It has been over a year since Kathy Sierra's blog Creating Passionate Users has updated. Ms. Sierra was the victim of serious online harassment, up to and including death threats, via anonymous comments in her blog and posts elsewhere revealing personal details about her such as her SSN, and false accounts of her career. It prompted her to cancel a speaking engagement at a tech conference, made her afraid to leave her house, and eventually drove her to give up blogging all together.
Anonymity is a privilege, not a right. Privacy is a right. One has every right not to have the details of one's personal life spread around without consent. One's name is not, however, private. A method of contact (not even a home address or phone number, specifically) is not private. Like it or not, we are members of a public society, and the most basic requirement of participation is that people know who you are and how to get in contact with you.
The internet is a little different. It's a society in the making, and the social consensus of acceptable and/or required behaviour is still being worked out. Until it is, we can only fall back on the rules we've brought with us from the 'real' world, and this particular rule is even more vital. The information-based society ceases to function without accountability and credibility, and anonymity undercuts both of these values. How can data be trusted when the source is unverifiable? Who can be turned to for correction, clarification, or elaboration?
When anonymity is abused, to attack, slander, and or harass another, it loses any redeeming qualities it may have had. To abuse the privilege of anonymity should result in loss of the privilege. Mike Krahulik had it right when he put forth John Gabriel's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory: take away accountability, and lose coherence, accuracy, and even basic courtesy.
Kathy Sierra's experience catalysed the Call for a Blogger's Code of Conduct, which in the short form demanded that people take ownership of the words they write. I feel that it should be taken a step further. Just as in real life, acts of this nature should carry social consequences. People who behave in anti-social ways lose the privilege of a social circle. Unfortunately the nature of the internet and most message boards, blogs, and free or cheap email services means it is too easy for the cowardly to stay anonymous or appear under another name, free of the baggage they accrued with their first persona.
My personal policy has always been that people should police themselves; one's own sense of self should prevent acting like a jerk, even if no one knows who committed the act. Sadly, this appears to be inadequate. If the status quo were otherwise, I wouldn't be writing this. Anti-spam measures such as requiring authorisation to comment, via TypeKey, OpenID, or others are a start, but what more can be done?
The members of the blogosphere need to be more willing to pierce other's veil of anonymity to protect their own privacy. IP address logging can help pinpoint an abuser's ISP, and harassment complaints can be made. Surely there are other steps that can be taken?
Anonymity is a privilege, not a right. Privacy is a right. One has every right not to have the details of one's personal life spread around without consent. One's name is not, however, private. A method of contact (not even a home address or phone number, specifically) is not private. Like it or not, we are members of a public society, and the most basic requirement of participation is that people know who you are and how to get in contact with you.
The internet is a little different. It's a society in the making, and the social consensus of acceptable and/or required behaviour is still being worked out. Until it is, we can only fall back on the rules we've brought with us from the 'real' world, and this particular rule is even more vital. The information-based society ceases to function without accountability and credibility, and anonymity undercuts both of these values. How can data be trusted when the source is unverifiable? Who can be turned to for correction, clarification, or elaboration?
When anonymity is abused, to attack, slander, and or harass another, it loses any redeeming qualities it may have had. To abuse the privilege of anonymity should result in loss of the privilege. Mike Krahulik had it right when he put forth John Gabriel's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory: take away accountability, and lose coherence, accuracy, and even basic courtesy.
Kathy Sierra's experience catalysed the Call for a Blogger's Code of Conduct, which in the short form demanded that people take ownership of the words they write. I feel that it should be taken a step further. Just as in real life, acts of this nature should carry social consequences. People who behave in anti-social ways lose the privilege of a social circle. Unfortunately the nature of the internet and most message boards, blogs, and free or cheap email services means it is too easy for the cowardly to stay anonymous or appear under another name, free of the baggage they accrued with their first persona.
My personal policy has always been that people should police themselves; one's own sense of self should prevent acting like a jerk, even if no one knows who committed the act. Sadly, this appears to be inadequate. If the status quo were otherwise, I wouldn't be writing this. Anti-spam measures such as requiring authorisation to comment, via TypeKey, OpenID, or others are a start, but what more can be done?
The members of the blogosphere need to be more willing to pierce other's veil of anonymity to protect their own privacy. IP address logging can help pinpoint an abuser's ISP, and harassment complaints can be made. Surely there are other steps that can be taken?
Leave a comment