Real Names

[Chris Majer]

As this is a forum of the ECF, it is a requirement that everyone register with their real name.

Chris Majer
ECF Director of Home Chess

> This is no longer an official ECF forum, however since the members appear to prefer not to allow anonymous handles we are attempting to stick with the
> policies and ideas that this initial statement referred to
> Cheers
> Carl

[David Robertson]

A discussion of this matter has already started on the Atticus CC forum where the policy is already being playfully pulled apart at the seams

http://www.atticuschess.org.uk/forum/ph ... .php?t=258

I and others are highly sceptical, and doubt this policy has been properly thought through. Frankly I think it is unwise and unworkable. Banning anonymity seems superficially to be a good way of maintaining posting standards in a forum. In practice, it is a hopeless way. Mischief-makers can easily circumvent the restrictions since the webmaster can never know who is really who. And false email accounts are easily created to underpin an identity. To be quite honest, I'm really Stewart Reuben; and the person claiming the name 'Stewart Reuben' is probably Doris from Droitwich who also trades as 'John Saunders'.

Attempts to tighten identity security can lead to ludicrous displays of intrusive control, as happened last year with the NCCU forum. People there could register only after supplying the webmaster with details of their private home address. Amazingly some people did. But the forum was killed stone dead when it became clear only those agreeing with the webmaster would ever be admitted. Nothing so idiotic is proposed here, but it's a step in that direction.

Furthermore, many real 'real names' are unlikely to risk posting controversial opinions for fear of having their comments attributed out of context by anonymous third parties elsewhere on the internet. The effect is to cut off the vigorous and sometimes heated debates that are the life-blood of an active forum.

Of course, it depends what this forum wants to achieve. We have not had significant problems with anonymised identities on the well-established and widely read Atticus forum. For sure, there may be issues and constraints applying to the forum of the official body of English chess that do not apply to a club forum. If the objective of the ECF forum is simply information exchange in a controversy-lite environment, that seems a reasonable basis for a 'real name' policy. If however the forum wishes to generate forthright debate under conditions of vigorous adversarial exchange, then (partial) anonymity will be demanded by many. Or people will turn for their argumentative 'fix' to forums like Atticus

Best of luck either way

David

[Carl Hibbard]

Of course, it depends what this forum wants to achieve. We have not had significant problems with anonymised identities on the well-established and widely read Atticus forum. For sure, there may be issues and constraints applying to the forum of the official body of English chess that do not apply to a club forum. If the objective of the ECF forum is simply information exchange in a controversy-lite environment, that seems a reasonable basis for a 'real name' policy. If however the forum wishes to generate forthright debate under conditions of vigorous adversarial exchange, then (partial) anonymity will be demanded by many. Or people will turn for their argumentative 'fix' to forums like Atticus

We want and require forthright direct debate but offensive and abusive comments under an anonymous username just cannot be accepted by the official ECF body

Say anything you like opinion wise as long as its obvious to everyone here that its you alone that hold those opinions, we may disagree but at least those comments are for all to see as yours and yours alone

I have relaxed the rules a little on 'real names' but the policy for the moment remains

Cheers
Carl

[David Robertson]

We want and require forthright direct debate but offensive and abusive comments under an anonymous username just cannot be accepted by the official ECF body

They can't be accepted by any body, official ECF or otherwise, under the general rules applying. We don't tolerate 'offensive and abusive comments' on the Atticus forum either, but nor do we impose a prissy definition of what might constitute 'offensive' or 'abusive'. Adults will have squabbles; they are largely self-regulating; and commonsense must guide interventions, always biased towards non-intervention. None of this concerns issues of identity. Few doubt who I am on the Atticus forum where I'm [partly] anonymised; and some have been 'offended' on occasions by my forthright comments. But stuff blows over; life moves on; and perspective is restored. But the debate is always first-class. Confusing 'real name' policy, anonymity, and good conduct will not help good forum management.

Say anything you like opinion-wise as long as its obvious to everyone here that its you alone that hold those opinions. [W]e may disagree but at least those comments are for all to see as yours and yours alone

I thought I'd dealt with this canard earlier. Any poster offering an opinion, anonymised or not, must by definition "alone...hold those opinions" since no one can hold those opinions on their behalf. All you wish is that a 'real name' can be attached to those opinions. My objection, based on wide experience of forums like this, is that [a] 'real names' are easily aliases; and those with real 'real names' are constrained by the prospect of attributed citation from expressing 'real opinions'. Hence, a bland and boring forum in view.

My solution: allow any and all [sensible] names; forsake paranoia; and let free speech flourish [within the general rules]

David

[James Toon]

I agree with David. All the other forums I've come across allow the use of created user names and they don't appear to have any major problems as a result. If you want vigorous, uninhibited debate, you have to allow users to adopt their chosen persona.

And what does happen if two people with the same real name apply to join?

I hope that others will post their views and that the overwhelming weight of opinion will persuade the ECF to adopt a more sensible policy.

[Robert Taylor]

> We have not had significant problems with anonymised identities on the
> well-established and widely read Atticus forum.

A few people post repeatedly. Possibly, this is always going to happen with a forum of this nature. What you don't know, Dave, and by definition cannot know, is to what extent newcomers/outsiders have been put off joining in the Atticus forum in the past, precisely because most of the contributors are 'anonymous' (of course in time some of the aliases become obvious, but not all of them). I've read Atticus forum. I still (after months!) only know who half the people are - and I'm from the NW.

Bob

[Neil Graham]

What happened to "we require that everyone register under their own name?"

If that's so the latest batch of recruits have some really odd names!

[Administrator]

What happened to "we require that everyone register under their own name?"

If that's so the latest batch of recruits have some really odd names!

I am afraid that is the spammers who attempt to register - they appear in the list (but are unable to post...) until I approve them!

It's just the way this software works and one of the reasons the real name policy was decided upon

I delete them as fast as I notice them appear

Cheers
Carl

[Dr Andrew Cula]

Is this policy obsolete?

Or am i still illegal?

[Justin Hadi]

Nice one...
Dr A. Cula.

I should have posted as Frank E. Stein.

[E Michael White]

I had noticed Andrew's daytime postings were without bite.

[John Upham]

I believe Dr. Fronk N. Steen was played by Gene Wilder IMHO in a true comedy classic.

He wasn't a vampire, as I recall, but an eccentric academic intent on bringing new life to a corpse accidentally fitted with a deranged mind.

John

[Steve Henderson]

As this is no longer the ECF Official forum, I think all posts and users should have been deleted.

The forum should have started from scratch, allowing users to sign up if they wished under *NEW* terms & conditions.

I also feel that users of this new forum should have the choice of registering with their real name or an alias!

Carl, how do you know if someone is using a false name or not?
How do you know if they are a chess player or not?

Come on Carl, wipe the forum clean (or archived the old ECF Official stuff), delete all users, install NEW terms & conditions and let us sign up with an alias name if we so wish.

[Carl Hibbard]

As this is no longer the ECF Official forum, I think all posts and users should have been deleted.

The forum should have started from scratch, allowing users to sign up if they wished under *NEW* terms & conditions.

I also feel that users of this new forum should have the choice of registering with their real name or an alias!

Carl, how do you know if someone is using a false name or not?
How do you know if they are a chess player or not?

Come on Carl, wipe the forum clean (or archived the old ECF Official stuff), delete all users, install NEW terms & conditions and let us sign up with an alias name if we so wish.

Not sure what this would gain to be honest?

[Steve Henderson]

Not sure what this would gain to be honest?

Well , we are here because as we understood it we signed up to the ECF Official Forum and its terms & conditions.

The ECF forum is no longer in existence, so all the posts that were made by the users are now on this new forum, they should have been deleted, you have transferred ECF Official posts without giving notice, You have also failed to change the terms & conditions.

IMHO, Whether it gains anything or not is not the issue.

You are holding and displaying the ECF official posts by members on this forum which is a third party chess forum, I believe that you are wrong to do so. Those posts were made under the T&C of the ECF Official Forum, surely if the forum changes its status then those posts must not be transfered without the authors say so?!