Calendar

December 2014
M T W T F S S
« Nov    
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

Google Plus Bans Seattle Rex

Seattle Rex on Google+

Seattle Rex on Google+

Today, I was notified that I will be unceremoniously banned from Google+. My page will exist until September 9th, and I will be able to make further posts, but in three days, all of my data will be deleted and I will be locked out.

Why?

Was it because I posted a profanity-laden diatribe about some petty injustice?

Surprisingly, no.

Was it because I posted a photograph of my massive schlong, causing widespread panic and a run on Viagra?

Not this time.

Was it because I uploaded a pirated copy of the latest mass-produced, auto-tuned aural abortion?

Perish the thought. Those talented artists deserve every nickel they make.

So why, you may be wondering … why was I banished from the realm of Google’s new social media platform?

Well, I’ll tell you.

I was booted from Google Plus because I do not have a traditional Caucasian-American name.

Seriously.

You see, Google+ requires, not prefers, but requires that all subscribers have both a traditional first and a traditional last name.

Unfortunately, my full, legal name really is “Rex”. It is on my birth certificate, passport, and driver’s license. Just like Prince, Cher, and Teller (of Penn & Teller fame) I am mononymous. It is perfectly legal to be mononymous.

Fortunately, for those of us with slightly unusual or confusing names, both U.S. Federal and Washington State law allow a person to adopt a common-law name. So long as the name is used consistently, and without the intent to defraud, the name is legal.

Because many entities request a first and last name for technical reasons, in addition to my legal name … I adopted a common-law name which is, indeed, “Seattle Rex”. It’s been adopted via both the assumed and usage method. Said name is legal, and may be used in any capacity, including legal contracts.

Unfortunately, Google will accept neither my legal name nor my common law name. In order to use their service, Google absolutely insists that I have a traditionally Caucasian-American name, such as Fred Clark. Native-American derivatives, such as “Seattle”, are apparently unacceptable.

Now, Google did offer me admission to Google Plus if I sent them a copy of my driver’s license … and this is the point at which they probably violated the Civil Rights Act Sec. 201 and any number of state laws which enforce the right of public accommodation.

In their statement to me, Google openly admitted that they suspect that I am lying for no other reason than the spelling of my name. A name that does not contain profanity or any other objectionable words. Only if I listed a traditionally Caucasian-American name (ie. “John Smith”) on the Google+ application, would Google assume me to be honest. Only then would I enjoy the same benefit of doubt as other customers.

This reminds me of the old joke:

Three people; a white guy, a jew, and a black guy; arrive at heaven, where St. Peter greets them before the Pearly Gates.

“Welcome to Heaven!”, says St. Peter, “We have just one last thing to do before you enter … are you ready for your last test?

The white guy says, “I’ve been preparing for this moment for 73 years!”

“OK,” says St. Peter, “spell God.”

“G-O-D”, says the white guy.

“Very good, enter the gates for your eternal reward!”

“Well, that was easier than I thought! I’ll take MY test now!”, says the jew.

“OK,” says St. Peter, “spell love.”

“L-O-V-E.”, says the jew.

“Excellent!”, says St. Peter, “You may now enter the Kingdom of Heaven!”

“Boy, is THIS gonna be a snap.”, says the black guy, “Give me MY test now.”

“OK,” says St. Peter, “Spell chrysanthemum.”

My friends, Google is asking me to spell ‘chrysanthemum’ to get into Google+, and a nigga ain’t gone do it.

Requiring everyone to present a valid ID to enter your store is legal. Requiring only people named “Mohammed” and “DeShaun” to present an ID to enter your store is against the law. If Google demands a driver’s license from some, it must demand a driver’s license from all. Or, it must take everyone’s word for it equally. Equal opportunity and equal protection.

Of course, I would never litigate such a thing. I author several blogs and a web forum, and I have no problem getting my content out there. I can very easily live without social media altogether. The company lawyers might want to take another look at the policy, though. It could be a legal liability.

This whole thing is also kind of a shame because Google+ is the only social media outlet that I really used. I am an avid Android user/developer, an avid Google Docs user, and I am a heavy user and proponent of a great many of Google’s products. I guess I’ll be using one fewer going forward.

In any event, if you followed me on Google Plus, suffice to say that I shall exist no longer on that platform. Until Google buys the rest of the Internet, my true home is where I shall always be found:

SeattleRex.com

Where Amazing Happens.

4 comments to Google Plus Bans Seattle Rex

  • SPRUNT

    I’m thinking that Google’s attempt to keep G+ free of fake accounts is a bit broader than it should be.

    Also, ironically enough, they could have Googled your name and figured out you were a real person.

  • James Black

    Yeah. Not my real name. Never has been. I’ve had a google+ account since it started. The irony here baffles and frightens me.

  • Margaret Bartley

    I don’t use Google much because I hate the lack of support. I had a friend whose gmail account was hacked. I got an email from him asking me to wire him money in Glasgow. I called his wife and said, “Where’s Ed?” She said people had been calling all morning. Ed never did get his email account back. No one to talk to.

    The only thing google offers is a stupid forum that is confusing to use, and has no Help system that works, and if you do figure out what forum to use, and how to use it, most of the posts sit for months without being answered, and a significant number of the ones that are answered are answered by different people giving completely different contracdictory answers!

    And their documents take forever to use. No keyboard shortcuts. I can’t stand it when you have to wait for seconds for an update or screen refresh. Reminds of the 1970s dumb-terminal, “time-share” computers.

    So it doesn’t surprise me that Google is falling down on this, as well.

  • GiGi

    Well, as a fellow (legally) mononymous person, I say let’s start a revolution!!

    I, too, am constantly discriminated against. I have refused to change my name to accommodate _popular_ convention. Noting that if this country had continued on the road of what is most popular, we’d never have had segregation and women would never be allowed to own property, let alone vote.

    A system (e.g., computer system) should be designed for what is _legal_, not what is most popular. Besides, there is a very simple solution that benefits a larger segment of the population:

    Allow a hyphen character in name fields. Since many people these days have hyphenated names, it accommodates them too. Then, a hyphen could be used as a placeholder for the non-existent name part.

    The U.S. Social Security Administration system actually has a checkbox on their form for mononyms. When the box is checked, it disables one of the name fields. Now, if companies would follow suit. Database administrators, think outside the box!

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>