Real names forum - what's your policy?

[TomCann]

I run a strictly 'real names only' forum that requires at least one full first name and one last name to register - no handles, initials only, etc. It's been this way for 25 years and works really well for my community. I don't mind if people choose not use their actual names for privacy. If John Smith registers as James Smythe that's fine by me - as long as it is plausible.

I would reject names that were not plausible (Buzz Lightyear for example). But I am often left making a judgment a call on names that don't look right but aren't as obvious as Buzz Lightyear. For example someone registers as 'Dinka varzel'. Doesn't look like a real name in any language, and a google search finds nobody on the planet with that name.

I want to preserve my forum as a Real Names Only forum, with no doubt about that, so what do I do? reject them with no explanation? reject with a messagte that I do not find their name plausible? Allow them in, but monitor for spam or other bad behaviour?

I'd be interested to know what other moderators would do in these circumstances.

 

[CedricV]

Reject will cause them to be discouraged and they won't bother signing up again.

If you see a weird name, let them in. Send them a private message instead asking to comply with your real name rule. Give them a 30 or 60 days notice. If they don't reply, then send them another message with a warning that you may delete their account.

 

[Jonathan_Bathrough]

If John Smith registers as James Smythe that's fine by me - as long as it is plausible.

'real names only' f

What's the point?

 

[TomCann]

It works for my forum thanks.

 

[Jonathan_Bathrough]

It works for my forum thanks.

Whats the point to have real names without validating them?

 

[TomCann]

It's the perception; the message it sends out. If everyone participating has plausible name rather than handles, initials or joke names, it sets a tone: my forum has been going for 25 years with a thriving community that meets very regularly offline too now, arranged via the forum. It's a matter of trust - of course the names might not be 'real' real, but the feel of the forum is very different from one with obviously anonymous participants. Almost everyone does use their real name.

I'm not sure validating is possible - asking people to upload copies of drivers licenses for example, would be a data protection risk that I'm not prepared to take, never mind the additional admin.

 

[Ricsca]

If users can choose not to use their real name then it becomes a nickname and therefore I don't understand the point of not allowing nicknames.

 

[Chromaniac]

I have a message on registration form essentially pleading not to use real names. Though no one seems to read it and end up using their email id or name in login id. Young folks really do not know how forums operate. Some would use their handle and that’s fine.

The problem is that a lot of them would ping me to remove their actual name from their account and post content 2-3 months down the line. Some folks would ping me years later. It is just extra hassle for me to clean up post content.

 

[Mr Lucky]

What about the bloke who legally changed his name to Fire Exit so he could see his name in lights all around the world. True story.

However Lightyear is an actual surname, and Buzz is an actual first name (albeit a nickname) obviously Buzz Lightyear was named maybe after Buzz Aldrin.

 

[alfaNova]

This decision should be made depending on the audience. I have an engineering community, and I require people to use their real names as well. If they use meaningless name, I am giving a warning and the system is automatically assigning them to the restricted user group. If they change their name, then removing that warning and all it will become normal.

 

[Mendalla]

Given the vast range of languages in the world (I have three in my family alone), I would probably go easy on a weird name unless it's an obvious fake.

My site, I entirely leave it up to members. Most use a "handle" but some, mostly ministers in the church that ran our predecessor site, use some variation of their real name. RevGord, RevJohn, that sort of thing.

 

[woody]

I encourage usernames, not real names. Too many possible legal headaches.

Creating a bogus name to register is nothing more than a "real sounding" username.... equally fake.

 

[Sim]

I run a private members-only forum for an industry association where I insist that people use real names - but I also insist they use a work email address so it's usually pretty easy to verify. I can also check names against the membership list if required - which is fairly definitive. The biggest problem I have is people who try to sign up for the forum, despite the clear warnings on the front page that this is a private forum for members of the association only - people don't read instructions.

In your case, I would be contacting them by private message or similar to explain the rules and confirm their names.

 

[Suzanne O]

Wow a strict policy on names.

People say i'm too strict on my forum.

Maybe i'm not strict enough.

You do you @TomCann It sounds like it's working for you.

 

[zappaDPJ]

I encourage usernames, not real names. Too many possible legal headaches.

I agree, it's something I actively discourage on all my forums.

 

[80sDude]

I let them choose but most I believe have registered on my forum with their real names.