people search

Posted by Jim Adler, Chief Privacy Officer at Intelius

There’s been a lot of recent debate around the use of online names sparked by the Google+ real names policy. The stark absolutism of this debate baffles me, as if we had to choose between them. It’s a false choice. We should have them all. As we map human social customs online, nuance and context rule. Inflexible policies and binary choices are a cop-out. Life’s complicated and more interesting that way. As I recently tweeted in a privchat:

There are legit use-cases for pseudonyms so they shouldn’t be banned. But they are certainly unnatural for mainstream use. #privchat

This got me thinking about how many real names are typical for each person? I did a quick look across the Intelius public-records corpus of a few hundred million people and counted the number of real names per person. The results are what you might expect:

The vast majority of people, 83%, have one full-name [Just to be clear, Sarah Jessica Parker may also go by Sarah Jessica Broderick. Those would count as two real names.] A significant minority, 11%, have two names. I imagine that most of the people with two names are married women who are recently married or simultaneously maintain their maiden and married names (typical of professional women). It’s a little surprising that 6% have more than two names. I wonder how many people in this set have criminal records?

So far, the nymwars debate has largely been framed around the 17% that have more than one name. But there are strong pro and con arguments for nyms, pseudonyms, and anonyms. What, the totality of human social engagement can’t be pigeonholed into a single use-case? Hmm, Surprising.

Nyms

Whether offline or online, the vast majority of us build trusted relationships and reputation around our real name. Real names are easy and natural. I use my real name on Twitter, LinkedIn, and Facebook. One of Facebook’s best strategic moves was encouraging use of real names. Generally, real names encourage real interactions and weakens the barrier between offline and online experiences. However, requiring real names is an 83% solution that’s fueling a Google+ backlash from the other 17%.

Pseudonyms

There’s a host of reasons for pseudonyms, many of which have been cataloged during the recent nymwars. An example of a pseudonym is Twitter’s PogoWasRight, which is used persistently and has established respect within the privacy community. Pseudonyms are not new as Samuel Clemens proved more than 130 years ago.

The challenge with pseudonyms is that they are tough to manage. I know several professional women that simultaneously maintain two legal names. They are in a perpetual state of multiple account management—”which name did I use for this account again?” I founded a startup several years ago that tried to crack this problem. It’s a bear.

Anonyms

As for anonyms, they are distinct from pseudonyms. The intent with pseudonyms is to build a long-lived identity that’s separate from our real identity. In stark contrast are anonyms (e.g., fymiqcxw) which are throw-away identities that in nearly all cases (except political dissent) have nefarious intent. Online anonyms too often encourage what psychologists call deindividuation. Nothing empowers a psychopath more than an audience and a mask.

The key takeaway is—whether nym, pseudonym, or anonym—trust, accountability, empathy, and civility are built around knowing whom you’re dealing with. As we move through this continuum, we move away from “real” relationships. If that’s your intent, fine. The nymwars debate is larger than the real name policies of any social network. It is a further evolutionary move toward mapping our social norms online. Sure, it’s messy. Most human endeavors are.

More from Jim Adler, Chief Privacy Officer at Intelius

For many, the Holidays are a magical time made up of family, friends and fond memories. But what if someone near and dear is missing from your life? If you have lost touch with a special person and want to reconnect this holiday season, the Internet may hold valuable clues to their whereabouts.

Years ago, locating someone required a lot of legwork, some detective skills and a little luck for good measure. Today, there are online tools, sites and services to aide in the process. The key is to get organized, use the right tools and get started sooner rather than later.

1. Gather together any and all information you may know about the person. Begin with the basics, such as name, birth date, mother’s maiden name or last known address. If those details are limited, make a list of anyone who might have knowledge about their whereabouts, such as childhood friends, relatives or old neighbors. Each person on the list may hold an important clue to helping you achieve your goal.
2. Although Google or Facebook may seem like an obvious place to start, the volume of information you receive can be overwhelming, unproductive and even discouraging. To bypass quantity and go straight to quality data, tap into public records. A social security number can unlock a goldmine of home, work and personal records, but even a single email address or phone number can produce valuable insight.With the exception of juvenile files, adoptions and financial records, public information is available for anyone to view. What once required a trip to the city or county clerk’s office is now available at your fingertips from companies that bring this information together as a service, such as Intelius (www.intelius.com).
3. If your special someone is, or might be, homeless or does not want to be found, your search could require some serious sleuthing. Since no national database exists for this population, your phone skills, patience and ingenuity will be key. Check online for a list of shelters, community organizations and churches in the area you believe they may reside and track down anyone with whom they may have had contact. Share photographs, create a ‘Missing’ poster or consider an ad in a local paper or online website such as craigslist. Keep in mind that this population is mobile and that your search may take you to places you have yet to imagine.
4. Once you secure contact information, consider carefully the best method for reconnecting. If you have time and reason to believe that your special someone may not be as interested in connecting as you are, send a letter to the last known address to break the ice. Explain your interest, provide contact information and give them the opportunity to respond. Always mark the envelope, “Forwarding Address Requested,” so the post office can forward or return your letter if their address is unknown.

Reconnecting with a special someone could be the best gift possible for the holidays, but it may also present challenges and even disappointment. Today’s online tools make the process easier than ever before, but it still takes time and patience to undergo a search. 

Keep in mind that you may locate someone who does not want to be found or may not be ready to reconnect as quickly as you are. Take heart. You will never know until you get started.

Set your expectations and cherish the peace of mind gained from the journey. If you locate your loved one, celebrate the joy of having them back in your heart, if not your home, during this special season.