More About
Use of Your Full Name

Here is what some members of our team think about
Kidlink's requirement that all youth participants
use their full name whenever appropriate or required:

Art by Mads Roennest (12), Denmark

Lara Stefansdottir, Iceland, 1997

"What I fear most is people that are afraid. When controlled by fear the human beeing does things never imaginable. Fear has been used by politicians and those who want to control the human beeing as far as anyone can remember. People have killed witches killed Jews - afraid of their talents, wealth and heritage."
"Life isn't safe and will never be, taking our chances we might be hurt. But we can also be hurt at home just crossing the street or by the man next door. We were not born with a guarantee. It might have been nice to be born with a sign "this girl is guaranteed until year 2004". But where would my challenge to life be then?"
"The best thing we can do is to promise ourselves to take as good care of the kids in Kidlink as we possibly can. This is the same commitment as any parent must do, but we cant give full guarantee neither can any parent."

Laurie Williams, USA, 1997

"As media tends to focus more on the negativity of Internet, and less on it positive side, people here who know little or nothing about Internet are running scared. Our district *does* say "First Name, Last Initial"...*but* I have been able to circumvent that ruling by explaining to parents *exactly* what Kidlink is and what we'll be doing. They have given 100% support to allowing first names for Responses and the chat registration :)"

Hannah Sivan, Israel

"I am comparing the internet to a big town and saying that no one stopped going out to town because some "bad" things are happening there (I also have never seen a parent preventing his/her child to do so...). I also have never seen anyone not buying a daily newspaper because of the same reason. This is not unique - I am sure that most of you are doing the same..."

Bonnie Thurber, USA, 1997

"I do believe in being me, I am Bonnie Thurber. My students use their names as well."
"If kids do not use their real names and are taught that this is a place to hide and a scarry place to be when they login they will do scary things."

Brendan Desilets, USA, 1999

"Some organizations warn children of web dangers, and urge them to be careful when on the net, and, for example, never to disclose their full name, their address, or the address of their school.
They do this without any hint that a parent might want to balance all the good that can come from sensible disclosures (as in Kidlink) against the minuscule risk that someone might suggest that the kid do something wrong.. They claim their advice is like teaching children not to cross the road without looking both ways, or teaching them not to talk to strangers.
What a sad kind of reasoning, the sort of thinking that childishly rejects sensible distinctions. It reminds me of the first time one of my nieces went to a religious service. Her mother had told her that she shouldn't talks to strangers, so she declined to exchange greetings with the people around her at the appropriate time in the service. Unlike the folks at these organizations, though, my niece, at the age of four, quickly learned to make an obviously warranted exception.
In the five years or so that I have been involved with Kidlink, I've had several occasions to ask the parents of my kids for permission to participate. Generally, most say yes, and the rest respectfully decline. This year the proportion of acceptances is typical, but a couple of the rejections are so emotionally charged that it may difficult for me to keep my students involved without creating a divisive controversy. I strongly suspect that these parents, quite understandably, have been influenced by organizations that insist on the "never disclose" principle.
I don't understand why these organizations offer their overly broad advice. Perhaps they are operating on the assumption that there's never any real value in a child's disclosing her name or school, but maybe their actions are not based on simple errors in reasoning. The American sociologist Barry Glassner, in his book _The Culture of Fear_, suggests that "immense power and money await those who tap into our moral insecurities and supply us with symbolic substitutes."
In any case, I'm certainly glad that Kidlink's sponsors, who make a very impressive list, do not buy into the fearful nonsense that these organizations are spreading."

What others say?

Translated parts of an article published in L'Espresso, Rome, January 14, 1996:
"One of the first voices to ring the alarm bell was the US magazine Harper's in an article called 'House becomes transparent.' The date is 1893, and panic spreads. The telephone is becoming popular, and media react by denouncing the risks of the new technology for current moral.
In 1887, The New York Times condemns the horrendous nature of the diabolic creation by telling how it is possible by abusively connecting into the wires to hear the private conversation of husband and wife. The debate heats: Anyone can penetrate the domestic walls. Anyone may, with fearless impunity, address another's wife, even worse, court your daughter. Children answering the phone could be addressed by corrupted ones and hear the worst obscenities...."

What's new?

More...

Check out "Kidlink's cultural challenge."