Editing Identity dispute

'''Identity dispute''' arises when '''claimed identity cannot be verified''' ie. that someone is who they are claiming to be '''or''' when anonymous users (anonymous users may in fact be [[trolls]] that frequent the media in question) that '''refuse to take an identity''' thus existing (or perhaps non-existing) in the [[social club]] as non-persons or using [[pseudonyms]]

== heading it off ==

Collective and alleged and ambiguous identity are all problematic.  The first step is an [[interwiki identity standard]] so that those who seek to claim a name on several [[large public wiki]]s can do so quickly and unambiguously - this avoids much confusion.  As [[trolls]] enter, the second step is a way to place an [[IP number]] or [[login]] in a [[faction]], which it can move from to another faction, but may not totally defaction itself.  That way, signals can be sent to others that this IP number originates [[controversial edit]]s consistently, so it can be watched by those who think so.  It also makes the dispute a bit less personal and avoids [[repute]] debates and [[echo chamber]]s.  [[Funded troll]]s would likely require a third step involving some [[sysop power structure]] under supervision of [[Consumerium Governance Organization]].

See [[Noise vs. Signal]] for the different approach to take in each wiki - research needs a somewhat looser standard than the final published information that becomes the [[Consumerium buying signal]].

==Troll point of view==

This can be seen as a subset of a [[political dispute]] in that a political dispute may involve accusations of real or manufactured identity disputes as a form of political battle

Some [[trolls]] claim that some ideologies claim that identity and politics itself are just forms of [[neutrality dispute]].  

[[Trolls]] consider the '''whole concept of identity dispute stupid''', and it is the reason for the many problems of such projects as [[Wikipedia]], which accept and promote such ideologies, and attract believers in them, who eventually degrade and destroy the capacity of the project itself to deal with political dispute, and promote noxious personalities.  

[[Trolls]] promote the [[political virtues]] instead, and reject identity that is not [[factionally defined]].

Failing to recognize the concept of an '''identity dispute''' leads directly to [[sysop vandalism]] as [[revert]]s occur simply because of what sysops believe or suspect about identity.  

This is one of many reasons why [[trolls]] advocate ''foment ambiguity'' and not [[use real names]], particularly if ''constant pseudonyms are allowed''.

See [[conceptual metaphor]] for the "green" and [[God's Eye View]] for the "grey" way to settle such debates.  The latter leads to trust in one [[GodKing]].  The former may lead to a greater role for [[trolls]].  There are reasons to avoid either extreme.  

==Non-troll point of view==
Probably the most realistic view is that identity and other politics disputes are inevitable and normal and part of language and linguistic relationships, but they have to be contained using some methods such as '''different levels of identification''' ranging from [[anonymous]] users to normal users to verified users.

It is not good to let trolls totally escape all accountability and it is also not good to let [[outing|outing problems]] determine who participates in the [[Wikis]]. A troll's anonymity is approximately equal to a random stranger on the street.  

People who have no principles and accordingly spell principle "principal" as if they [[authoritarianism|still obeying authority in school]] assert that the "principal of [[w:immediate pursuit|immediate pursuit]] applies."  This is doubtful, as "immediate pursuit is a legal principle describing rules of engagement to enter into combat with or forceably detain another."  This has to do with [[body]] relations, not any kind of talk or interchanges of text.

However, there may be some valid reasons to believe that edits under one [[IP address]] made to several [[large public wiki]]s in short succession might be the same person;  It could however be a deliberate [[alleged and collective identity]] tactic to trick [[sysop power structure]] into doing something very foolish.