Shared publicly  - 
 
When we launched Google+ over three years ago, we had a lot of restrictions on what name you could use on your profile. This helped create a community made up of real people, but it also excluded a number of people who wanted to be part of it without using their real names. 

Over the years, as Google+ grew and its community became established, we steadily opened up this policy, from allowing +Page owners to use any name of their choosing to letting YouTube users bring their usernames into Google+. Today, we are taking the last step: there are no more restrictions on what name you can use. 

We know you've been calling for this change for a while. We know that our names policy has been unclear, and this has led to some unnecessarily difficult experiences for some of our users. For this we apologize, and we hope that today's change is a step toward making Google+ the welcoming and inclusive place that we want it to be. Thank you for expressing your opinions so passionately, and thanks for continuing to make Google+ the thoughtful community that it is.
4662
2439
Rafael Folch's profile photoArt Atwal's profile photoOnline Gurru's profile photoJensen Jeune's profile photo
497 comments
 
Ha. Lle. Luuuuujah

I don't have any use for this, it would have been really nice when I used to do YouTube videos.
 
Translation: Its safe to come out and play again comment trolls
 
I loved the real names enforcement ... So sad to see it go, let's hope it will not look like the Facebook mess ...

+Paulo Raoult révise ton anglais
 
Does this mean my business email for my company can now start a profile instead of being a page on my primary email account?... Without me violating the policy? also... We need a way to transfer or merge our page to the new profile of so...+1's and all...
 
I too was a fan of the real name enforcement.
 
+Michael Perrigo You can, but a page is still a much better option for you if you're a business. They've got all sorts of features like multiple admins and insights which are great for businesses.
 
+Tyler Winfield Oh, don't worry. One of the reasons this is safe to launch is that our troll-smashing department has gotten very good at their jobs. :)
 
I respectfully disagree with this decision , but there you go. Can't please everybody. And I guess this is to try and gain traction.
 
+Yonatan Zunger yes, but I'd prefer to manage it from my company profile... Instead of this one...though this doesn't seem possible... I mean, that would mean the page would have to be standalone.. Which doesn't make sense either. Otherwise we'd have a profile and a page of the same name. You should create business profiles and allow us to merge our page to it, giving it all the functionality of a page. Does that make sense? Lots of times companies prefer not to attach their home email to a company account. 
 
+Google+ does that mean that mean name changes are no longer restricted? I know there was a limit before hand
 
Ja bardzo dziękuję . Jestem osobą początkującą i porady , które otrzymuję są bardzo pomocne . Obecnie mam dylemat bo nie chce otrzymywać żadnych aktów nawet artystycznych nie wiem jak zablokować. Pozdrawiam.
Translate
 
I'm not sure that I care for this change. Does this mean that YouTube comments will go back to being a steaming pile of monkey shit? And how am I supposed to tell who is who when making decisions on who I circle-back?

Anonymity has its place on the internet. I'm just not sure that G+ is that place.
 
+Michael Perrigo Add your company profile as a second manager to it, then! And even remove your personal profile from it completely. 
 
Google does it again!! Hip Hip Hooray!
 
So how can we change our G+ URL's that you told us before that we couldn't change when the requests were denied?
 
That's great to hear. I'm liking it. Nice job Google Plus developers. Wish I could be a bigger part of all of this.Angelene Fredericksen
 
That's OK no problem. You guys are to cool to get upset. J then my main poo a is is Google and I already gave you a g+. What's the difference between the white and red g
 
+Chris Chase I don't think so. I spent two years working closely with the YouTube team on comments, and I think we have a much better understanding of what turned them into the wretched hive of scum and villainy we all know. It had to do with more subtle aspects of the interface there: things like "top comments" rewarding people for getting the most interaction, rather than the most positive interaction. We've changed all of those broken behaviors that we could find and are definitely not changing those back. :)
 
Well this sucks cuz I was blocked awhile ago for a name I enjoyed having now I come back and I'm told that my name is acceptable now, but its too late? This is Bullshit.
 
+James Skivers We're not making any changes to how vanity URLs work right now. I'll let that team deal with it in their own time. :)
 
Too little, too late.  The damage has already been done.
 
Great.... Google is always pro users 👍
Translate
 
+Yonatan Zunger the problem with history is that it has already happened. But please keep pumping up the size of the troll hammer in the meantime. :)
 
One of the biggest mistake of internet finally fixed!
 
So Google has done the cost benefit analysis of potentially  being on wrong side of privacy/NSA issues or having a less than perfect dataset of users to leverage. Fair enough.
 
Is this for all users? And if so, how long will it take before I can apply it to my own account? Tried just now and had no luck.
Steve G
+
3
4
3
 
Too little, Too late.
 
Good job!! Because the NSA/CIA data mining site known as Facebook is going in the opposite direction, and the name that I use here, that I have used for over a decade on various sites on the internet, is not allowed to be used on Facebook....
 
And here I was liking the kind of community you get when people are tied to their words
 
+Brian Wisti All users, and it should already be live at 100%. What did you try to do and what didn't work?
 
This is Google, +Kenneth Fegley. It's going to take a lot more than a name change to detach us from our words, clicks, and general online activity ^_^
Jezra
+
7
8
7
 
+Google+  If there are no restrictions, why can't I change my name to "jezra"?
 
I have seen plenty of fake names around G+ before this announcement, so that is kind of odd - I bet you  the government and corporate paid shills are going to be loving this new change, though...
 
+Yonatan Zunger I just went to my profile, clicked on my name (since the tooltip says "Click to edit your name"), edited, went through a few "are you sure? Really really sure?" dialogs, then got an "unable to save" error.
 
I personally dislike this as people tend to be bigger assholes the more anonymous they are. However this is solely to bring more people to G+
 
Now do something about all the people who steal images and we'll all be better off. A lot of us speak passionately about that but you do nothing. Photographers that you worked so hard to attract and bring your eye candy in the early days are leaving on droves because you do nothing to image thieves except through an archaic and draconian ritual. People can get a photo of a breast removed in seconds but doing a take down on a photo thief is nearly impossible. G+ lags behind every other platform in this respect. Fix it or have no images. Your choice. 
 
Well that sucks...  The previous name policy forced the trolls to actually own up to their comments rather than cowardly hiding behind a fake name.  I foresee a lot more trolling and spam around here.....  :/
 
I have a friend whose profile got locked as her unusual name was questioned. She was reluctant to scan her ID to prove her name to be correct. Will these kind of cases now disappear too?
 
+Kahil Nettleton Folks just went with plausibly named sock puppet accounts. I've seen less of that activity recently, so I suspect +Yonatan Zunger's right about the troll-sniffing getting better.
Viv Ian
+
4
5
4
 
Now if you'd fix your timeline so it's in a logical order that'd be nice 
 
+Ville Jansson Yes. That entire appeals process has been removed, all pending appeals have been approved, and anything which would have gotten an appeal under the old system is now automatically OK.
 
+Yonatan Zunger It seems this account owns my business page +Fatedrawn Studios 

HOWEVER my fatedrawn@gmail.com email address has a business page called Fatedrawn Studios as well! It's here: https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/101547672262573715735/101547672262573715735/about

It just doesn't have a vanity url... is there any way you can migrate +Fatedrawn Studios as a business page over to my fatedrawn@gmail.com email address with the correct vanity url? I'd appreciate it greatly. I really hope you can do this. 

THE REASON I DIDN'T CREATE IT on Fatedrawn@gmail.com to begin with was because I didn't make a profile with my business because out of fear of violating the name policy.
 
Probably lots of Twitter profiles will take a look to Google+ using the same nick they have there. That will be a plus.

It also satisfies angry youtubers that didn't understand Google+ and didn't want to learn how to configure their profile, page and channel.

There was a huge mess about name policies and some wrong decisions about it, closed profiles, for example.

But I like connecting with people, their real name. Hope there will be a balance between nicks, people, pages and brands. Anyway, it's a really wanted detail so... Welcome to this new step of Google+
 
When will you allow businesses to recover the custom urls that they lose by merging +Google+ and Google Local pages?
 
میشه کاری کرد در صفحه اول و نمایه هر شخص نام و نام خانوادگی اصلی را بنویسد و درادمه هرنامی که دوست داشت با ان. ادامه دهد. 
Translate
 
Awesome!

(For those complaining: pseudonymity ! = anonymity.)
 
Use any name you want. I don't know if it will be good or bad thing. 
Patti M
 
I like this... I miss TD!
 
I understand the bit about trolls (and don't act like an ass online), but as one preferring privacy I applaud this.
 
Congrats to the two people who need this feature and actually use Google+.
 
I've been using Google+ for almost a month now, i found some many awesome communities and I fell in love with the UI. More people should start using it :D
 
All: Please update your Google Circles with my new name. "Goo Gull" Thanks!
 
+Sam Nead this is gonna be treacherous... I'm gonna be asking my long time beta friends who they are lol. 
James C
+
6
7
6
 
Boo. I like talking to "real" people.
 
Goodbye real name enforcement and hello to a deluge of spammers and trolls. Well, that's one possible scenario. 
 
+James C So keep taking to real people. Letting people use the names they want just makes it easier to identify and ignore us furries. :D
Raul Rios
+
9
10
9
 
It's okay, I will continue to not take seriously anyone without a real name. Is that a lot of blocking I see coming up ahead?
 
My favorite part, is when they tried to sell us the idea that the real name enforcement was the best improvement that could happen to youtube.

I would had preferred a sincere apology for screwing it up, was it really hard for Google to admit failure? Even Microsoft has been constantly apologizing for Internet Explorer, Windows 8 and other failures!!!

But anyway... Google has lost any credibility to me, and from now I won't take seriously any future announcements about Google-owned websites. They will always pretend that things are fine when they aren't.
 
Yesss! I can finally change my name to "Silky Johnson Player Hater of the Year"! Thanks, +Yonatan Zunger!

On a serious note, this concerns me, but you turned YouTube from a cesspool of humanity and all things wrong with it to a place I actually enjoy now, so I trust that you know what you're doing.

Plus you're a pretty smart cookie and I like your insights, so I'm more inclined to trust your judgment overall.
 
I'm fine with allowing the public view of a name to be any name you might use online, but you should have people's real name securely attached to all accounts. Hell, you should even VERIFY these names via a $1 credit card charge. (Think of the revenue!)

Bringing anonymous BS and "OMG13yoNYC" type crap here won't even make this Facebook. It will make it MySpace, circa 2005.
 
Oh great. Now wait for the flood of haters and trolls.
 
+Aldo Fregoso why should they apologize for something they saw as a good implementation and your opinion was that it wasn't?...
Stik
 
Cuz we all use our real names :) 
 
I think its good that G+ has done this thank u :) except for all us roleplayers like myself out there on G+ we prefer to have our roleplay characters name like mine but i just changed my first name to shadowWolf and im ok with that :)
 
+Yonatan Zunger is there a good reason for this?  The statement that it has been 'unnecessarily difficult experiences for some of our users' doesn't sound like enough to warrant this. It sounds more like +Google+ has just given up as it's too difficult to 'police'/refine.
 
Don't turn into Facebook it's just too much bullshit there. 
 
Will I now be able to change my custom URL from the only one Google+ allowed to the one I want?
 
+Google+ and +Yonatan Zunger Thank you for finally abolishing the hurtful real names policy! My sympathies go out to all those people who were forced into tough choices by the old policy.
 
+Yonatan Zunger, here is an idea that MIGHT be an interesting idea... Add a control to Allow only people who fit the real names policy to comment on posts if the poster sets that option on the post.

I can see this possibly not working out well, but its food for thought.
 
eww.. how about removing last 0 from shortname? or can i make 2 google mail for one google+ account?
 
+Yonatan Zunger that's a shame I think, I know I asked to be considered about three years ago for one but thank you for replying and making the position clear, maybe at some point I will stumble into being considered worthy enough! ::Grin::
 
Does this apply to custom profile URL's also?
 
Long overdue change that will make G+ much more open and user-friendly. 
 
+Michael Harries It's one of those things that's completely fine and you never notice it for the 99.9% of people that were never affected by it, but really sucked for the 0.1% who got hit by it. I don't like things that suck for our users, and want to fix them.
Translate
 
+Ben Woods We thought about that, actually, and worked through the various resulting behaviors -- they were not pretty. Better by far to just kill it.
 
You have lost many users there, Google
Translate
 
+Yonatan Zunger will the restriction on amount of times one can change a username be changed or restarted from todays date?
 
+Yonatan Zunger, yeah I figured something like that. It's an interesting thought experiment, but you'd have to have some godly algorithms in order to really make it work.

I promise that one of these days I'll actually suggest something useful to you! :-DDD
 
+Google+ and about the custom url? i'm trying to change mine, but it only gives me the option to add numbers in the end of my name. i wanted to use my username as a custom url, as i do in all the other social networks that i have an account.
 
+Michael Harries There are people whose real names -- the names that their friends knew them by -- got flagged as suspicious. The process for them was, shall we say, not great.

+Terry Simmonds Reset. We've also adjusted the limit to 1/90 days, instead of 3/2 years.

+Leandro Maciel Sorry, no changes to custom URLs right now.
 
Thank you very much for the right of privacy on the public name. Particularly in Mexico where kidnappings are often this is an excellent notice for us to choose between set a RL name or public one. I believe in Google people whom encouraged this because it started to seem as a obsession to control RL data.
 
While this new policy makes it easier for trolls can come out and be horrid, it also means that those who live in fear of trolls can participate without having to provide their real information to those bent on harassing them.

Those of you who think "what not just use a real name?" have likely not posted with a female sounding name, especially a unique one that truly identifies you, and enables 4Chan style trolls to dox you.
 
I'm extremely skeptical about this... I just hope Google knows what it's doing...
 
Lol, how much time you thought until you made this DECISION ? For years G+ didn't allow me to use this account, FB had absolutly 0 issue for me using a pseudonym.. You're 5 years too late Google..
 
+Yonatan Zunger guess that's my point. Instead of fixing the process (whatever was not-great about it) it sounds like the easier option has been taken - as there is no benefit to the 'typical' user and only potentially large negatives.
 
+Michael Harries Or put another way, after a few years of analyzing the process and improving it, we came to the conclusion that there is no improvement which would work as well as simply chucking the whole damned thing out the window.
 
+Yonatan Zunger does the change name reset and 1/90 days limit apply to established Google+ Pages, or does it still stand that once a Page is well established it cannot be changed?
 
The real name enforcement was a joke-I couldn't change the Japanese version of my real name to my actual real name because
1. my name didn't resemble a name to their system
2. There were restrictions on how many times a name could be changed

3. A real name enforcement could go in the other names section, but again, doubt it can be foolproof

4. The freedom to change g+ profile photos, cover and finally name is fun/ dress up/ self-expression

5. Haters comments can be deleted if the post is yours, blocked and muted in all cases. Don't waste your time on 'em, don't worry about them popping up-you've got better things to do

6. Thanks Google+! I take it then that my appeal to have my real name on my second g+ account was successful?
 
I really just wish I could merge my personal page and my YouTube page, I want mine to be one in the same.
 
+Darryl Collins Agree completely, this is actually a very BAD idea. People have not thought it through....
 
How about let youtube accounts log in without a google account? You didn't force us youtube users to move to g+, but now I can't log into my youtube account because your login page requires the login be a google login............
 
Congratulations +Google+ !
took 3 years to solve this basic bug but you finally start respecting people rights! (too bad was a lot of time and users prefered to protect their accounts by staying away from your ban hammer)

Now think on opening the hangouts protocol, people is starting to use another services too because it looks broken from a xmpp/old gtalk perspective


ps: this is my real name here and im a real person, my legal name may be another. Try to use correct terms next time :)
 
Finally, good news!
At each time I heard about real name policy, I thought about China dictatorship. China’s own social network Weibo enforces identification of every member, with verification. I think that this enforcement is a thing we should left to countries like North Korea, China, not to US companies who must bring the freedom of their country. I’m sad that Google+ was like China, but I’m happy that Google+ is not China anymore. Too late is better than never.

One thing we could keep, though: enforce a FirstName LastName format, like in Second Life in first years. So, without many numbers and so on. If we want nice looking names without enforcing real names, this solution could be good. I don’t advocate much for this proposition, but still.

EDIT: According to the help article, we can’t use symbols or numbers inside the name. Okay, Google+ team, you followed my idea in fact :p
See https://support.google.com/plus/answer/1228271

+Laurent Dinclaux Facebook enforces real names. And they also enforce that every information written provided in the profile must be real. Also, they did a dialog box where people were asked if this friend told his realname or not. So they really enforce real names and as you say, you see the results.

Sources:
http://www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/facebook-snitch-on-friends-that-arent-using-real-names/#!bfB4sn
https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms (See 4.)

+Tyler Winfield According to a DISQUS study, in 2012, pseudonyms comments are more liked than others. See https://plus.google.com/111593724138709794622/posts/RuYbFHhKWub

+Michael Perrigo If you like to take risks uselessly, then yes. Otherwise, don’t do that, you will regret it.

Firstly, it could be against the policy anyway, even if I can’t find any terms saying this. For example, if you share or promote regulated products, you must use a Google+ page. If legally there’s geographic restrictions applicable, then you must use a Google+ page in order to apply them.

Secondly, there’s also additionals terms for Google+ pages and working around them by creating a profile wouldn’t be appreciated, I think.

Last but not least, if you ever have a community manager for your business, you will have a lot of pain if you manage it as a profile. You won’t have these problems if you do that as a page, it is designed to be managed by several peoples at the same time.

+Steve Johnson If NSA needed that Google+ enforces real names, it would be known. Even FBI can find someone within a gang by its pseudonym…No, the purpose was different than that.
 
There is no real reason why 99.8% of the world needs to hide their real names. If they are, it simply means they are up to no good
 
+Chris Slowik YouTube accounts and Google accounts have been the same thing for years. If you have one, it's also the other. 
Kosso
+
1
2
1
 
Great news. Now.. about that full posting API.. 
thx
 
+Max Ryerson 0.2% of the world is 14 million people. That's more than the population of Illinois. 
 
+Max Ryerson Oh yeah, there’s a lot of countries under dictatorship and saying something against the governement is denied, but 99.8% of the world should not be afraid of that. You know that being homosexual can lead to death in some countries? Seriously, look at your newspaper more carefully, tomorrow.
 
Finally. Now the billions of people on earth who have names in addition to their legal ones can use them on G+. ^5, everyone. 

(I know it "feels" true, but real names policies do not change trolling behavior. Interface changes do, and G+ has mostly solved those.)
 
Too little too late. It's bad enough that Google refuses to learn the lessons of others, why did they refuse to learn any lessons from Buzz?
 
Oy Vey!  Fake Names = Trolls... ugh!
 
I m still funny with my real name. 
 
+Yonatan Zunger well I hope that it works out. I unfortunately don't feel very confident as the +Google+  experience got a lot worse for me once Youtube (and the associated anonymity) was merged. 
 
+Yonatan Zunger There should be a way to verify more people at least with real names to tell apart from the trolls. 
 
This is a small step for Google+ popularity, but a great leap in behind for the community quality.

I think this is the worst decision taken by Google+ team since it has started.
Jezra
+
3
4
3
 
"there are no more restrictions on what name you can use" -- still requires first and last name. :)
 
But you can't change the name that Google Plus forced you to use.  So what's the point?
 
+Lunix Watt so what you're saying is that I should just start over on my new G+page? The one attached to my business email by default? (Oddly though there's no profile, like as a user. The account is ONLY a page when I log in...)
 
+Jezra ! put a . for your last name and it'll do the right thing. It's in the FAQs.
 
Hmm... Not sure about this change. I liked the "real names" policy and found it made G+ better than other sites. 
 
"Changing your name here will change it in all Google products." dafuq plus?
 
Thank you, Google.  Thank you, thank you, thank you.

I have reasons...other than a healthy paranoia that comes from working with servers daily...for using a pseudonym and I've been using this one for a while now.  I hated being forced to change it a while ago and I'm glad that I can change it back now.
 
+Alfredo Torres Authorship is linked to your profile URL. And if you care about authorship, then you presumably also care about the name you use on your account, so everything works out just fine. :)
 
3 years. I have been using my real name. And even though you, Google, you promised to give me that holy status of "verified", which you never did. And now you just give up. Thanks, but no thanks. 
 
+Gürkan Gür Your account has a single name attached to it. That's for your privacy and security: if you had two names on a single account, then it would be far too easy for a security bug to accidentally reveal that they're the same person, and it would be impossible to know which name to show when whenever there was an overlap between products. (e.g., if you +1'ed something from a search result on google.com, which name would show up?)

If you want to have more than one identity, the way to do it is to have two accounts: you can either create two profiles, or (often better) create a page. You can then log in to both at once and use the menu at the top-right (or Chrome user profiles, if you use Chrome) to switch between them easily. That gives you a lot more protection.
 
The problem is now I have two profiles and Idk how it happened.. 
Jezra
+
1
2
1
 
+Liz Fong-Jones no, putting a '.' for the last name make a . show up in my name. that is not "doing the right thing"
 
I never see this coming. Having real names in Google+ is better but let's see what this action might result to. We can never tell. 
 
+Mari B I don't understand what you mean. 

+Jezra ! I think I just found a bug in the name rendering code. Oops. Leave it as a dot, we'll fix it soon and the dot will go away.
 
Wish this change affected vanity URLs. The only preapproved URL I have is my full name. Interestingly enough, my gmail address and all social media profiles use my first initial and last name. I'd like my G+ to follow the same structure for obvious reasons.
 
+Liz Fong-Jones Yup. Just realized the mistake; fortunately, something easy to fix. Well, easy-ish, because it involves digging through a rather intestinal bit of code. 
 
So I can now create fake account, write fake review and fake YouTube comment? 

Great! That's wonderful! 
 
+Yonatan Zunger you could only change your Google+ name 3 time for every two years. Since we can use any name we want will this restriction still be mandatory?

And after the YouTube integration people migrated to using +pages, now they are stuck using it so I was also wondering if we'll be able to switch to a page.
 
Great, now please make it possible to merge accounts, or at the least, change ones Gmail address.
Bob O`Bob
+
1
5
6
5
 
To those of you who are expressing disappointment:

As long as you are wishing for a mythical land of real names, ignoring three years of very very strong evidence that it never could have happened, don't forget to wish for a pony, too.
Denny
+
3
4
3
 
Great!

... oh, except I still can't set my surname blank (I have to put a . in there, kludge-tastic!) and of course my custom profile URL is already set and you no doubt won't let me reset it without my surname in.

So... too little, too late, I think?
 
+Bob O`Bob I only wish for verified name status, I have invested in my digital identity, although ponies are nice too. ::Grin::
Totty s
+
3
4
3
 
Still getting: "People change their names infrequently in the real world, so Google+ limits how often you can change your profile name. Learn more
Changing your profile name changes it in all Google services that require a Google profile. Please note that it may take some time for this change to be fully applied. Learn more"
 
+Mari B There will still be restrictions on how often you can change your name, yes.
 
+Totty s Do you mean you're getting that while trying to change your name right now? What did you do (which platform, etc.) which led to that?
 
+Yonatan Zunger If I'm "+1"ed something on somewhere, well.. Obviously it should shown as my nickname on Google "plus". I'm +1'ing, not +gmail'ing.

Problem: Google loves mixing services. You're basically saying that I can't be the same person who can share my silly funny gifs on a social platform and use my mail for something serious. "More than one identity" is very common on the net I guess.

Also using two accounts, nightmare. Which one should I keep my bookmarks on? Which one to use for an irrevelant service like "drive"? Or easiest question for most: "Is it worth it? Or should I just keep using Facebook/Dropbox etc for the other job?"
Lucas
+
4
5
4
 
Fantastic. I'm glad Google FINALLY listened to the public. 
 
+Yonatan Zunger appears as though the Get URL link has disappeared as well. I don't have a custom url and the link to get one is no longer on the About page
 
The final nail on G+'s coffin. Those who hated G+ will not come back, thise who loved it will leave. I guess it's time to reactivate my Facebook account.
 
I created a page so I could use a pseudonym here. So can I convert the page into a profile now. I don't want to create yet another Google account.
 
+Serdar Kilic I don't know what the status of that link is -- I haven't been working on that one at all. No changes to it today.
 
Now if only we could easily change custom urls...
 
When will the first name / last name box on the sign up form be removed in favour of a username so I don't have to go back and forth between the Youtube one you made and my Gmail? :/

If Google+ Pages don't require a first name / last name combination then regular ones shouldn't either.  Learn from Twitter. We want usernames.
 
Ding dong the Vic is dead. The wicked Vic! Ding dong the wicked Vic is dead!
 
Not afraid to use my real name.I don't hide. IF MY COMMENTS ARE OFFENSIVE TOO FUCKING BAD! Get some....


 
Wonder if this is related to the (last month or two) astronomic increase in spam by fake profiles and the (just today) increase in people circling me who are just as clearly fake people?

I liked real names. Surely there could have been an approval process for people who seriously have legitimate reasons for needing a screen name. 
 
Uncouple the YouTube connection.
 
+Jose Navarro Impersonation is still against the policy. Read the policy please.

+Chip Salzenberg It could be also they wanted just to avoid Google+ profiles with names like jerem7548 and impersonaton. The idea behind the law and what the law tells can be really different. This would explain why they apologize about clarity.

+Rafa Ramírez In fact, it seems Google+ still enforce to not use numbers or symbols. They pretty much followed my idea, in fact. Source:
https://support.google.com/plus/answer/1228271 (behind “We ask you to pick another name”)

+Richard Arnold +Jarle Børve Watch my comment above. It talks about Facebook. So talking about Googlebook is erroneous.

+Yonatan Zunger Why this process taken months? What steps needed time or thoughtful conception?

+Michael Perrigo Can you give us, via Hangouts or a private post, or even here, your page URL? I would like to check out if it is really a page or it only looks like a page.
 
I never use my real name, which appears on the account is a nickname
 
+Charles M. Hannum Check the "learn more" link for how to enter a single name. (BTW, there's a bug around that at the moment which will cause single names to render with '.' as the last name; I'm fixing that now)

+Chris Harpner From web, go to your profile and click on your name; from mobile, go to your profile and select "Edit Name" from the ... menu.
 
Thank you Google.
I really hate using my real name on internet, because I fear that anybody can just type my name on Google and discover everything on me, my thought or what I like.
I'm not using my pseudonym to being a troll, just to protect my privacy.
 
Honestly +Google+ you didn't need to go full free for all. Accounts should be set up using real names and a credit card to verify, then allow people to choose their display name.
I'm in favor of verified persistent pseudonyms.
 
"We were unable to save your changes at this time. Please try again.". But other than that, thanks Google!!
 
How can I destroy my Google+ thingie (that I did not ask for, has no function, and do not want) /without/ losing my Gmail account and login for other Google applications (that I applied for myself, has function, and which I want)
Google+ is a disgusting failure that Google+ bolted artificially onto Gmail's account system, like Microsoft in the past illegally bolted IE onto Windows.  I really want to get rid of it.
Translate
 
So, How can I change it +Google+ ?! I don't like the URL either u_u' You asigned my name as URL, seriously?!
 
Google, please.You have to be smarter than Microsoft.When hundreds of thousands of people constantly complain about something publicly that means something needs to be fixed ASAP.Now let's hope you will fix Chrome to add an option that warns the user before closing the browser with multiple open tabs.Way too often it happens that I open the Print page and accidentally click the browser close button instead of Print page close button.Too confusing, less productive,high risk of losing hours of work on multiple tabs. #fixgoogle  
 
Google + is really the only social app I use. I got rid of Facebook 
 
Next you should work on your kicking people off G+ for posting a topless women but not a man, we all have breasts, I get it that Porn should be deleted, I don't like watching Porn, but beautiful women, that show some nipple is not porn, you must have lost thousands of people here for showing women's nipples poking through there tee shirts or with no top, its only fair that you don't allow men without shirts,!!
 
+Kahil Nettleton The issue is that a troll account could easily be identified whether or not the name was "fake"; it's not like you could simply be anonymous, nor does this change make that possible. It takes effort to set up each account if a troll was using more than one. And a troll comment could taint the reputation of an otherwise "good" account. You could look at the source of a comment and decide for yourself if that person is just an idiot or having a bad day. Real names or not has no impact; anyone could set up a Joe Blow and then go to town if they were so motivated to leave a nasty note.

This very account, set up as a joke at one point, passed the "Real Name" test before the policy was changed.

Maybe you should prevent people not in your circles from commenting on certain things? That would be my advice to you if you have problems with trolls.
 
No. No. No.
Don't back down on this policy. It was one of the greatest parts of G+. Now the nameless and faceless (bashing, bullying and nonsense shit talking) will pour forward making this place no better than Failbook. Thanks for giving in to the fickle mob just to be a little more popular ...
 
. +Yonatan Zunger , certainly Google has studied how removing the real name policy will influence/change the GPlus Community Culture. (a) Can you confirm this, and (b) would you be kind enough to share what you can of what your internal research predicts? Thanks.
 
+Yonatan Zunger So the current need to put a . in one of the name fields is a temporary workaround? Do I understand that correctly?
 
I tried and it did not work... "We were unable to save your changes at this time. Please try again."
 
+Paul Marcelino You can’t show nudity to teenagers, that’s the US law, AFAIK. Posts from profile are not filtered by age right now, so posting nudity as a profile also shows also this content to teenagers.
 
+Google+ I'm still getting the "Add a few extra letters or numbers to this URL to get one that is unique for your page." on a six letter brand name. REALLY want to get this handled please. cc +Dave Besbris 
 
+Yonatan Zunger it would be awesome if you would give us a second chance to change our vanity urls as well.Now that u have changed your policy i will change my lastname i want to change my vanity url too or not to have any,even better!plz do this
Translate
 
Where's the option to use any name you want?
 
I hope this change fixes the debacle which is G+ Custom URLs. What a mess.
 
Are there any instructions on how to do it? I can't find anything obvious. I can enter my pseudonym in the "nickname" field but there's no option to set the displayed account name to show only the nickname. It still insists on showing either the real name only or "real name (nickname)". Maybe the feature isn't actually rolled out yet? 

Will this feature also revert the duplicate YouTube account created by G+'s forcing the creation of a second YouTube account with my real name? It would be nice if I could dump the unused real name YouTube account that's linked to my G+ and instead link my real pseudonym-named YouTube account instead. :(
 
I'm glad, but I feel like it's too little too late for G+. Maybe you guys can afford to funnel money into it indefinitely from other projects until it takes off? I feel like it's dead in the water right now, and I quite liked it personally.
 
+Google+ you've made a huge mistake by catering to the lowest common denominator. 
 
That's all fine and good, but when people create fake names and accounts. We still can't get verified to keep us being our real selves
 
+Yonatan Zunger my question is can you possibly make it impossible for identity thieves from using old email addresses to open fraudulent accounts in google? I live in NC and two men in Turkey have used my old email to create a profile. 
 
Google's new motto "Don't be evil, just help other people be evil."
 
So now you have another way to figure out our alternate identities. Yay.
 
Let the common man get verified. 
Seebs
+
9
10
9
 
+Tyler Winfield  The previous policy had no checking or enforcement of whether the "real-looking-name" you picked was actually your "real" name. Meanwhile, if your name looked "weird" to them, you could have a huge amount of trouble, and if you hadn't gotten a formal legal change to a weird name, it could be worse than that.

I have a number of friends who have names that look sorta weird, and whose legal paperwork would result in G+ outing them as trans. And say what you will about comment trolls, I'm less bothered by them than I am by the significant history of real-life violence against people whose name has the wrong gender.
Peggy K
+
4
5
4
 
+Steve Rainwater You can change your Google+ Profile name by going to your profile and clicking your name. A nickname would be in addition to your Google+ Profile name. A YouTube channel connected to your Profile will display your Profile name only.   If you'd like assistance with your YouTube channel,  you can make a post in the official YouTube Google+ Integration community and I (or someone) will assist: https://plus.google.com/communities/116715546192712015485 
 
Yay! But I still can't lose the hack of a last name.
 
I'm using G+ since day 3, and imho, this is the worst decision you've ever made for this network...
(but of course i'm not pretending i know better than you what's good for you ^^)


Goodbye G+, welcome 4chan...
Na Love
+
6
7
6
 
its about time, FORCING people to be public with their REAL NAMES is STUPID and UNSAFE.
 
-I can't change my name back.- Fixed! You can't have your full name be equal to your nickname.
 
The worst part of this will be when people who you have their number in your phone start changing their names it'll make +Android and +Gmail users' contact lists look like a three year old labeled the names cause the one you type gets overridden by the G+ name when you merge duplicates
 
+Michael Burke So you will advocate yourself for real names while Google stops this horrible and rude review process. Nice!
 
+Yonatan Zunger - can we add unblocking people/pages from the hotlist to the things to do list to make people feel welcome on G+ yet?
 
This is the best decision G+ have made, about damn time.
 
+Yonatan Zunger Please give one extra free change to people who changed their names wthin 90 days before this policy change, so we don't need to wait.

We couldn't predict your timing, it feels unfair.
 
So, we can change our names, but not to a single name? 
 
That's great and all, but twitter has never pissed me off and everyone I know is there. Google+ is irrelevant. You are the Bing of social networking. Maybe even more lame.
 
this new policy seems good to me.
 
This is why when i signed up for gmail and google+ i didn't put my last name...hehehe
 
+Google+ This is why people stick with you. You always do the right thing eventually - if not straight out of the gate.
lola butt
+
9
10
9
 
anyone who thinks that the real name policy prevented trolls is ... well, they're dumb.  It didn't prevent trolls, it prevented wacky names.  Trolls can make a whole bunch of John Smith and Carol Jones accounts and troll just as well as they could under "eViLDaRkSnYpA666"
 
We are +Google+, a community of real people! We aren't a troll-community like the others social.
 
Are we also allowed to change our profile URL to reflect a new name?
 
"We know that our names policy has been unclear," !?!?!? unclear? Bulldust! It was VERY CLEAR and also VERY WRONG. I have been restricted from posting anything interesting - I am interested in China, and certainly do not want to miss out on a Chinese visa in future - what did you think I'd do. Also, not very friendly to people in police states that manage to access Google. Dumb move, so what took you so long to roll it back?
 
(i'll change it as soon as it works. getting an 'unable to change name' error) Finally. I went on an anti-google kick for quite some time because  my real name is not super common and I run some forums where I've been harassed and threatened. I didn't like having to use my real name. Many of us left Google+ and google products.My RL friends know me by a particular name that I wanted to be able to use here, and now I can.
 
+Google+ +Yonatan Zunger Too late. You ruined the passion for Google of most of the Google Reader community, which included a lot of Google services early users and promoters, and you ruined the dynamic of Google + launching. Try to make Google + so useful as Google Reader was, and then maybe you'll have another chance to compete with Facebook. 
 
+Yonatan Zunger Feature Request: When a user has a certain number of people that they have circled, who have circled back. Plus a certain amount of interaction (reporting a user would act negatively on this score, but not completely obliterate - because some users report a comment when they don't agree with it, not because the comment is offensive / spam)  - the user could have some sort of badge indicating that they are a member in good standing.  I'll admit - I'm much more likely to be wary of someone who has a nickname rather than a real name - unless there is an easy (use the hovercard) way to see that they are actually a useful member of society. And yes - I also admit that some people have a legitimate need to not use their real name.
Eddy Z.
+
1
0
1
0
 
I don't agree with the "there will now be more trolls" argument. Even with real names, trolls were everywhere. 
 
I don't always G+, but when I do ... I use a pseudonym.
 
Terrible idea. You're just opening the floodgates to all the abusive behavior that we see elsewhere. I see very little of it on G+ and it's because you don't allow cowardly vermin on here... or at least you didn't.
 
I am glad to finally see this come about. Although I managed to survive the policy, I know many other good people who were driven by it. 
Eddy Z.
+
1
2
1
 
+Ernest Adams Even with real names abusive comments are ever present. I understand that you see very little of it in your feed, but you'd be surprised at the harsh things people with "real identities" say online.
 
+Michael Perrigo you don't need a profile to manage pages any more.

You can log straight into
plus.google.com/dashboard
You can also create a 3rd party password and login for your page and directly log into the page so that it acts similarly a profile.
Using the 3rd party login you can create a gmail address and calendar as well I believe. 
 
I'd like to +1 for also eliminating the silly custom URL restrictions.  Currently I can't even select my own name (+GlennRempe) which is not in use as a custom URL by anyone else.  I am forced to add numbers or letters to the end which I won't do.  With this new policy change I should be allowed to use an available custom URL of my choosing to match my own 'branding' everywhere else on the Internet.
 
+Michael Beckett Yeah, but it's not crowd approved. A community led system would be better. It would essentially be upvoting and downvoting, but upvoting is done by interacting with someone, whether it's resharing, +1ing or commenting and downvoting is reporting the comment. The problem with Verified Names is the same as on Twitter, only highly influential people and / or celebrities get them. They require a manual process - and let's be honest - when it comes to manual processes - Google is not exactly on the ball.
 
I think this will make it harder to manage political communities in particular, +Yonatan Zunger , but generally I think this was a poor choice despite all the metrics I'm sure were examined. You guys had something special here at one time. Oh well, we'll do the best we can with what we are given.
 
Good news. The only thing is the timeline isn't so great
 
+Jim Munro ,we can always live in hope that +Yonatan Zunger and others are listening closely, and are open to reconsideration. 

Just hope this isn't an indication of Google loosing faith, or acting out of fear. If so, I fear they may look back on today as the day they lost their greatness.
Scratch
 
+Kamal Tailor  Tried that on my phone
Probably didn't work due to it being parsed on the app, which hasn't been updated
 
I love u google+ I can use my own name from now on not like I don't tho but thank u 
 
Once, this move would have been lauded as brave. Now it's just the dying gasps of a service nobody cares about. Woot. woot.
 
Real names was one of the great things about Google+. Nothing was worse than one of your friends commenting on your post on Facebook, but you had no idea who they were because they changed their name and you couldn't recognize the picture.
 
The real reason +Google+ is doing this is because they can't control ID authentication and never could control it since day one since they adopted the ID authentication policy. Sure, they can control name restriction which restricts the username but that's bogus and doesn't justify jack! For example In old policy you can't use Zr87dd909 but they can't stop you from using any name you pick out of the hat from an old dusty White Pages or your neighbor's name, or any real authentic sounding name out there that obviously isn't you.  The complaints are unjustified and invalid!
 
About damn time.  Shouldn't even need a Google+ account but here we are anyway...
 
+Jim Munro I'm curious about something. Exactly how will this make it harder to manage those communities? Keeping in mind, of course, that so long as a name "looked" legit Google+ users have been able to use names that weren't on their birth certificates since 2012.
 
To bad it's still in first name last name format and it doesn't even look like anything changed.  Google "doing no evil" as always...
 
to become truly anonymous, remove all google services and recreate using the handle of your choice.
 
Had Google not jumped on the real name privacy-destroying-for-the-sake-of-marketing bandwagon from the beginning it could have been better than Twitter and Facebook, that is now a lost opportunity and this is Google's way of going "oops."

Real name policies have no use, online or offline, and put the safety of politicians, law enforcement, government workers, call centers, and whistle-blowers at risk. More to the point, see how often women and minorities are sent violent and hateful messages just because their name gives it away.

There are more effective means of reducing the harm from bullying and trolling by simply moderating or disabling all comments to begin with if what you post is going attract more unwanted attention than can be handled. It's not Google's job to police behavior. Google can provide the tools to do it only.
 
+DeAno Jackson When people use their real names they naturally add details over time that make it reasonably easy to assess a profile as valid. A persona generally has nothing to add.

Political parties use shills and multiple temporary profiles to influence and skew debate. They've got software for it.
 
+Jim Munro Those things you mention, once again, have been possible for the last two and a half years. Absolutely nothing has changed on that front. The only thing that has changed today is that people with unusual names, like writer Violet Blue, no longer have to combat the system in order to get their names to work.
Peggy K
+
1
2
1
 
+Mohit K it is possible to use a different identity for Gmail  and YouTube if your channel is connected to a Google+ Page - you can even set your Google+ Page-linked YouTube channel to be the default, so you shouldn't have to change channel identities when signing in to YouTube.
 
This is a joke, we can't use « single word » name on profil. This is not what pseudonyms are on the Internet.
 
I disagree with this decision. Real names and real identities require people to be responsible for their content and interactions; this reversal favors trolls and abusive users.

The quality of discourse is degraded when I have to respond to 'Twinkie6972' rather than 'John Smith.'
 
It's about damn time. And what of those of us who were at one point or another excluded under the previous policy, or treated unfairly, despite using our real names, or our chosen and preferred names, etc?
 
+Jim Munro Of course I did. You're just not understanding my answer. I don't think that most of you understand what changed today, and I as a Google+ Top Contributor who has known about this change in great detail for the past month, am trying to clarify it.

Fake profiles like the kind you mention were already possible. Hell, they've never not been possible. If a name looked legit, it was fine. You could make as many "Joe Browns" as you liked and the system would never bat an eye. The problem came about if your name was Honjaa Mburia or Sunshine Richardson. Real names, but the old system wouldn't go for them, causing users to have to jump through all kinds of hoops just to be able to use their actual names. The user experience was terrible. Today that problem is solved.
 
Ok, so we are allowed to change the name on our profile, but what about our google plus URL, which in my case displays my full name as decided by you?  Are we going to be allowed to change it as well? 
 
+DeAno Jackson  I think you need to read the explanation again then. For my part, I have carefully read the announcement and know both the implications and the history.

I manage a few communities, mostly non-political, but I can vouch that this change will make the job of moderating political communities   harder.
 
Does this mean now that we can finally name the shortcuts to profiles to make sense for example my football teams google+ shortcut address can finally remove the dumb fi from the end that Google suggested since they didn't allow to use just the team's name?

Otherwise the real name policy was good and now hopefully this will not have an effect in trolling returning with fake names.
 
I see still way too much people complaining about the existence of Google+... seriously you are hardly able to accept changes it seems.

Google+ is here to stay and also the connection with YouTube was one of the best steps in my opinion.

+Audiofeeline Read the comments and you'll see there is a solution for that: Put a dot (.) as last name and it will only display the first one (unless the system bug is still present which should be fixed soon)
 
Why can't there be a system in place where a user can use both. Their real name and "nickname". I mean +Google+ has the slot for " nickname " but doesn't use it. Let's just make it more Twitter like with a combination of real name and nickname. 
 
Sorry to see this change - not sure what the point of G+ is without this differentiator. Might as well just use Twitter and Facebook.
 
I wish +Google+ would require real pictures instead of all of these blue heads. I won't even friend someone without a viable photograph. 
Andi S
+
4
5
4
 
I'm glad that this finally happened.  I just wish that many of the early adopters who made this a vibrant and diverse community hadn't been driven away by the "real-name policy," which made many contributors feel unsafe. 
AJ West
+
1
2
1
 
I was really hoping that Google Plus would be my "Phonebook" of real people.
 
Big mistake. G+ and the adults using it will probably not benefit from this decision. I didn't ask for this change and certainly not wasn't asked as the topic statement falsely claims. 
 
I should add +DeAno Jackson that the issue is that political parties use software to create and manage these profiles.

They used to be  easy to spot because they have no ancillary details but now there will be genuine personas which will look just like the fakes. (personas usually don't have details to add).

We used to be able to inhibit them by reporting the fakes as "not a real person". This will no longer be an option.
 
Still waiting to get my own name here on Google+  in the profile. I've been a user from Day 1 but that apparently isn't enough. 
 
+Jim Munro "They used to be  easy to spot because they have no ancillary details but now there will be genuine personas which will look just like the fakes. (personas usually don't have details to add).

We used to be able to inhibit them by reporting the fakes as "not a real person"."

Not one single part of that has changed.
 
+DeAno Jackson   From the announcement above: "Today, we are taking the last step: there are no more restrictions on what name you can use. "

However, on thinking about it, I guess you would need to have practical experience of the issue to understand it's ramifications so let's just leave it at that. Have a good day, mate. :)
 
After having gone to our real names, there's not much point to change back to a pseudonym now.  We're known by our real names, and have already built a following and a reputation on it.  Thanks +Google+   You've killed my alter-ego on a mere whim.

To all the people happy for the change... be careful what you wish for... you just might get it.
 
I had to use my real name, and I broke out the secret. But I don't give a fuck anymore, it can stay as it is.
 
That's a nice lock you've put on the stable door.  Has anyone seen the horse?
Translate
 
absolutely not, we don't need more trolls and haters on youtube
 
Congratulations. I sincerely hope the minority forgives you enough to buy your 584.78 dollar shares again. 
 
+Doug Goodwin
Funny comment.  I've been called "John Smith" for the past two years.  My name is not "John Smith".  The real name policy didn't actually require a real name.  Trolls could hide just as easily as they can now or at the start of G+ (it didn't require real names when it launched).
 
What bothers me are the URLs that are not available. Again, way behind.
 
Thanks, +DeAno Jackson, but I've read that, mate.

This might be clearer if we consider an example. Here's what I wrote at the beginning of this epic: "When people use their real names they naturally add details over time that make it reasonably easy to assess a profile as valid. A persona generally has nothing to add. Political parties use shills and multiple temporary profiles to influence and skew debate. They've got software for it."

Joe Brown is a real person but for personal reasons he chooses to call himself Bill smith on Google+. As Bill Smith does not exist, the persona is unlikely to add profile details or link up pages such as Youtube etc. This behaviour will make Joe's "Bill" profile indistinguishable from the fakes made by political parties. We will now have to be more careful not to exclude genuine people using personas.

The only correct answer to this is "fair enough" :)

Thanks mate and have a good day. :)
 
+Chronno Trigger Whether a pseudonym like your video game-inspired moniker or a altogether false identity, I find the pretense cheapens the quality of discourse on +Google+ 
 
+Doug Goodwin That's your personal opinion.

I have been known as Chronno S. Trigger for decades now.  To me it's more my name then my given one.  But Chronno, John, or Bill, it doesn't matter, I'd still put as much effort into my comments as I do now.

Trolls will be trolls no matter the name.  Nice people will be nice no matter the name.  Judging a book by it's cover is always a bad idea.
 
+Jim Munro Your whole Joe Brown example was just as true two years ago as it is now. That hasn't changed at all, it was always the case, and this announcement today doesn't change that. There is never a point in G+'s entire history where Joe Brown couldn't make a Bill Smith profile. NEVER. What you're thinking is a new problem caused by today's policy change has been possible ever since the beta for G+ began. I'm not sure how much more I can break this down.
 
I have mixed feelings about this. At first, I really did not like the real name policy, as I was an activist who took on, confronted, and exposed some of the worst racist, sexist, homophobic, and hateful right wing trolls on the internet (the stormfront, WND, Breitbart, freerepublic type) . Many of them seriously threatened me, and I used my pseudonym as a firewall to protect my real world identity and those close to me against them. 

After a while though, I got used to the real name policy, and noticed how well it dealt with trolls. The reason why conversations on Google+ are far superior to any other large social media site has a lot to do with this "real world" policy. I really hope our discussions don't turn into a cesspool like Youtube, 4chan, and Facebook now. 
 
I'm not sure what to think about this.  On one hand it might foster a new atmosphere of. . . wait, where am I?  Oh shit, I'm on Google+, what am I doing here? 
If I wasn't forced into this piece of crap I wouldn't be commenting here about this change that means nothing to me. 
Edit:  Still, as always, go to hell Google+.
 
+Doug Goodwin
 any one could have hidden behind some false name anyhow. As long as it was a first and last real looking name. Use the Circles, post privately and to groups rather than publicly. Any time we post anything publicly, we put it out there for criticism and ridicule anyhow. Social Networking sites aren't supposed to do our 'common sense' job for us. They give us the tools and we need to use them. This is a great move - I think a bit too late, because lots of us were affected by the 'real name' issue. But glad they are finally getting around to it.
 
G+ Is amazing!  I've met a lot of amazing people on here.  :)  I wish my friends would see the light and move away from FB too  
 
+Jim Munro I've explained this inside and out, I've linked you to the Help Center article which explains in detail what's going on, and I've even dropped some knowledge on you that as a Google+ Top Contributor I got directly from the team responsible for this change when they told us about it over a month ago. At this point I'm down to rephrasing things I've already said, so feel free to simply go back and read my previous responses to you again.

Starting to be sorry I ever asked a question, particularly since I already knew the answer (the answer to that original question, by the way was, "It won't in the slightest.")
 
"online pseudonym" has become more synonymous with "privacy protection" than it has "excuse to be a jerk,"

 the reason behind why this change is almost undoubtedly owed to the rather strong online backlash to revelations of US spying programs and the increasing public awareness of internet surveillance around the world and Google is almost definitely responding to that evolving connotation.

the problem is if you think about every time you might comment on a video or something and somebody disagrees with it (let's say, a troll). Suddenly, they've got your full name, which they can utilize to find your Facebook profile, your LinkedIn account, your work e-mail, and cyber-stalking or cyber-bullying is an option.

I can understand why it might reduce trolling, but at the same time it definitely can inhibit insightful comments if somebody fears disagreement (e.g., over gun rights, politics, abortion, or other hot button topics). Worse yet, what if a potential employer Googles your name and finds your comment on this hot button issue. It's not relevant to your job, but the employer doesn't agree with you on immigration reform or climate change and it counts against you.

It's similar to the reason I don't use the Facebook commenting systems on websites; I don't need somebody reading a blog to know what my sister's name is or what school I went to. It discourages me from entering certain online discussions that could be interesting. There are definitely two sides to this coin.
 
Can I say, "I told you so?"

Hard to go back and undo the bad feelings regarding "forcing name changes or be shut down" e-mails many read-though many users with "obviously-not-their-names" were never affected. The "unnecessarily difficult experiences" is correct-still leaves a very unpleasant taste in my experience, and my clients, who were stalked, had to go elsewhere-and don't care to come back.

I'd suggest personalized apology e-mails, but who am I kidding...
 
Not a chance g+. I am Keeping my real name.
I call g+ the intelligent facebook.
Joe L.
+
1
2
1
 
Is this mean Google+ has no restriction for names change? Anyone?
 
Why? Why would you do that? I know that you want more people, but how about sticking to what you believe? This one of the pillars that kept G+ clean and so pleasant to use all these years... It's one of the thing that made G+ about real people and not fake names under the avatars.
 
In reality, unless someone reported you or your name did not "appear" to be a real name, you could use any name without a problem-just like the profile picture... Not sure either (name or profile photo) makes a user or community respectful or friendly...
 
goggle post stuff on your wall,like it was you who is posting.
 
I don't know why you would bother me with a question if you thought you already knew the answer but I have only the official announcement to go on, +DeAno Jackson . It's perfectly clear to me and maybe if you read this again it will become clear to you too. I've cut out the irrelevant bits.

"When we launched Google+ over three years ago, we had a lot of restrictions on what name you could use on your profile. This helped create a community made up of real people, but it also excluded a number of people who wanted to be part of it without using their real names. Over the years, as Google+ grew and its community became established, we steadily opened up this policy. Today, we are taking the last step: there are no more restrictions on what name you can use".

Q.E.D.
 
I guess all you need to do is to compare and contrast the Google Plus Community culture with that of the old YouTube culture. The former is known for thoughtful discussion, the latter was a joke, mostly trash comments. Trust and authority are built over time, and one of the many pieces of the puzzle that allowed for accountability and transparency was the real name policy. Dropping the real name policy at minimum sends the wrong message. At worse, it potentially contaminates the stream to the point the bad will chase out the good. It's as simple as that, IMHO.
 
Creo que una red social con nombres reales es mejor opción, sin embargo felicidades +Google+ por esta apertura y por contemplar las necesidades de todos usuarios. 
Translate
 
+Chris Chase > Does this mean that YouTube comments will go back to being a steaming pile of monkey shit?
How name and comment content are correlated? Comments on youtube always been a shit.

> And how am I supposed to tell who is who when making decisions on who I circle-back?
I'm always look at posts of the user. How do you make decision based only on the name?
 
+Google+ I don't care about the names. Can I just place my photo albums in any order I want it?
 
+Scott Scowcroft I disagree. All one had to do pre real name policy was have a vaguely plausible name. Mine used to be Typhoon Jim, and I was forced to pick a real name: in a fit of pique I simply put in Jim Typhoon. 

Real names don't deter trolling unless we go the Chinese route and force you to present id in order to post, and even then there are still trolls in such places. 
 
Freedom, flexibility, inclusiveness, sincere apology and atonement, encouraging thoughtful communities - I approve Google. Keep up the good work.
 
This is long overdue. I only wish it came with a more thorough apology demonstrating that Google actually gets why the original policy was inconsistent with modern social media. It was a terrible policy in the first place. At every moment it was in effect, it was a terrible policy. It remains a black mark on the face of G+. This idea that a community was established and is now opening up is a transparent attempt to spin a PR disaster. And I say this as someone who has always used her real name online.
 
Well that's to bad. REAL NAMES is the way to go for individuals. That's why I loved Google+. This announcement somehow tells us that you want quantity more than you want quality. 
 
Is it now possible to pick a custom URL besides the ones they offer you?
 
+Jim Typhoon , I guess it's all a matter of degree. At least the crowd I hang out with on GPlus (literally and metaphorically) are thoughtful, honest and appropriately transparent.  We've gotten to get to know each other as real people, and there's a certain respect and caring (and dare I say it? love)  we have for one another. In business too, we are entrepreneurs and small businesses who are learning to collaborate and cooperate with each other in new ways, on paying projects.

We all believe we're helping to reinvent the world, Google/GPlus are providing the framework, and we're doing the rest. We feel the "real name" policy promotes the sort of culture that fosters honesty, accountability and civility. But I also recognize the injustices as well, such as in your case. As I mentioned, it's all a matter of degree.

All I can say is there are a number of us who believe GPlus is different, and hope that Google wont loose its way, but rather stay the course so together we can make a better world.
 
Thanks, but it's too late for me, I had to give my real name to people who was interacting and communicating and already knowing me by my usual nick (even using that nick, forbidden by G, in 'real world' conversations, in Cons, in meetings, etc). As me, others, so some people had a total disconnection that eventually resulted in not using G+ in all his potential. 
 
My name change is still not saving. Go fix it please.
Translate
Ben F
 
Man-IP-ulation.
 
Put the comment box up top now, you amateurs. Then fire all of the idiots who tried to force our real names on here and You Tube. Then fire the other idiots who deleted decades of gaming videos for no good reason.

Imbeciles.
 
I wonder how I can change my profile name, not that I want to, but it is good to know. 
 
Google+原先想做一个实名社区,最终以失败告终。
Translate
 
Nooooo. Another caos network. This is an error 
 
+Google+ riiiight, first you ban people left and right for having a unique-ish name, force a lot of my circles here to use generic fake names that pass your retarded policy, and now let's celebrate "the welcoming and inclusive place", oh wow. Assholes.

Having no balls to admit that you were horribly fukken wrong all the time is so very suitable to a nameless Google employee. Be a man once, commit suicide, like Hitler or something. Make the world better place for once.
Seebs
+
5
6
5
 
+Scott Scowcroft There are hundreds of other communities you could compare with. You could also compare the communities in terms of, say, how many people I know who are absolutely not trolls, but who are not willing to participate in a community where the trolls can harass them in real life if they post something the trolls don't like. My experience has been that "real name" policies are heavily discriminatory and don't really help.
 
+Yonatan Zunger sorry but no it bloody well hasn't, I've reported countless trolls and spammers and nothing has ever happened, ever.
 
Real name policy never worked and therefore never existed, this is just an admission that it was not possible to police and they've given up. I ain't even mad, I just prefer a little honesty.
 
I want to  change my name but my three chances has been used up.I don't know if the policy has changed or i have to wait two years to change my profile.
 
Sorry, but it's not enough. Bullying me into changing my 5-6 years long username on youtube to my Google+ username doesn't really go away with "we appologise". It's obvious that "Do no evil" is meaningless at Google for sometime now. 
 
Good news for a lot of people... not for me. I'll stick with my real name and I hope +Google+ won't become messy like Facebook. 
 
+Seebs . you make some valid points.

Because you have neither avatar profile  image, nor have you shared anything personal on your about page,  nor have you shared any posts, it is hard for me to judge if you know GPlus by another account, or if you're a newbie. If the former, you should know that you can lock down your public account pretty effectively through privacy settings, and still participate privately. If the latter, then I'd encourage you to get to know the platform better, then form your opinions.

GPlus really is different than Facebook.
 
Too little too late.
 
Hmmmm.  I never had a problem with my nom-de-plume.  But then I had this ID from 2006 or so, and though initially scared of G+ 'pseudonym' policy, didn't find any problems.  In fact, the 1st G+ name suggestion (when Google switched over to custom URLs from numbers) offered was the same.  I guess Google gave me an exemption. :-D
(Glad that the anxiety has been removed, one and for all, though) 
 
A great move! Well done, Google+! 
 
So you're giving more freedom to people who insult and spread all sorts of negative influence over the network than to your users who have built that network? Nice to know that fact when I delete my account on Google Plus. 
 
Every time I try to change my name it keeps kicking back a "We were unable to to save your settings at this time, please try again later." error. 
TheBlack Box
+
19
20
19
 
To all those who don't like this change:

We never had a real "real name" policy here in the first place.

The implicit rule was that a name has to look like a real name.
And if it didn't, you had to "prove" that the name belongs to an "established online identity".

The policy was a total mess that resulted in discrimination between those who are "internet famous" and those who aren't.

And some people's "real names" don't look real to most people.
(Examples: Crazy Horse, Bruce Wayne, Batman bin Suparman)

Spammers and trolls don't care either way. They have no problem using names that appear like real names.

The key to a positive G+ experience is in doing your own curation. You choose whom you add to your circles and who gets blocked and muted.

It is your choice to do that curation "by name" or "by content". 
Smart people will go "by content" because that is what matters.
 
+Yonatan Zunger - no you haven't. Google+ is full of profiles that are nothing but porn and spam. Don't kid yourself that you have it under control.
 
+Malcolm Oakley ha ha!
Internet control for me has the same place as bowel control for someone with amoebic dysentery ...

Utterly absent! And utterly impossible
 
+Google+ It's all cool...But when you create Exclude circle?! I want post to my G+ to everyone except couple people.
How you say "launched Google+ over three years ago" but you can't do this simple thing?
 
+K. Cavoli ora non ti rompono più le scatole nemmeno su questo. Però tu diventi sempre più irrintracciabile!
Translate
 
Good that you're finally removing your silly restriction on names. However, you still fail to acknowledge that those restrictions never were about real names in the first place. Any western-sounding fake name would pass. Many real names wouldn't. And most importantly, especially on the internet, you forbid many people to use their self-identifying name, aka their IDENTITY, which they might have been building up for over a decade.

This is still a good move, but it would've been better if it came with an understanding of the problem.
 
It's too late, and you know that, and you guys always try to save your products when it's too late. Why? because you were, are, and still will be too ego.
 
1) Too little, too late...? 2) What took so long, with all of the strange in-between, Heisenberg-ish states of this policy and its enforcement in the intervening YEARS...?

3) Anyone thinking that this had effects on only 0.1% of users is in deep denial, the ripple-effects went much further than that. It cost G+ a ton of momentum in the first few months, as I said back then, the word "ban" should have never been heard from a PR stand-point during the launch phase...
 
Good job, Google, good job. [pat, pat pat]. As I am using my full name for whole fucking three years I will stick to it. However, I will still use the services as until now - just for silly things.
 
Oh no!, I loved the real name policy. It's so much easier in life when everybody have a name.. (And don't some made up name they register when they was 14 and in 20 they regrets it. Or couple of names (because the regrets it they open a new email and G+ profile) and now G+ have couple of millions more users (that they don't engaged but hi, they will have as same numbers of Facebook crap users)).

+Google+ +Google #realNames
 
G+ is a stillborn social network. Please stop forcing us to use G+ when we just want to use another Google-Service. I don't want to link my G+ profile to my youtube profile and vice versa. I dont' want to have a G+ account opened automatically for me when I create a new gmail address.
Translate
Translate
Translate
 
I can find the options to change my name in my G+ profile page, but it still insists that I enter a surname - my name is "Shish", and that is all. Have I just not got the update yet, or do both the "real names" and "not-real-names" policies not allow my real name? :(
 
Better privacy, more freedom. Congratulations
 
500!  Regrettably, it's not possible to say you are right today, +DeAno Jackson . I am sorry about that. Please try again later. :)
 
+Jim Munro Me right, you wrong.  Read the HC article.  This'll be my last comment to you on the matter.
 
Imágenes de la virgen del carmen
Translate
 
+Google+ What about company brand names? When do companies or brands get to choose what they would like to be called - rather then what you suggest we are called? 
 
Google+ is a good place to be. I keep tabs on amazing stuff on the internet through here. Every day there is great, well written material on my dash. The layout's clean and everything fits nicely in place.
 
+T Mulhall, the naming restrictions only ever applied to Profiles, not to Pages, I believe, and businesses were always supposed to use Pages in any case.
 
how many users were in 2012 and 2013 separated
 
Being forced into google+ and using a real name was evil. Shame on you google.
 
I really don't want to use my real name! I would at least like {ELITE}DREamS or Dreams not my real name.Please Google+ PLEASE change this :)
 
Thanks. Because, if you can tell, this IS NOT my real name. And thank goodness we can still keep our role play accounts now. I've made far too many friends through that to lose it... 
 
Very sad news. I was a big fan of mandatory "real name" policy and I feel like we've just lost one of the main winning points over Facebook.
Now my stream is full of posts from weird-name users and I can report them no longer.
Furthermore, finding an old friend searching for him has become harder, since he could be using a fake name I'm not aware of.
Sorry +Google+, I love your network but I strongly disagree with all this.
 
Well, some of us really don't feel comfortable with absolute strangers knowing our real names...
 
And if you're just trying to look up friends +Luigi Apicella​, just ask them what they call themselves online...
 
"I think you kind just lied to us by restricting name changes again..."

"At first, I was really excited, but then, not even a year, and it was gone faster then you could say Happy New Year. Please let us change our names again."
 
I wanna change my name to mangle the Little fox
 
For me it has nothing to do with remaining anonymous but more with what people call me. 
 
Dmkzsloiekdleo ppppppppppppppppppppppppp soy argentina abaletito djfufufk hola
Translate
 
I'm so evil. Now, everyone has to come back to this old ass post! Muhahahahahaha!
 
Dear Sirs.. I've felt that if I post more than 13 posts, they're not shared by Google+..! Is there any restriction on number of posts per day.. that can be posted? Please clarify soon.
 
+Bharat Kapadia I don't think so. But, I think that if people stop interacting with your posts, they stop seeing them after a while
 
Dear Sirs, though dear leuan Mark Mills has replied.. but still the problem continues, if the number of posts exceed 13 per day.. It's not the question of people stopping interacting with them..perhaps. Well, tomorrow and onwards I'll try to post more and then I'll communicate later to rectify the problem. Thank you for taking interest.. so soon!
 
Being able to choose my own identity is very comforting for me, my online name has a lot to do with who i feel i am as a person. I've just come from Facebook very angry as it asked for my government ID. I think i like G+ better... As long as i don't get asked for any ID here. Why would they want that from me? :'( I feel violated and scared, :'( and i lost all my friends as i'm locked out of my account till I give them ID... :'(
 
Dear Sirs, 2 weeks ago I had put up the complaint concerning not receiving my posts by 3 communities, namely.. "Love And Friendship".. "Relatable Teen Posts".. and.. "Everyday Teen Posts".. Sirs, soon after my FIRST POST is received by them, the next post doesn't reach at all.. The situation has worsened now..!!! Though they are my majority friends and followers, I have no other option left.. I have to post under " Public " only which do not reach them at all.. I AM VERY MUCH DISAPPOINTED IN THIS MATTER. Please do something and rectify this problem forever and obliged.. Thank you.. Regards.
Add a comment...