There are so many widely varied naming conventions across this world, that it’s likely to be the case that members of *every* subset will feel that a major portion of the rest of the world uses conventions which make them “uncomfortable.”

While I’m sorry that there are people whose legitimate experiences have conditioned them to fear names of unrecognized configuration, it’s really more of an education problem than it is a valid reason to exclude subcultures. Those who don’t understand names should be provided with resources to help them understand the variety of *other* cultural norms that exist around them. And if that’s not enough, they’re just going to have to “get over it” sooner or later. The world is going international and multicultural whether we like it or not, and the internet is (or at least should be) leading the way.

I have people in my circles who sometimes post in Chinese, in Japanese, and in what I think is probably Arabic. I can’t read any of those. That’s not *their* problem, it’s mine. In fact when I _do_ care, I know how to find translation tools. It’s a big world out there, and if Google Plus ever wants to serve it all, they’re going to have to quit limiting membership, for the illusory and fleeting benefit of a subgroup who judge others based solely upon labels without regard for behaviors.

The English language has a rich word for passing judgement on others based solely upon criteria like labels: bigotry.

He includes women among the mainstream users who – due to underrepresentation online – will be frightened away by people who have handles. But because of underrepresentation, and the latent online misogyny it gives rise to, women are also heavy users of handles as a way to protect themselves – from online abuse and meatspace violence.

14 year old you wondered what it would be like to have people not know you were a kid. 14 year old me wondered what it would be like to have people not know I was a girl. And in certain online fora where I went by other names, I explored that. 25 year old me still revisits those identities from time to time, because the contrast is so instructive.

‘We’re protecting the vulnerable women’ is the oldest excuse in the book for illiberal policies, and something about the way Zunger introduced it in this thread irked me.

There are many beautiful visual representations of text out there. However to answer this question we need to ask what do we need to represent that would allow users to get more out of quora.  Good questions to represent might be: * What is trending no…

* Free speech zone. No holds barred, anything goes (think 4Chan)
* Civil Discourse zone. You can say an idea sucks. You can’t say “You suck!” (Metafilter)
* Living room zone. I consider this an extension of my personal, private space. Anything that would get you kicked out of my living room will get you booted out of here. (Many millions of blogs about the writers’ personal experience).

Different levels of discourse promote different kinds of freedoms. It’s hard to imagine 4Chan rules promoting a free discussion of, say, the issues faced by someone going through a gender transition. But the more restrictive norms of the Living Room Zone probably would stifle a Metafilter, and Metafilter will never have the raucous vitality of 4Chan.

So it’s not really about less free or more free — it’s about what level of discourse promotes the very specific kind of freedom of speech that each one exemplifies.