Beezle Warburton

So, no appeal, you have to change your name in four days.

Fucknuts.

__________________

Argent Stonecutter

As you say, I'm an expert. In this thread, though, I have to bow to a true master.

__________________
Argent Stonecutter -- Skyhook Station -- Coonspiracy Store

"And now I'm going to show you something really cool."


The previous is a cybernetic datum published - in direct contravention of DoD Regulation #229RR3X3 - as being conducive to the physical, psychological and/or social well-being of the population.

Joshua Nightshade

Uh huh.

The primary point of the thread is about SL, whether or not you want to redefine it into something else because as it relates to SL this issue is inescapably absurd. Let me amend my earlier comment that you seem to think suddenly changes everything:

The thread has not moved beyond that, but even if it had, that's not the point. The point is that people are comparing their inability to register how they want for a social network to the Holocaust, and that's offensive as shit.

The only obsession is from you and Gypsy.

__________________

Argent Stonecutter

It's also a photo sharing service, and people have been using it as such, and paying for extra storage, and they're losing access to it over this stupid policy.

And everyone using Buzz, and Reader are being effectively signed up to Plus, because both the services depend on Profiles. Even if they have no intention of ever using Plus.

You could "vote with your wallet" by downloading all your stuff ahead of time and disabling your Google Profile, but there's lots of people using Buzz and Reader who have no idea the hammer is about to fall. That's a closer parallel to people wandering through stores using Redzone with media enabled.

Joshua Nightshade

I'd really like to see some further information about how this relates to Picasa and Google Reader, as the first and only time I've heard anything about it has been you in this thread.

Link please?

Argent Stonecutter

Yeh, that's what I'm getting at. You keep saying that, but that doesn't make it true.

Where have I disagreed with that point?

Joshua Nightshade

It is true. It was true for the first half of the thread. Then when it became obvious that the ˇviva la revolución! wasn't going to fly, you and your comrades started trying to associate this with Larger Big Issues to make it more relevant. You began throwing out a bunch of stuff about how it was homophobic and endangered the LGBT community, other people brought out stalkers and rapists and identity assassins, then before I knew it suddenly not having a Google+ account under the name you want is akin to Hitler personally murdering Jews.

Attempting to capitalise on real historical atrocities in order to artificially inflate the magnitude of "I can't use a pseudonym on Google+" is ridiculous and offensive to gay people, to battered wives, to gassed Semites, to the dude who stood in front of the tank in Beijing.

That this behaviour has become the focal point of the discussion by people upset about Google's policy is embarrassing.

And ultimately the entire point of the thread was about how it related to SL users, which was why Gypsy started out framing the thread as such, and why he drew parallels to Facebook explicitly deleting accounts for SL users; it only became about "something else" when you all indirectly admitted the immateriality of the previous entitlement drama.

Argent Stonecutter

https://plus.google.com/104013835962...ts/NBTvM7bZo42

Google’s Antisocial Behavior – DocPop.org

Google eliminates appeals option for names and service infractions

Joshua Nightshade

Sorry, I meant can I see information about it re: an explicit Google policy saying so?

It's obvious that they're fucking shit up in the banning, but I haven't seen anything saying that's working as intended.

Argent Stonecutter

Then people who had been following this stuff outside SLU all along noticed that this thread was going on, and pointed out that this wasn't actually "Google versus SL" but there were lots of other people who'd never even heard of Linden Labs getting effected by it, and it's not "the first half" (or whatever the proportion is by now) any more.

Threads drift. Deal with it.

Joshua Nightshade

Stupid analogies get replied to with eyerolling. Deal with it.

That the thread drifted isn't the point. It's that the thread drifted into utter absurdity because you and a handful of other individuals kept insisting that this was exactly the same as World War 2.

Ann Otoole

But but but they are teh smartest people on earth! How could they make a mistake?

Argent Stonecutter

About profiles : General - Accounts Help

What do they mean by "full name"? Follow the link, and you get to:

Your name and Google+ Profiles : Google+ Answers - Google+ Help

Where it says: That page is titled "Your name and Google+ Profiles", but they don't have different "kinds" of profiles. You can't sign up for a "non Google Plus" profile. Also "editing your name and submitting an appeal" means "sending us a photo ID to prove that's your legal name".

Joshua Nightshade

Everything I've read about this has said that if you lose access to Google+, it won't affect other services that you've linked like gmail, YouTube and Reader.

I know that this hasn't been the case 100% of the time when people get banned, but I haven't seen anything from them stating that you will lose your access to other services which are not a part of + if you get that account deactivated; obviously it's obnoxious for them to be suspending anyone at all if there's policy and the technical implementation is glitching things up counter to that, or if CSRs are doing something they aren't supposed to be doing, but I haven't seen any statement about how this is supposed to happen.

Argent Stonecutter

I haven't said a single word in complaint about eyerolling at stupid analogies.

I know, the point is Godwin's Law. I've acknowledged that point, more than once.

I have not insisted any such thing. Or anything even vaguely like it.

And we already went through your hissy fit because a few of the links I posted pissed you off, and I apologized for that, and you seemed to accept my apology.

Joshua Nightshade

Yeah and then you keep doing it. And then Gypsy does it, and you keep pointing to his posts like he's making sense. So it falls flat.

Maybe you didn't directly say that this is like the Holocaust, but you're yeah thatting people who are. And you have consistently posted arguments by others who are elevating this total non-issue to the same level as child abuse and gay bashing, which as far as I'm concerned really isn't that far from just going all the way and comparing it to Hitler.

By this point I don't know how else it can possibly be made clearer that losing your ability to sign up for a social network under the name of Farty McFuckerbutt is not genocide or gay bashing or rape or running over puppies. It's an optional service, and quite frankly a dumb one at that.

This thread is frankly representative of larger entitlement issues that many people in SL have about how their identity should be respected at all costs, but fuck you if you're not interested in interacting with an anonymous puppet.

Argent Stonecutter

gmail and YouTube and blogger and other services that are only linked to profiles, no. Services that require an active profile, including Reader, yes. Google stated, explicitly, on the page I just linked to and in the text I quoted from that page: "If your profile is suspended, you will not be able to make full use of Google services that require an active profile such as Google+, Buzz, Reader and Picasa."

Joshua Nightshade

Well that's obnoxious. I don't know why you would need that for Reader; it makes sense for Buzz, and slightly for Picasa if you're using it as a photo sharing service. But Reader? I shut off all the dumb social networking functionality.

Argent Stonecutter

Doing what? Comparing Google Plus to Nazi Germany?

Have I QFT-ed anything that mentioned the Holocaust? I don't think I have.

And I have actively avoided posting links that seem to me at all similar to the ones that set you off. I'm doing my best, but I can't read your mind.

Given what people are saying about this policy on Plus, and the kinds of links I'm passing up, I'm being outrageously restrained.

Joshua Nightshade

It's moot by this point Argent. The thread has been so inflated with ridiculous hyperbole and bullshit parallels that I think it should just be taken out back and shot in the face.

You'll probably enjoy the thread Kristian started instead.

Pseudonymity and Privacy on the Internet

Argent Stonecutter

Yeh, I know what you think, you've made that quite clear.

The one that starts out saying it's not about Google Plus? You don't like thread drift, so you want me to hijack one instead?

Joshua Nightshade

It's about the Bigger Thing you keep insisting this thread is about, so its direct relationship to Google+ shouldn't be any more relevant than to the insignificance of SL, as you keep complaining about.

Brenda Archer

One of the quotes at Google’s Antisocial Behavior – DocPop.org really stood out for me:

This mixture of free and paid services, and the loss of the paid services because of users reporting each other, is a very, very poor way to handle paying customers. I keep hearing of other examples as well.

This is truly complete B.S. If Google cannot find a way to shield paid product from name griefing, they need to stop the suspensions until they can work out a policy that makes sense.

Saying it's a free service and opt-in no longer holds any water when paid services are impacted.

Argent Stonecutter

Well, all this "useless" complaining seems to have convinced Google to create a downgrade page, so people can go back to the "status quo" before Plus. At least people have reported the page exists, given Google's track record it's probably hit or miss as to whether it works. I'm waiting to see whether Rainyday Superstar's restored before I cheer.

The whole thing reminds me of people's reports of Linden Lab's abuse process, with people getting falsely reported for being underage over and over again...

Joshua Nightshade

I never said it was "useless," I said it was entitled whining.

I also said at the beginning of the thread that I suspected they would be bullied into changing the policy; they're the upstart, they have to unseat Facebook, so they can't afford people leaving as a critical mass.