why the real names in comments on the New Photo Page?
this has probably been brought up before,
why are the real names given in the comments on the New Photo Page?
So the whole world knows our names? Most of us have screen names for privacy- so why this? I don't like this at all.
Its confusing that some views show real names and some show screennames.
Its also confusing that in some views, a solid white star means you have NOT yet favorited it and a pink star means you have, but in other views, a solid white star means you HAVE favorited it, and an outlined star means you have not.
People are now confused about whether it's me, because they are used to my screen name not my real name. Please start using the screen name again as the main name. Please!
Please put it back the way it was, this new idea is totally out of sink with what flickr is all about, this change is half hearted and helps no one at all.
I am all for screen names in all cases.
flickr user since 2006 commented
Accidentally posted in the help forum...
Hi! At some point, user names were replaced by real names in certain places here on Flickr. In one instance the nickname is given, in another part of the feed the real name is given. Clicking through to view who has been visiting an image and added it as a fav shows a different name from the name displayed in the flickr feed.
Is there any way this could be optimized to somehow show the same name again? I don't really care which, as long as it's the same name given. I've come to know certain users by their nickname so that would be optimal but frankly, as long as it's the same name, I'm happy!
Indeed, it would be nice to be able to have a nickname and a real name again =)
One to use for interaction on flickr, a <i>nickname</i>, and one to display when someone clicks through to my photostream.
I've come to know a few users by their nicks. Last month I missed that someone who'd been away over a year was suddenly active again, just due to the name/nick confusion.
Saffron Blaze commented
While AS's comment is useful for my own account it doesn't help with the hundreds of contacts I have. It just makes it that much harder to build relationships when you have to constantly remember two often unrelated names for one person and yet only one for others. There is no consistency now. Moreover, in this day and age it is almost foolhardy to pin your real name to an account.
All those who have an issue on this score, could edit their profile by leaving the first and second names blank. The real name will not appear.
Jeremy Whigham commented
Another vote to use screen names at all times. Why else does one have a screen name? Please act on this stream and stop procrastinating.
I have just noticed an instance of Flickr not being consistent even on a single (and new) page - on somebody else's album page, I notice that the album header says "By: David Bank" but the photos say "by artenovaphotos". Perhaps this happens all over the place, and I have only just noticed, but what would someone unfamiliar with Flickr make of it?
And meanwhile "real names" have crept on to the signed-in home page and it looks as if this will be the norm as pages are gradually re-vamped. Of course, if one wants privacy, one does not have to give a real name (I don't) and this also means that I am consistently described on all pages. I would urge others who do not like Flickr's drift to "real names" to do the same. But, as has been said, what is the point of recording a screen name if Flickr does not use it? And, on the page where I can set my screen name, it still says "Your screen name is the name that identifies you on Flickr, along with your buddy icon."
Still "gathering comments" after more than a year? Really?
Is it not obvious that when you allow people to select a "screen name" that is not the same as their "real name," you should consistently use that "screen name" on-screen?
How hard can it really be to fix this?
I DON'T WANT MY REAL NAME TO BE SHOWN ON MY PHOTOS, THIS IS WHY I HAVE A
SCREEN NAME. How hard is that to understand. FIX IT!!
use screen names and only screen names ... no more 'real' names!!!!
This has been gathering feedback for a year and 2 days! Who's not listening and acting upon it?
What I find difficult is when I'm told that 'Tom' has left a comment but then I'm sent pics by 'Tom's' screen name and/or vice versa. I comment on 'Screen name's' pic and get told 'Tom' has replied to my comment. I then ask myself, "Who?". I know Flickr isn't advertised as a social media site but I've enjoyed getting to know the few followers I have made friends with. I've also had to make sure I get rid of some followers, too. This to-ing and fro-ng between real and screen names makes life harder than it needs to be. Either put both names or stick to one.
Tim Parkinson commented
This was an ill-considered change.
I have been forced to use the privacy setting to hide my real name from all but Friends and Family just so that my name is not splashed publicly across all my photos.
Yes, breach of privacy.
Yes, crass implementation and rollout worthy of Facebook.
Please at least implement a setting to control whether real name or screen name is displayed and default to screen name like before.
this HAS been brought up before ... we have screen names for PRIVACY so why use REAL NAMES?!?!?! ... I agree with Marlis1 ~ please use SCREEN NAMES in a consistent manner, please. Shein Die~
The real problem here is that real names are not unique. When it says 'Tom faved this' I have to figure out which of the many users called Tom this is, but by showing his username I immediately know who he is. If you're going to implement this feature at least do it consistently - the photo page shows real names but recent activity identifies the same users by their usernames, which gets very confusing.
Bring back screen names......I want my privacy.
YAHOO should NEVER have been put in charge of Flickr ... Photographers should 'run the show' ~ of COURSE we should use screen names consistently!!!! for privacy ~ AND for our professional names in the entertainment industry!! ..
Ian Gourlay commented
If you're really asking "why" with this question, the answer is that Yahoo comes up with shoot from the hip ideas, gives like zero thought to the results, and implements them - depending on user feedback to tell them if it's good or bad. Only if it's bad it's usually ignored... It's as good an example as you will find of the loonies running the asylum. Put some real photographers in charge of Flickr and perhaps it will slowly get steered back to the path of sanity.