Agree, I think there are lots of valid reasons to want to be anonymous online - hell, isn’t that half the fun for a lot of people.

I think the solution has to be in algorithms and programming to flag abuse - they managed it with all the fake news around Covid and it’s almost unbelievable the speed they take down videos posted without consent - they have the capacity to monitor abuse far better than they do.

I think it's a matter of appropriately enforcing current laws where someone behaves this way (as in, in a stalker-like fashion like this lady was subjected to) rather than wanting us all to 'hand over our papers' in advance. There are already plenty of powers to access email accounts, phone records and so on, and so the fact that they weren't interested is what is of concern. They could've certainly easily tracked this person down if they had deemed it important enough.

Edited by BlueJay (15 Jul 2021 4.39pm)

What of whistleblowers and other people who put themselves at significant risk by speaking publicly. Do you not think that in certain situations or societies being able to anonymously shine a light on abuses from government or military holds value for instance, and has to be weighed up against this? Some abuse these platforms, but there are already are laws in place to deal with this. The irony is that in the bigger worldwide picture it is likely persecuted minorities and the downtrodden that benefit from anonymity. Entertaining the idea of wiping that out due to a few loudmouth d!ickheads is unfortunate.

People are falling into a trap just because it relates to something that they agree with in the moment. Governments change over time, and the more you readily hand over to them in terms of your liberties the quicker you're eventually going to find yourself in a 'social credits' type situation like China where you're rated and graded as a human being based on how much you adhere to whatever criteria is set in the moment. And we know what abuses occur in China, and how terrified people are of publicly speaking out. What may start with something apparently well intentioned rarely ends there.

I assume people require a telephone number and the like to sign up to Twitter anyway, so the vast majority aren't anonymous in any significant sense as it is. Hence why action has already been taken against several already. I would wager that few blurting out racist nonsense are tech savy cerebral types masking their every step along the way. They're idiots with keyboards.

Edited by BlueJay (15 Jul 2021 4.42pm)

One no would suffice.

Anonymity when it comes to expressing opinions, sure, I don't think anyone would need an ID trail for opinions, abuse and threats, yes, there should be a trail to the authorities and some accountability there.

La la la your mum

There are many instances where anonymity is a good thing:

- You live in a police state and want to express your dissatisfaction with the regime.
- You are LGBT and live in a culture where it is unacceptable to the threat of your life. That could be the Middle East or a former mill town oop north.
- Whistle blowing on your employer who routinely trawls social media looking for this stuff. Plenty of complaints that companies like Amazon do this.
- Any number of issues you campaign on and might not want family and friends to be aware of e.g. FGM, Forced Marriage or spousal abuse.
- Cancer support, you want to engage with others before you are ready to tell your love ones you are going to die.

Etc.

One more point

Sure but I saw a media article the other the police are investigating a post which said "why don't you go back to your own country". * Not exact words but close enough.

From what I could see it was abusive but no swearing or skin colour mentioned, how is that a crime?

One more point