As Botgirl Questi reports, the reason things have been so topsy-turvy on Google+ (some pseudonymous accounts being suspended then being reinstated; others being suspended and remaining so, others apparently being removed), appears to have gained some clarification.
It appears, to precis, that Google wants G+ to mimic how “ordinary people” interact in the real world.
Wow.
So innovation has now become a matter of mimicking, rather than enhancing or actually, well, being innovative. Givem all the possible options Google could opt to take when looking at building a genuinely innovative, progressive and encompassing social platform, the one that claim to have opted for seems to be little more than a wimp-out.
Obviously, there are clear reasons for this – as Tateru Nino commented the other day – in relation to capturing those who have been engaged in Facebook. This is also the possibility that Google’s conservative approach is because most people are, well, conservative, when it comes to making friends in RL. But in taking this approach, the fact is that Google is hardly likely to set the world alight – and they may actually be aware of this, hence the current flip-flopping over the matter of pseudonymity we’re currently seeing in terms of some accounts being reinstated as the beta progresses.
Even so, one cannot help but think that in taking up this stance, Google are potentially leaving a very large opportunity open for someone else to take-up.
Botgirl Questi closes her post with a quote from Marshall McLuhan regarding looking back at the future. I’d like to add my own to it, this one from Jim Steinman and made famous by one Marvin Lee Aday. It may not be as illustrious as the quote from McLuhan, but it still tends to sum Google’s position up:
Objects in the rear-view mirror may appear closer than they are.
Inara Pey: Living in a Modemworld 
“It appears, to precis, that Google wants G+ to mimic how “ordinary people” interact in the real world.”
I’m probably in the minority in this, but there are not 200 Million people living in my town.
However, even in our small population, there are some very common (as in ‘not unusual’) names.
Humans can deal with knowing of 2 or 3 different Liz Murphy’s. Google+ ‘real names’ is completely unable to deal with more than one Liz Murphy without forcing all but one of them to use a pseudonym.
That’s just in a small collection of humans in a minor town. In a world in which 100s of millions are potentially connected, it becomes pure insanity.
As I commented in BotGirl’s blog.
—————————–
I can see where automation by Google+ would enhance my natural human experience.
I quite often spend time going through Chinese telephone directories looking for the number of my friend Mei Chen.
This process is very tedious as Mei is a most common female name and there are over 90 Million people named Chen in China.
Her email address is just too inconvenient to remember MeiChen80948576432@google.com
I really don’t know why the hell she stuck on that number. It makes her look like a spam bot.
Anyway, now that we’ll all be on Google+, all I have to do is search for her real name and I’m straight there. This is absolutely brilliant!
—————————–
LikeLike
I thought we *were* the ordinary people on the Web? Heaven knows *I* am!
LikeLike
Apparently, we’re not. Although, I suppose that might make us extraordinary people. Ah, the pros and cons, the pros and cons… 🙂
LikeLike
Google must be severely out of touch with “real life.” Most places, in real life (as opposed to what? unreal life? life as a zombie?), I might converse with one or two dozen people all day on nothing more than my first name. I certainly don’t hand them a dossier with my phone number, email addresses, like/dislikes, blah blah etc. And I certainly don’t do it in a shopping mall.
To pretend otherwise is disingenuous.
LikeLike
In real life, there are 45,080 people named John Smith – in the USA alone – according to US Census data http://howmanyofme.com/search/
How are Google going to ‘replicate’ even a fraction of those signing up with their real names?
You know it’s going to happen. Very soon, people will be forced to use some variation of their name that absolutely nobody knows them by.
Add in the John Smiths in the UK and whereever.
Other countries would have their own common names.
Over 90 million Chens in China ( Sounds like a Monty Python song )
I just Googled “johnsmith” – 22 Million results
It’s a tad frightening to realise (again) just how stupid very powerful people can be.
LikeLike
Yup.
And why the whole thing becomes a mockery. And we haven’t even touched on the question as to whether John Smith actually *is* who he says he is in the first place, although Tateru did a nice little piece on that. Nor have we mentioned the fact that, were were both to have G+ accounts, I’d probably stand a lot less chance of being suspended than you because my pen name “sounds more real” (and could easily be registered with a photo of my Great Aunt Joyce).
LikeLike
“replicate real life”? What does actually it means? The web is not a real tool? Virtual worlds are not real software? Avatars are not puppets moved by real player? Not? Really? OMG… So I was misleaded using all these tools in my real time instead of watching tv or going out wit friends and eat pizza? Is not a matter of personal choice in your real daily life?
I’m surprised….
LikeLike
“replicate real life”? What does actually it mean? The web is not a real tool? Virtual worlds are not real software? Avatars are not puppets moved by real player? Not? Really? OMG… So I was misleaded using all these tools in my real time instead of watching tv or going out wit friends and eat pizza? Is not a matter of personal choice in your real daily life?
I’m surprised….
LikeLike
Hi Luciana
WordPress submitted your comment twice, so I deleted the duplicate. In fairness, “replicate real life” is my term, rather than Google’s, but it is essentially what they are saying. If I’m honest, it smacks more of a kack-handed excuse for recent activities rather than an actual policy; particularly given that half of Google itself doesn’t seem to have got the message.
LikeLike
Wait! Damnit! I accidentally turned on my PC and went online! I’m not a real person anymore and my real life has stopped working until I turn it off!
LikeLike
“You’re traveling through another dimension, a dimension only of sight and sound but not of mind; a journey into a mundane land whose boundaries are a lack of imagination. — Next stop, the Google Zone.”
(with apologies to Rod Sterling. Afraid you must add the “do-do-do-doos” yourself when reading this)
LikeLike
Im wondering what my “real” name is … is it …. Annika; the name my parents chose for me ? is it .. Alexandra; the name it changed to when I was 16? is it …Lady; a name I chose entering the virtuality almost five years back?.
What does it mean when Google+ Says that I should use the name friends, family etc call me? .. that could be any of the above … or Alex.. or Sandy .. or Sandie.. or Sandra .. or …? See how confusing it can become dear google+ ?
Blegh Im not even gonna bother about it really, They are the ones loosing out not me. I never got FB and Ive seen google+ and I dont get that either .. so boring it drives me to tears
LikeLike
Well, it would appear that depending on who at Google looks at your G+ profile, the rule would seem to be, “Use any name you go by, as long as it is your real name or looks real enough for us to let it pass. Or use your avatar name, although we may suspend / unsuspend it a few times; but then again, there is no guarantee we won’t just suspend your really name anyway. Oh hell, do what you like; we’ll just roll the dice on you at this end and see what happens.”
LikeLike