And also agree with Steph and Michelle in that anonymity can strengthen group bonds – but also push them to more polarised views.

The main thing for me is that though anonymity clearly lowers the barrier to entry – and may mean that more stuff gets posted – I am not sure if I want the barrier to entry that low when it comes to reasoned debate. I don’t think that means you have to make identity transparent – ie you should use screenames if people prefer – but there should be the knowledge that someone can work out who is posting.

I think this is even more important if you look at creating relationships between citizen/government – is it really reasonable to expect the state to have a dialogue about important issues without having any certainty as to how many individuals they are dealing with – let alone if they are citizens with rights within the decision making process.

I am also increasingly uncomfortable with the engagement / democracy divide – but am in the process of getting my head together on this and will post when I have!

C.

I totally agree that from a government/Council perspective accountability and identity are very important. I know that @cusiousc is exploring all of this in greater levels of detail than most of us ever will!

I think there are forums where people turn into dickwads – e.g. online comments on newspapers. And support forums where anonymity is vital.

Councils need to think about these different needs when engaging with people online, too. Don’t expect people to share with their Facebook friends how they’ve used parenting support services or accessed benefits (some might, I sure wouldn’t). But they might share that kind of info in an anonymous forum without turning into dickwads.

People rightly expect a degree of accountability behind what they get from services paid by tax/Council Tax etc, and there fore need to have access to some sort of identity for things like detailed follow up, complaint, redress etc (not a compleet or very good list, but hope you get my drift). If all they are dealing with is a faceless, nameless avatar in the form of a corporate logo, we could be setting back the cause and course of open communication. There’s also big issues for local authorities themselves within all of this, around reputation management. It is something that some are more sensitive about than others, but most will expect some form of assurance that when their staff are blogging/tweeting/posting etc on issues related to their daily work, they are on-message, saying things they are authorised to say etc. Plus, of course, there is a need for people to be assured that they are dealing with an authoritative, informed voice behind the logo, and not someone who is pretending, or making it up as they go along.

I know that a few commentators feel that social media only really works well in a viral and slightly anarchic way, but when I look, for example, at many of the things on, say, Twitter, that get people excited enough to retweet etc, they have at their root very accountable, far from anonymous, and directly attributable sources, such as pages from press web sites, or the like.

Social media as an information tool probably has a lower set of necessary standards than its use as a community engagement tool, where the focus is going to be on multi-way conversations, rather than generally one-way information broadcasting. The difference probably isn’t stark, though.

And of course, local authorities probably won’t be able to insist on a quid pro quo. They are bound to be dealing with public who prefer to remain at least superficially anonymous on some issues. But that’s cool, IMO, if it is helping an enquirer, commentator or customer iin the community to use their anonymity to help them open up about an issue in a way that using their own name might inhibit.

RT @davebriggs Anonymity, community and identity [link to post]

– Posted using Chat Catcher

RT @davebriggs Bloggy bloggy blog blog: Anonymity, community and identity [link to post] > to be or not to be transparent?

– Posted using Chat Catcher

RT @davebriggs: Bloggy bloggy blog blog: Anonymity, community and identity [link to post] <

– Posted using Chat Catcher

When I went to see the The Student Room recently, Jamie there was telling me how anonymity seems to make the community more supportive and constructive, oddly. Certainly, compared to the other network its members use – Facebook – where everything you do is attached for eternity to your real identity.

RT @davebriggs: Bloggy bloggy blog blog: Anonymity, community and identity [link to post]

– Posted using Chat Catcher