35

Reading over the A51 proposals, I see a proposal for a sexuality Q&A site (cough "sackoverflow" cough ). I don't know if I would particularily like Careers2.0 to link up a potential employer or customer with my contribution in threads regarding sexuality.

  • As I just reopened the sexuality proposal couple months ago I thinks a very good point. I think people are even embarrassed to follow it. Its a piety seeing how much i've learned from my Human Sexuality class and how most people dont even know the basics. Surveys show that people think they know but actually dont :( – Xitcod13 Nov 11 '12 at 22:06
20

We've talked a lot about this one on the Stack Exchange Community Team, and we have plenty of time before the Sexuality proposal is likely to see a private beta in which to hammer out the details. It is clear to us that there will need to be some separation between the Sexuality site and the network at large -- for example, non-PG13 question titles shouldn't appear in the "hot question" box at the top of other sites. The extent of the separation and the implementation details are still up for grabs, but don't worry, we're thinking the same things you are.

This isn't to say that we'll be able to magically keep anyone from noticing your participation if they are looking for it, and if you use your usual nickname and/or associate your accounts. We're just not going to advertise it.

  • 16
    I feel this is a poor position to take when you consider that careers encourages potential employers to view your profile, and part of that would be seeing what other sites you're on. It would be incredibly inconvenient for users to not receive notifications on their main account, but to link them and have that bridge there is just inviting future employers into your bedroom life, where they really don't belong. – corsiKa Nov 14 '11 at 18:37
  • 1
    I completely agree with corsiKa (not to mention its my favorite childhood vacation spot). Society has not yet linked the business world with the bedroom world. Some People have not even linked their own reality with their sexuality. Not allowing people to hide their identity (even nicknames) will force the site to stand on its own with a much more separate community from other sites. You cant even get people to admit to certain things when they are anonymous how will they cope if they are not! Not providing true privacy will hinder the sites community development. – Xitcod13 Nov 11 '12 at 22:13
5

Meh.

You can whip up a new OpenID and create an unlinked account on any new site pretty easily. Heck, once it moves past the closed beta, you don't even need to log in at all...

Also, I have high hopes that ol' Hedge can whip up an even more opaque name for the thing 'fore it actually gets out the door.

  • 13
    I don't think a common stackexchange user should be assumed to know this. As the diversity of stackexchange grows, a larger and larger percentage of the user base will feel that the site is magically recognizing you. Hell, it might even frighten people away. Just like walking down the street with your family and having a bouncer of a strip joint calling you out using your first name.... and then some time afterwards you realize that it was a guy from the gym. – Tormod Oct 31 '11 at 9:38
  • 2
    This is actually a much-requested feature, though for slightly different reasons: We've discussed this in the past at Information Security that disclosing your identity can, in certain scenarios, be a real vulnerability. At the time, we decided the same, though it's not quite ideal. – AviD Nov 3 '11 at 11:50
  • 5
    Given the nature of the multi-site-login (via stackauth) this is annoyingly annoying. You have to log out of all sites, then log in with your openID. If you want to go back to the other account, you have to log out everywhere again, then log in to the other account. There should be an easier way to manage this so that you can use one account on one site, and another on the other site without ever having to log in or out of the SE network as a whole. – Adam Davis Dec 19 '11 at 16:54
  • 3
    +1 to Adam. Ideally, I'd like to have one OpenID, and be able to designate specific sites as "anonymize", or at least some smarter way to handle the switching between IDs. – Jonathan Van Matre Dec 19 '11 at 20:15
  • Interestingly, @Adam, this was easily possible at one point... Folks got horribly confused, didn't use it when they meant to (almost never), did use it when they didn't mean to (all too often), and never understood it. So it went away. If you have a bright idea for making this easy and not at all confusing (especially to the folks for whom "openID" is already a scary and mildly annoying concept), you should write it up... – Shog9 Dec 21 '11 at 2:06
  • 2
    It would be great to get assoc bonus, but with anonymization. – hexafraction Nov 8 '12 at 0:04

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .