Google are not
interested in permitting Psuedonyms in.
it would beo ne of the first things asked for.
They launched with an anti-psuedo policy.
They had numerous excuses
ready to doll out when people asked.
They made all the empty noises ...
... then did nothing about it.
I've seen them say it was a policy opted for as it will generate a sense of Trust and Safety.
I disabused that by creating an account and impersonating Googles +Frances Haugen
, jsut to show that a real name and real face means nothing (yes, G may be/were (are?) considering a "real photo" policy too!)
I've seen them say (via googles +Brian White
) that it is a security/privacy issue - they cannot gaurantee real anonymity/privacy to those using psuedos (which leaves me wondering about all the other G platforms/services/tools ...).
I've seen them cover suggestions/reasons/-excuses- such as more open, honest, encouraging real interactions etc.
What they fail to mention is that one of the first (and most common?) suggestions was an authorised account, and a sub account with a psuedonym.
So G would still know who/what/where/why/when/how etc. - the same as a "real name" account ... but the public would only ever see the psuedo.
I can only assume that Google thinks that silent gays, quiet crossdressers, those holding religions unpopular to their area, those who have suffered abuse etc. have no real place on the internet.
Maybe Googles precepts of "nice" automatically disclude anyone who isn't "out and open" about who/what they are?
Personally - I stand by/for the Psuedoname usage,
I have from the beginning.
Some of us have had psuedos for years ... some even before there was a Google.
part of the internet lifestyle, community and one feature that made the net what it is.
Personally, Google have no right to tell people that they are not permitted to use those names, nor shut out those who may suffer if they used their public names.
As for the troll aspect ... there really aren't that many trolls ... and shooting them down isn't hard.
G have had numerous valid/viable methods suggested.
They simply don't want to do any of it.