I keep wondering, if forums and social media platforms required ID verification (probably through a third party with policies against retaining PII) and each account was linked (but not necessarily publicly) to a real ID, would that help? For example, being banned from a platform would be permanent since the ban would be tied indirectly to your ID, meaning that consequences would be real for abuse.
I feel like the core problem is that people can post without consequences. It’s both a good thing and a bad thing ofc, but maybe the downsides are too big.
Could also maybe be a more robust “verified” system I guess where all platforms verify identities of businesses/people through a common provider, and even a platform like Lemmy could show who is verified (which would require tying the identity to the account publicly). This would still allow for anonymous accounts, but those who are verified would be able to be held accountable to what they post online in exchange for higher credibility. I don’t think the verification systems we’ve seen already really help that much though, considering how toxic twitter has been basically throughout its entire existence.
We choose our levels of anonymity. You responded to Chris, who uses his full name as a handle, and I’m responding to you as literally the only person in the world with my name. ID verification is an unnecessarily onerous requirement that just adds more PII to the insatiable maws of tech firms.
You can self-select being open about your identity, and that seems a good middle ground. Facebook has had a real-name requirement for quite some time, and it didn’t exactly settle into civil discourse as a result of that policy change.
I think what I was more hoping that would address are anonymous (and sometimes fake) personas spreading hatred and misinformation publicly and loudly. I guess the problem though is that even without anonymity, people still do it anyway, and Facebook and Twitter are great examples of that. I think having control over your own anonymity is important. I just wish there was less of a feeling that you can harm and disrespect others without consequence.
That’s taken rather seriously on Beehaw, but we of course have no control over what happens on other instances.
I think the issue is people just want a drop-in Reddit replacement via Lemmy, which is easily enough done to a certain degree on other instances. Having control over your Web presence takes effort. Choosing not to put that effort in is a personal decision.
I keep wondering, if forums and social media platforms required ID verification (probably through a third party with policies against retaining PII) and each account was linked (but not necessarily publicly) to a real ID, would that help? For example, being banned from a platform would be permanent since the ban would be tied indirectly to your ID, meaning that consequences would be real for abuse.
I feel like the core problem is that people can post without consequences. It’s both a good thing and a bad thing ofc, but maybe the downsides are too big.
Could also maybe be a more robust “verified” system I guess where all platforms verify identities of businesses/people through a common provider, and even a platform like Lemmy could show who is verified (which would require tying the identity to the account publicly). This would still allow for anonymous accounts, but those who are verified would be able to be held accountable to what they post online in exchange for higher credibility. I don’t think the verification systems we’ve seen already really help that much though, considering how toxic twitter has been basically throughout its entire existence.
We choose our levels of anonymity. You responded to Chris, who uses his full name as a handle, and I’m responding to you as literally the only person in the world with my name. ID verification is an unnecessarily onerous requirement that just adds more PII to the insatiable maws of tech firms.
You can self-select being open about your identity, and that seems a good middle ground. Facebook has had a real-name requirement for quite some time, and it didn’t exactly settle into civil discourse as a result of that policy change.
I think what I was more hoping that would address are anonymous (and sometimes fake) personas spreading hatred and misinformation publicly and loudly. I guess the problem though is that even without anonymity, people still do it anyway, and Facebook and Twitter are great examples of that. I think having control over your own anonymity is important. I just wish there was less of a feeling that you can harm and disrespect others without consequence.
That’s taken rather seriously on Beehaw, but we of course have no control over what happens on other instances.
I think the issue is people just want a drop-in Reddit replacement via Lemmy, which is easily enough done to a certain degree on other instances. Having control over your Web presence takes effort. Choosing not to put that effort in is a personal decision.