pseudonymous Google+ accounts, tech pioneer Jamie "jwz" Zawinski reports on his blog. As noted last week, Google has said at the Web 2.0 conference that they plan to introduce pseudonymous Google+ account options soon, but that leaves one big question open: What happens to all the pseudonymous G+ accounts that already exist now? Zawinski's suggestion to just stop deleting them was raised in a company meeting with Google CEO Larry Page, who reportedly had this reply: "To nobody's great surprise, his answer was a very long-winded 'no'."
So if you do maintain a Google+ account with a non-real name now, I frankly wouldn't get too attached to it. Page's answer also gives credence to Zawinski's previous speculation of what Google's pseudonymous "options" will be: "I'll bet they still require you to register with your 'real' name, but then they'll graciously allow you to have a linked nickname or two, meaning they're still fully prepared to roll over on you to authoritarian governments or advertisers at the drop of a hat."
By the way, I asked a Google spokesperson about Larry Page's response as blogged by Zawinski, and she told me they had nothing to add that hadn't already been said at Web 2.0. She even sent me the specific video, which you can watch below. I continue to be amazed by Google's incoherence on this matter. So much so, I really feel the need to put my opinion in bold:
Google, if you do not give Google+ a powerful and distinctive market differentiator to Facebook's real names-based social network, you will lose to Facebook. If you lose to Facebook, you will become a subsidiary to Facebook. The company's future position on the Internet depends almost solely on how you handle this one policy.
That's my take, at least. Here, this weekend watch Google+ lead Vic Gundotra, to see if you think he's on the right track:
By the way: Anyone with a pseud-based Google+ account get theirs suspended recently?
Hat tip: Torrid Luna.
At best they're probably just going to expand options for making pseudonyms via the "Other Name" field more prominent. Its not the pseudonym support people are hoping for, because all that calls for is just....stop banning and deleting profiles that use pseudonyms instead of real names.
So yeah you're right, there's zero point in getting attached to one's Google+ profile if you want to exclusively use a pseudonym without providing a real name.
Posted by: Ezra | Friday, October 28, 2011 at 03:49 PM
I would say that at this point it's time to start quietly walking away. And not for high-minded, political reasons, but because it's simply bad policy to rely on people who cannot clearly explain a policy for services we have come to rely on, and who's behavior is arbitrary and whimsical.
Posted by: Denovo Broome | Saturday, October 29, 2011 at 02:09 PM
It's not just the policy, it is their method of shoot first (delete the account) and ask questions later. As many reports have shown, this can happen even if it's your real name. Since they want to link your G+ profile to your other Google services, you would be silly to take the risk of losing everything.
Posted by: Danielle | Sunday, October 30, 2011 at 04:28 PM
I just deleted my Plus account yesterday without touching any of the other Google stuff.
What good is a social Media network when so many of the people I know online I know by their online names? And the offline people I know, don't go online (and plus would not entice them to do so).
Just another screw up by major Mongo Corp wanting to muscle in on a business they know nothing about, but are determined to take control of. This debacle makes clear Google's desire to make everything you think, say or feel salable to anyone with a dollar in their pockets. Me, I'm now very leery of trusting Google with anything.
Posted by: shockwave yareach | Tuesday, November 01, 2011 at 01:26 PM