I just don't understand why people are so against Google over this, when Facebook has always been doing it.
Because we wouldn't be interested in Google+ if we thought it would just be another Facebook?
I mean, if the fresh launch of a beta product to an audience of mainly tech-savvy users is not the time to complain loudly about what you don't you like, what is?
I'd been rooting for Google, against Facebook on this. Till now..
But now... The thing is that Facebook so far mostly has just made noise about not allowing pseudonyms - I've only seen them ban obvious organizations from using individual accounts and then only when someone complains. If you're locked out of your Facebook account, you have to show state ID. But it's a lot easier to just another "fake" account (which is not really particular fake if it is you representing you).
I'm in a somewhat "special" neck of the woods on Facebook but I'd say more than half my friends use pseudonyms on there. If all of those got banned, we'd move elsewhere. That might be a good thing. But we sure wouldn't move to G+.
Because we wouldn't be interested in Google+ if we thought it would just be another Facebook?
I mean, if the fresh launch of a beta product to an audience of mainly tech-savvy users is not the time to complain loudly about what you don't you like, what is?