First Draft Narration

My persuasive argument thesis is: 

Network real-name system should not be revived as a key solution to cyber problems. 

1. What do people already know about my topic?

I think people at age around 30 or more know much about my topic because they already have experienced the network real-name system in 2004. The old will know what is real-nae system and that this system has been abolished because it is not effective. However, I think people with my age will know anything about my topic, even what the real-name system is.

2. What research has already been done about my topic?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real-name_system - I can show a brief history of the network real-name system.

http://www.betanews.net/article/550098 - This article show NYT's opinion about the network real-name system in South korea. Good example of moving readers' focus on the negative situation of network real-name system

http://www.journalism.org/2009/06/25/iran-and-twitter-revolution/ - Iranian's uprising using twitter or youtube. I can mention that this network revolution could have appeared due to nonexistence of the real-name  system. 

http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~drm/papers/2013_NamesHavePower%20paris%20vn.pdf - A good research about my topic. I can mention sketchy argument on my side. 

3. What are the implications of my argument (What if I'm right? What if I'm right and people ignore me?)

Public will comfortably express their opinions against government. Internet will be a free-communication forum for public. Also not only public but the internet press will have freedom of expression and will not be pressed by government anymore. Furthermore, public don't have to worry about the leakage of their personal information.  

Since students who didn't use computer in 2002 up to 2004  don't know about network real-name system and to clarify its definition, a brief explanation  of the network real-name is needed. According to wikipedia, the  real-name system is defined as "a system in which when a user who wants to register an account on a blog, website or bulletin board system, is required to offer identification credentials including their legal name to the network service centre." Namely, this is a system that force the internet users to approve their actual identification such as their real names and register. Korea has exerted this system before. The first format of this system was specified in Public Election and Election Malpractice Prevention Act in 2004, which forced the both users and internet press to approve their identification when they updated any comments about election on the websites so that active communication on the internet between users themselves has been halted, especially political communication. Since June 28, 2009, thirty-five Korean websites have implemented a name-registration system pursuant to the newly amended Information and Communications Network Act enacted after suicide of Choi Jin-Sil. As a result of Choi Jin-Sil law, websites exerting this system has been increased to 100. However, on August 23, 2012, the Constitutional Court of Korea ruled that the system is unconstitutional, mentioning provision's violation of freedom of speech in cyberplace and its inefficiency. Through the brief history about the system, we can notice this system has experienced serious failure and we must not revive this failure again. 

"Look at the failure of South Korea. The freedom of anonymous speech is necessary to political dissidence and whistle-blowing from the inside. Network real-name system is a silly idea." New York Times argued. We have to know that this "silly"system can facilitate the corruption of actual democracy and  kick-start dictatorship, however, reversely, anonymity can make free communication among public. Post-election uprising that happened in Iran in 2009 is the case. According to a statistic from Betanews, approximately 98 percent of Iranians use twitter and according to an article, Network Real-Name System Is to be dead, Iranians could last and inform their uprising to the world using twitter and youtube,despite their government's strong censorship. How could they achieve this "twitter revolution" ? Many people owed this accomplishment to nonexistence of real-name system on twitter and youtube That's because they could join these sites freely while avoiding the government's censorship. Moreover, a network protecting foundation recall that offline anonymity to foster political speech has been upheld as a constitutional right in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm’n 514 U.S. 334, 357 (1995) with the resounding assertion that:

“Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. It thus
exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First
Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from
retaliation—and their ideas from suppression—at the hand of an
intolerant society. The right to remain anonymous may be abused
when it shields fraudulent conduct. But political speech by its
nature will sometimes have unpalatable consequences, and, in
general, our society accords greater weight to the value of free
speech than to the dangers of its misuse.”

From these examples we can say : If you want to remove "dictatorship", you have to remove "real-name systme" first!

Since Lilian Edwards and Derek McAuely from What's in a Name? Real-Name Policies and Social Networks said at a personal level, many users find a real name policy is best at annoyance and at worst a potential bar on online participation and at a practical level, the real-name policy can damage public's security, we have to prevent the real-name system from walking around our "networking" streets.