Hacker News Reader

Comment by Cthulhu_ | Hacker News Reader

The real name policy on Facebook is a load of bollocks, IMO. I have a friend who has to use a fake name to keep her stalker away (he threatened to abduct her son and stuff like that), and she's legally required to both keep a low profile on the internet and to report any and all possible interactions with the guy to her solicitor. I know Facebook probably has its reasons (mostly having to do with money, I'm sure), but they have to make exceptions.

View on HN

>she's legally required to both keep a low profile on the internet

Just curious, but why is she legally required to do that? I understand why she would as a safety precaution, of course.

It's not a "real name policy". It's rather a policy against names which look a certain way.

See, "real name" means "the name which is actually yours". The set "real name" and "name that looks good to Facebook" are different, intersecting sets.

If you want to evade a stalker, you can use a fake name which looks good to Facebook: a "realistic" name, let's call it.

On any web site that insists on banning certain names, you can easily pick a name that is not banned, yet that is not your real name.

Your friend clearly has her priorities straight. One would think that if someone really had a good reason to not be found online, the first thing they'd do would be to not be in FB rather than use some fake name.

Then again, maybe things aren't quite as dramatic as incinuated :>

Perhaps they don't want to let some arsehole stop them from keeping in touch with their friends?

True, but then again this is a moot point, since the person in question seems to struggle with distinguishing friends from arseholes, right?

Wrong. She's clearly identified him as an arsehole. You can tell because she's reports interactions with him and tries to hide from him.

Blaming the victim, how progressive.

This is a clear issue of having your cake and eating it too. Being a victim is irrelevant and shouldn't be a reason not to call them out on their stupidity.

What's stupid about wanting to use a mainstream website to keep in touch with friends while also being able to avoid the attentions of someone who is abusive?

(1) That it's a website specifically engineered around bringing you into the attention of anyone you've ever known

(2) That there are other ways of staying in touch with friends

(3) That given the situation, if everything is in fact true, it seems the wrong compromise has been made. Maintaining the safety of your family should trump being able to always have someone/something to chit chat with.

So clearly one should cut oneself off from social interaction because of an individual?

I do not use my "real name" on Facebook, or elsewhere online apart from in a professional capacity, and this is precisely the way I want it. If you know only my real name, not the one I have been using for the last 10 years, then you are not someone I want to be in contact with.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com