Wednesday 12 August 2009 4.28pm
No one is making that presumption (unless it's you).
pointing out that using a "real" name means nothing (and I'd add that anyone who assumes otherwise is possibly too naive to be let near a keyboard).
But my main point, which is that your borrowed ideas about usernames vs. "real" names are cobblers (for the reasons in my post above, which don't centre on whether or not people who use "real" names may or may not be using their actual name), still stands.
My argument is that usernames become like real I.D.s. They can have credibility, and they can lose that credibility, according to their behaviour, just like "real" people. This applies whether the username is in a format which could be someone's real name or not. So, no, I don't think there would be any change in behaviour is we were all forced to adopt lifelike usernames. The idea that it would lead to an overnight transformation is so poorly thought-out that it's quite hilarious.
...if you press it, they will come.