Name changes

long story short, the names are now far shorter, easier to remember, and more professional than they were originally , thus justifying the need for the change. Names of staff members should be short, memorable, and easy to call up in case they are needed. These name changes accomplished just that. i would at this point like to politely ask that the subject be dropped, or at the very least, moved to its own dedicated thread.

apologies for the lack in grammar/punctuation and such. Posted this from my phone through teamviewer to my pc.

 

Name changes for general users are not allowed for two reasons.

1. It allows users to unfairly cover up their past identities and stigma associated with themselves.
2. It allows administrators to reap rewards from giving out name changes by monopolizing the service (corruption).

We've learned this the hard way in the past and we won't make that mistake again.

The only person who is allowed to give out name changes is Sythe, and he will only give name changes to staff members whose names are not appropriate for staff.

 

Quite the contrary in fact, i was going to complement your activity!

Indeed, Ive never understood the debate that arises when STAFF get their names changed to shorter or more memorable wors/phrases.

The effort that went into that post...

 

It doesn't pose as much of a security risk as you think. The user's post content and user ID does not change. In fact, letting people edit their posts in the trade sections could cause more damage. I definitely would like the issue to be look into rather than put behind us. Ignoring something a lot of users want doesn't necessarily make the issue go away. We're in a community with aliases, and our interests in those aliases changes since many of us have been here for a prolonged period of time. The most mature way to handle it would be a plugin where all of the user's previous aliases are listed on the profile. Of course, this would be a headache in vB 3.6, but I would definitely ask on behalf of a large portion of the community for you guys to consider it when you (eventually) move to vB4.

Preventing means of corruption does not alter the corrupt. Going by your statement, we could also say title changes and username images allow staff members to monopolize the service. Firstly, I'm sure people of such a high stature would not risk losing their position over a few dollars for a name change. Secondly, monopolizing the service actually seems like a terrific idea. It stops most people from ill intentions in being interested in name changes as they have to invest money, and it helps the website by supporting it monetarily.

 

This^
It's been talked about too many times...
Staff can change their names if unprofessional, normal members can't. That's how it is.

As for the recent staff name changes:
superman123321 - Superman - His name is now tidier and who ever typed the 123321 in anyway?

noamyoungerm - Noam - When asked to pronounce his name in IRC, 2 people got it right, he wanted it changed so people can pronounce it. Problem solved.

shoopadoop - Shoop - shoopadoop sounded stupid.


No more talking about name changes, it isn't feedback to any of the staff, so it will be considered spam.

 

Its been explained 5000 times.

 

Although its been explained over 9000 times, its also an issue that has popped up over 9000 times. Maybe Richard should have a look at this and see how sythe members really feel about name changes.

Also, I see mods fighting for (mod only) name changes, however they are bias since most have had name changes.

Anyway, I have reopened this thread for now, as its still being discussed.

 

I still stand by this. Staff members have always been allowed name changes in order to obtain a "More Professional" name. EVERY one of the recent name changes has been to a more professional name. The names have been shortened and made easier to spell and remember.

I'm all for getting further input from Richard on this matter, but regardless of how you look at it, the recent name changes ALL fall under the guidelines for changes.

The names weren't even "Changed" -- They were merely shortened. I personally don't see why there's so much of an uproar over the shortening of STAFF names, when, all through the history of sythe, staff have ALWAYS been allowed to have their names changed to something shorter and more professional.

 

If it provides such a risk to the point it may cover up past problems/situations why not note it when a user has their name changed? Note their past problems etc. This thread is a joke, it's not even that big of a deal. I wouldn't even consider it a problem.

 

This is how it is and how it always will be. Regular users are in no need of a professional username - If they want one, they can just go ahead and create another account to replace their previous one. It's been this way ever since I joined the site and I don't see any reason to change it.

 

@n4n0 and blupig

Perhaps you weren't here or have forgotten but name changes weren't always so easily given out. A couple years ago, it was near impossible to get a name change, The Viper 000 and nathan' just being two examples off the top of my head. Both wanted minor changes to their names and both were denied on several occasions. Nathan' gave up on a name change and tried using a User Image without the apostrophe and was told this was strictly prohibited. Up until a couple of years ago name changes only occurred to those who were very privileged, even if unfair. Sythe or Matthew (I forget which one) told all staff that name changes would not happen anymore. However, over the years with different admins, name changes slipped out more and more frequently.

This doesn't seem like a big deal to most mods, but we have to look at the situation in the regular member's (and old staff's) point of view. IMO mods shouldn't have special treatment, and we should have to follow the rules and guidelines just as everyone else.

 

People need to stop begging for name changes, the current system with name changes is perfectly fine. Sure i sometimes want to change my name but when creating your sythe account you shouldnt have been retarted and chosen a stupid name. With mods changing their names its understandable because its so much easier to remember as well as say. So no support for anyone other then mods asking for name changes.

 

This was exactly what I was thinking. The point Austin is trying to make is even back when they were much stricter, I assume Matthew decided to make it even stricter to get a name change after the Ricky incident. All nonstaff now can't get a name change. Yet these days I've been seeing name changes coming up more than I've ever really seen.

I'm starting to see being promoted to a moderator as a free pass to having a name change now. Just compare how hard it used to be to get a name change (Giddy's post) with today.

I'm not sure where you're getting at. If you're seeing Austin asking for one, read through the whole thread and you'll clearly see he wasn't. He's asking why it's being handed to most of the moderators, why it's easier to get approved than it used to be.

 

I think what's upsetting people is the lack of consistency. Nobody is trying to argue that rules don't change overtime, they do. But I do remember Matthew's last words on name changes were that they are to be prohibited entirely unless extreme cases of unprofessionalism arise.

Personally, I see no problem with the recent staff name changes, it just seems like the Admins aren't on the same page here. Were Sythe and/or Matthew made aware of the recent name changes? An official statement from either of them would help quell the uproar.

 

I think the main issue people have with the recent name changes, is that they feel it is 'not fair' for staff to have the option of receiving a name change, when the regular user base does not.

I disagree though. Of course, it would be completely fair if simply nobody had the option to receive a name change, under any circumstances whatsoever. But once a user joins the staff team, there is a certain degree of professionalism that is required, and also expectations to fulfill a role as a leader and a role model for other members of the community.

It is much easier to maintain an air of professionalism if you have a name that reflects that, and a name that is short, simple, easy to remember, and also easily distinguishable from other staff members and users alike. Just about all the current staff name changes are justifiable in my personal opinion as well, and I don't think there is really much point in discussing or debating this issue any further.

 

I agree with Farcast. I personally have never had a problem with name changes, but it's easy to upset people when sometimes the rules will be very strict, and then at other times they are very loose. We need to have a set policy, and it needs to be followed by everyone so people know what to expect.

 

I don't have an issue with moderators being able to change their name and us not. It makes their names easier to type, and easier to remember. Although it would be nice if we also had the option. Maybe like $50+ donators, but they have to keep their old username in their signature for a certain period of time (or their user title "Formerly Dialatic").

 

You're getting the wrong idea. Non staff, specifically Austin, doesn't want, nor asked for a name change.

He's asking how all these names got approved, they used to be harder to get a name change. Take a look at Giddy's post.

I too am wondering what happened. As farcast already mentioned, I'd love to hear an official statement from Matthew or Sythe.

 

I see no issue or problem with that the current policy is. The staff need to have a certain level of professionalism and formality, and shorter, easier to pronounce and more easy to remember usernames are almost compulsory for that. I wouldn't mind hearing something from Richard or Matthew either, but I honestly have no problem with what goes on now. If a username is changed to look more professional, then +1 to that.

 

I don't believe I am getting the wrong idea. I never said Austin was asking for a name change, nor anybody else for that matter.

I said that my feeling is that the community is suddenly riled up about this issue because people are feeling like it isn't fair that name changes are allowed for staff. Farcast worded it much better than myself when he said people are concerned about the lack of consistency - in the past it was near impossible to get a name change, yet recently they are practically being handed out like candy. Whether people are personally requesting a name change or not is besides the point, people are asking questions and likely feeling some unfairness after witnessing a rule being bent for a whole handful of staff very recently.

But the fact remains, and has been pointed out previously in both this thread and others like it, that name changes have been offered for a very long time under certain conditions and circumstances - namely the addition of a regular user to staff who has a name that is either unprofessional, abnormally long or confusing, or hard to remember.

And that leads me back to the conclusion I came to in my previous post: I don't believe this subject really needs to be discussed or debated any further. This question/concern has already been addressed, numerous times.