“If your website is full of assholes, it’s your fault.” - Anil Dash
I was pretty happy when I went down this list. How many things on it are you doing, fellow #mastoadmim people?
(I’m not hiring anyone to help watch this place but I’m also deliberately keeping it SMALL so I don’t have to.)
(Ironically, I did think its bit about YouTube comments seemed slightly dated because those seem to have become, on average, less toxic than they used to be, though that's a low bar considering they were actively the worst before.)
Where do you see him suggesting that? I don't see anything like that; in fact, I see very much the *opposite* of that. Here, let me copy the part on "accountable identities" for you, and split off some key points:
👉🏾 Your site should have accountable identities.
👉🏾 No, people don’t have to use their real names, or log in with Google or Facebook or Twitter unless you want them to.
But truly anonymous commenting often makes it really easy to have a pile of shit on your website, especially if you don’t have dedicated community moderators. When do newspapers publish anonymous sources? When the journalists know the actual identity and credibility of the person, and decide it is a public good to protect their identity.
👉🏾 You may wish to follow the same principles, or you can embrace one of my favorite methods of identity: Persistent pseudonyms.
Let users pick a handle that is attached to all of their contributions in a consistent way where other people can see what they’ve done on the site. Don’t make reputation a number or a score, make it an actual representation of the person’s behavior.
And of course, IF APPROPRIATE, [emphasis mine] don’t be afraid to attach people’s real names to their comments and contributions.
👉🏾 But you’ll find “real” identities are no cure for assholes showing up in your comments if you aren’t following the rest of the principles described here.
I really don't see how this at *all* reads as "admins should dig up people's RL contact information and spread it online". What parts of this essay read that way to you?
Did you see the part where he describes persistent pseudonyms as "one of my favorite methods of identity"?
He's not advocating for real names at all; he's acknowledging that some places may *choose* to say "use something that sounds like it's probably your wallet name, we will delete your account if we catch you using something else", and then goes on to say that doing that *still* doesn't solve the problem of people being jerks.