These stories seem to crop up with regularity, these days.
But last month she got a message from Facebook asking her to send identification to prove it was a genuine name and account.
There are two thoughts that follow. Firstly, their gaff, their rules. Facebook is a privately owned space and you abide by their rules of engagement. So, fair enough. However, the idea of having to send in ID is becoming the thoroughly modern norm and it is insidious, so the second thought involves telling them precisely where they can travel and multiply – and which end of the pineapple they should use.
I don’t have a Facebook account. Have never had one and never will have one. These people are using their users to make their profit – if you don’t pay for the service, you are the product and I’ll be damned if I’ll be Facebook’s product. It’s bad enough feeling that I have to use LinkedIn, but I keep my interaction there to an absolute minimum. Doesn’t stop people data mining it and spamming me from time to time, though. But Facebook, I have no need for and will avoid much as I would avoid Tunisia or Liberia. I certainly wouldn’t change my name to keep an account there.
I only have a Farcebook account because for some obscure reason people like to follow my blog on Farcebook. Beats me why they don’t just read the fucking thing…
I’ve left Arsebook because they didn’t believe me when I used my Iranian name as my real name. So I’ve left it. Though I’m still there under my English name for family connections.
Everyone has different identities depending on which group they are talking in. Family means no swearing & no politics, friends means open discussion about politics, work means no chance of bringing biz into disrepute. So I have different identities on Facebook & Twitter depending on who I am talking to and what the point is.
Why did she not just open another account in her real name?
What is wrong with people?
Wekk in this particular case the woman was not only utterly retarded but in addition overfilled with such narcissism that she felt the need to broadcast it in the Daily Mail.
I used to have a Facebook account, which I used for campaigning for a specific aspect of feline welfare. Nothing shocking in the campaign, no explicit pictures. The account had a name, not my real name, but a name that showed what the account was for.
Eventually, someone disagreed fiercely with my view that cats should not be mutilated electively by their owners & unethical vets and reported me to FB. I was locked out, told I had to submit the following:-
1) Formal ID such as a passport or employer ID as issued by an employer (I work for myself)
2) My Social Security number
3) Offical evidence of my residential address
…and a couple of other items, all as laughable as the first three.
I knew all about Zuckerberg’s utopian, frat-boy fantasy of everyone using their own name & personal details all over the net, but as I, along with many other people, value their privacy, I chose to take my chances.
My chances ran well for nearly two years, then I got reported and booted. It didn’t bother me. I had other outlets.
What does bother me is the hypocrisy of FB. Zuckerberg refuses point blank to remove still pictures and footage of explicit acts of animal cruelty. He states that the “community” will police itself. Of course, it never does and the postings of horrific cruelty grow daily because of his rule.
A post containing a female human nipple will be taken down in minutes and the poster banned for all eternity. Isn’t this similar to American telly, where a lusty kiss and a bit of sideboob will cause the end of the world, yet hard core violence is viewed with impunity?
Zuckerberg professes to be an animal lover, he has a dog apparently. He doesn’t love animals, the only things he loves are himself and money. Hence his hypocrisy.