Google+ accounts being suspended for not using real name

An unusually substantial amount of Google+ accounts have either been suspended or deleted in the past 24 hours, with talk from users suggesting Google is going tough on those not using their real name. The news comes as Google attempts to reinforce their community standards policy which prohibits people from using a nickname.

ZDNet have reported on the story, in which several users have been in contact, with all familiar stories that their accounts have been suspended. A woman who was recently featured on the cover of WIRED magazine, found that her account was recently suspended after having the name "Limor 'Ladyada' Fried". After apparently a series of complaints from her fans, Google discreetly restored her account, however the story isn't the same for the majority, who have now found themselves locked out of the Google+ network. Some users are apparently reporting that they've even been suspended on all of the Google services that they're signed up to, such as Gmail and Documents.

In an interesting turn of events, a former Google employee found they were also blocked from the network, who had previously applauded the social network's statements regarding real names:

It then asks me for my name (uh, don’t you know that already?), email (ditto), link to my profile (ditto), and asks me to provide documentation. I can either give them a scan of my photo ID (obscuring “personal information”, whatever that means), or links to places on the web that demonstrate that this is my name.

They suggest using Facebook (the site that allows Google founder Sergey Brin to go under a pseudonym, and whose own founder has a page for his dog) as evidence. I have something better, though, because I expected this to happen and I had already collated my evidence. I linked to that page and submitted the form.

It is somewhat surprising that Google has decided to punish users, who would otherwise have only helped to grow the newly founded social networking site. In a time when the Google+ user base is growing significantly by the day, despite being invite-only, one would have expected a more lenient attitude in regards to their naming policy. On the other hand, it's understandable that Google wishes to maintain a social network that can be viewed by many, as a serious competitor to Facebook.

Image Source: Google

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Fake Apple Stores in China prompt official investigation

Next Story

Microsoft's "Black Hole" sucks 2.5 billion dollars for the year

59 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

One more reason not to have Google+.

and yesterday a friend of mine sent me a G+ invitation, and instead of clicking the link to join, I clicked the link to never bother me with G+ stuff

This is an evil act.

Requiering users to document their Identities is a great step on losing all piracy.

It seems your emails, your online searches, your location is not enough.
Now Google wants to know all your friends, too!

katilkurt said,
This is an evil act.

Requiering users to document their Identities is a great step on losing all piracy.

It seems your emails, your online searches, your location is not enough.
Now Google wants to know all your friends, too!

You're not forced to use Google+ you know.

Google made people want to know G+. Now Google wants to scare people away. People should at least be able to use nicknames if they want to. Google should be worried about preventing abusive content, like porn, pedos, and that kind of stuff.

Another reason to not bother with google+.

"handles" are inherent in social communication circles.. from Ham, to CB, to BBS to forums.. why does google think they're soooo special?

spudtrooper said,
Another reason to not bother with google+.

"handles" are inherent in social communication circles.. from Ham, to CB, to BBS to forums.. why does google think they're soooo special?

I miss BBS Those were the days.

spudtrooper said,
Another reason to not bother with google+.

"handles" are inherent in social communication circles.. from Ham, to CB, to BBS to forums.. why does google think they're soooo special?

That's very true, and an excellent point.

This is a very stupid move for security reasons, throwing out your first and last name out there just makes it so much easier to become a victim of some sort of online scam,stalked, etc. Hackers, scamers spammers can be even more direct in there emails and making it seem more personal by using your REAL info in there scam emails. Google nor Facebook or any of these social type sites do not really care about your personal info and privacy this is how they make there money by mining and selling your data. Also they could just easily implement some sort of character limit to deal with the idiots that use the neverendingnicknameformatlikethislol. Furthermore, i still don't really see how they could tell if someone was really using there names, enforcing people to fork over there drivers license, cell #, etc wouldn't really work because not everyone has these forms of identification.

Ultravires said,
This is a very stupid move for security reasons, throwing out your first and last name out there just makes it so much easier to become a victim of some sort of online scam,stalked, etc. Hackers, scamers spammers can be even more direct in there emails and making it seem more personal by using your REAL info in there scam emails. Google nor Facebook or any of these social type sites do not really care about your personal info and privacy this is how they make there money by mining and selling your data. Also they could just easily implement some sort of character limit to deal with the idiots that use the neverendingnicknameformatlikethislol. Furthermore, i still don't really see how they could tell if someone was really using there names, enforcing people to fork over there drivers license, cell #, etc wouldn't really work because not everyone has these forms of identification.

Use a private profile to make your contact information not show up and/or just dont post that stuff if you are worried. Also both services also let you decide if you want your profile available on search.

Ultravires said,
This is a very stupid move for security reasons, throwing out your first and last name out there just makes it so much easier to become a victim of some sort of online scam,stalked, etc. Hackers, scamers spammers can be even more direct in there emails and making it seem more personal by using your REAL info in there scam emails. Google nor Facebook or any of these social type sites do not really care about your personal info and privacy this is how they make there money by mining and selling your data. Also they could just easily implement some sort of character limit to deal with the idiots that use the neverendingnicknameformatlikethislol. Furthermore, i still don't really see how they could tell if someone was really using there names, enforcing people to fork over there drivers license, cell #, etc wouldn't really work because not everyone has these forms of identification.

Surely nothing damaging or dangerous like that can happen if they only have your full name and a picture of you? Don't they need more information like your location, date of birth etc? Facebook and Google+ allow you to hide sensitive information like that.

Callum said,

Surely nothing damaging or dangerous like that can happen if they only have your full name and a picture of you? Don't they need more information like your location, date of birth etc? Facebook and Google+ allow you to hide sensitive information like that.

Yeah because websites never get hacked either, right? Lulzsec was just a paranoia machine, I assume. If a site gets hacked and it uncovers nicknames, who cares?

AllMac said,
Google's population control has begun. Everybody stand in line for chip implant.
If that ever happened, i'd immediately join in with the likes of anon haha

AllMac said,
Google's population control has begun. Everybody stand in line for chip implant.

The chip will need to feed you ads somehow first.

Do you really think google gives a sh.t what you think?They collect data.Data = power. So simple

Bad thing. Ok im gonna troll now but... diaspora lets you use any name you want and gender (its a text field) and requires no age to sign up.

zikalify said,
Bad thing. Ok im gonna troll now but... diaspora lets you use any name you want and gender (its a text field) and requires no age to sign up.

Those things don't make diaspora better in my opinion.

This is simple. It's apparently provided in the terms and conditions that you use your real name to create a profile. If you have a nickname that you go by, there is a section to add that.

The suspension of all Google products seems a bit far, but the suspension of your Google+ rights seems to be fair enough if you don't follow the T&C.

Intrinsica said,
This is simple. It's apparently provided in the terms and conditions that you use your real name to create a profile. If you have a nickname that you go by, there is a section to add that.

The suspension of all Google products seems a bit far, but the suspension of your Google+ rights seems to be fair enough if you don't follow the T&C.

Legit users are having their accounts closed and being told to provide photographic ID to prove their name. I don't think that's fair. Even if I put my name as "Eric Schmidt", unless I'm actually impersonating the guy, what's to say that my name isn't actually Eric Schmidt?

My first reaction is, "WTF", but then, I thought that it's a good thing.

I hope this practice becomes accepted, and then I hope that Facebook will ban Profiles with Fake Names and Profiles that should actually be Fan Pages!

thenonhacker said,
My first reaction is, "WTF", but then, I thought that it's a good thing.

I hope this practice becomes accepted, and then I hope that Facebook will ban Profiles with Fake Names and Profiles that should actually be Fan Pages!


Let's ban the "nonhacker"?

Probably to stop scams and fraud via impersonations. If you are not ready to use your own name in regards to communicating with the friends that you yourself have added to your circles, I agree with Google that you are probably after something else than a social network with friends. This is only intended to be the internet equivalent to talking with your buddies over the phone, or going to a party. Do you really do these things under a pseudonym to hide your identity?

If afraid of going public with your name, just don't post public statuses or add a lot of information to your profile.

Northgrove said,
Probably to stop scams and fraud via impersonations. If you are not ready to use your own name in regards to communicating with the friends that you yourself have added to your circles, I agree with Google that you are probably after something else than a social network with friends. This is only intended to be the internet equivalent to talking with your buddies over the phone, or going to a party. Do you really do these things under a pseudonym to hide your identity?

If afraid of going public with your name, just don't post public statuses or add a lot of information to your profile.

Your friends may also know you by a nickname as well as your real name, shouldn't you be able to use that in a "social network with friends"?

"If afraid of going public with your name, just don't post public statuses or add a lot of information to your profile." Whats the point of joining then?

Enron said,
Social networks are antisocial. What's so great about looking at somebody's wall anyway?
G+ has no walls to look at. Just your own feed about stuff that you personally have chosen as interesting.

Enron said,
Social networks are antisocial. What's so great about looking at somebody's wall anyway?

I think G+'s lack of walls is what makes it better than facebook.

Northgrove said,
G+ has no walls to look at. Just your own feed about stuff that you personally have chosen as interesting.

And what's a wall again ?

Xerax said,
Good. I hate having scene kids with names like "Roxy VanityKittensRiot Manson". My god, so dumb.

Bad, I don't like to share my names just because someone told me so. Ib4 I'm a kid, I'm a 24 year old master student (so far successful). Also, I don't like Facebook, but I don't tolerate either Elitism, so google+ can say goodbay to me whenever they want, is not that a social network is a primary component in my life.

Arceles said,

Bad, I don't like to share my names just because someone told me so. Ib4 I'm a kid, I'm a 24 year old master student (so far successful). Also, I don't like Facebook, but I don't tolerate either Elitism, so google+ can say goodbay to me whenever they want, is not that a social network is a primary component in my life.

Chill out.

FoxieFoxie said,

Chill out.

Lol, it's just that I perhaps may find funny someday that they deleted my account for having a nick name that I have widely used for I don't know how many years, that's why, they re welcome to delete it whenever they want, it just means they lose me and no one else.

Arceles said,

Bad, I don't like to share my names just because someone told me so. Ib4 I'm a kid, I'm a 24 year old master student (so far successful). Also, I don't like Facebook, but I don't tolerate either Elitism, so google+ can say goodbay to me whenever they want, is not that a social network is a primary component in my life.

24 but you sound like a Teenager to me....Whaaaaah they did something I don't like I'm taking my bat n ball and going....Whaaaah. CYA!

Baked said,

24 but you sound like a Teenager to me....Whaaaaah they did something I don't like I'm taking my bat n ball and going....Whaaaah. CYA!


He sounds like any rational customer. They don't do something I like, I'm out. Pretty simple.

DrunkenBeard said,

He sounds like any rational customer. They don't do something I like, I'm out. Pretty simple.

+1

anyway, google is a huge failure in the social scene. this only hurts them more than it does me xD

Xerax said,
Good. I hate having scene kids with names like "Roxy VanityKittensRiot Manson". My god, so dumb.

So, is Xerax you first of last name?

DrunkenBeard said,

He sounds like any rational customer. They don't do something I like, I'm out. Pretty simple.

+2 to this, if they erase my profile, then their loss, not mine, I'll still have some good alternatives out there, and btw isn't a good marketing thing suspending User accounts just for not using the real names, on the other hand I like the 'concept' of using real names, it gives you more confidence...

Arceles said,

Bad, I don't like to share my names just because someone told me so. Ib4 I'm a kid, I'm a 24 year old master student (so far successful). Also, I don't like Facebook, but I don't tolerate either Elitism, so google+ can say goodbay to me whenever they want, is not that a social network is a primary component in my life.


It's OK, I'm sure the other 20 million + people will get on just fine without you.

DrunkenBeard said,

He sounds like any rational customer. They don't do something I like, I'm out. Pretty simple.

I agree. I see no immaturity there; what he's saying sounds reasonable and rational.

daPhoenix said,
Judging by your attitude, not a big loss - to anyone.

Oh google elitists, when will you learn?

DrunkenBeard said,

He sounds like any rational customer. They don't do something I like, I'm out. Pretty simple.

(counting) +4.

daPhoenix is one of 'those' people.

This Sucks.....

What i hate the most is that you cant send a MSG to a member of your circle..
You cant even send them an email unless they have it in there profile information..
There is no possible way of descrete private exchange of MSGs

I loved the fact that G+ is clean !! No Bull on the page.... but this is just too LAME !

Ultimatum said,
This Sucks.....

What i hate the most is that you cant send a MSG to a member of your circle..
You cant even send them an email unless they have it in there profile information..
There is no possible way of descrete private exchange of MSGs

I loved the fact that G+ is clean !! No Bull on the page.... but this is just too LAME !

Post something, but only share it with that user, this acts as a private exchange between you and that user. The whole point of G+ is an amalgamation of services, a separate messages service would undermine that.

Ultimatum said,
This Sucks.....

What i hate the most is that you cant send a MSG to a member of your circle..
You cant even send them an email unless they have it in there profile information..
There is no possible way of descrete private exchange of MSGs

I loved the fact that G+ is clean !! No Bull on the page.... but this is just too LAME !


Write your message in a normal post, but instead of sending to one your circles, erase it, and type in a friends name! And in your message if you put +Friends_Name_Here they will be notified about your message.

Ultimatum said,
This Sucks.....

What i hate the most is that you cant send a MSG to a member of your circle..
You cant even send them an email unless they have it in there profile information..
There is no possible way of descrete private exchange of MSGs

I loved the fact that G+ is clean !! No Bull on the page.... but this is just too LAME !


You're wrong. You can send private messages. It helps to understand a service before you criticise it when it can actually do what you're after. As others have pointed out, you can post something and ensure that only the one person you wish to contact sees that post; likewise you can tag that person so it appears in their notifications.

Callum said,

You're wrong. You can send private messages. It helps to understand a service before you criticise it when it can actually do what you're after. As others have pointed out, you can post something and ensure that only the one person you wish to contact sees that post; likewise you can tag that person so it appears in their notifications.

I agree, you can send another person a private message. Under their profile in Google+, there is a link under their picture called send an email. Granted the user has the option to limit who can email them like just there circles, extended circles, public.