Name Changes

Members who have just recently been banned, TwCd, or DnTd should not have the right to request for a name change until a certain time limit has passed. They are just taking advantage of the system and I believe @Sythe didn't want to bring name changes to Sythe.org for a long time because of this very reason. You shouldn't be able to escape your past mistakes until you've proven that you are no longer a threat to the community.

What do you all think?

 

Not sure why this isn't already a rule lol, sickening seeing dnt's trying to change their name. Essentially trying to start a fresh after they pardon when we know full well they're nothing but a shit stain on this site. Bus shouldn't have been granted that name change lol

 

Should already be a rule imo. Support this so that its in writing

 

Would support this tbh. People associate things like DNTs/TWCs with a name and giving people the ability to change that deflects the negative attention. Cases like Bus' literally make me SICK!

 

No taking things into "consideration" just opens up bias we want a clear cut ruling, not you saying no to tom dick and Harry because he's got a poor forum presence. Treat everyone the same that way you won't have people bitching that their request wasn't accepted.

 

Support this. Alias changes shouldn't be granted to people convicted of a "crime".

 

Huge support for this. Everything in regards to the reasoning to me supporting this has already been mentioned above, but to add onto it there's really no good intention for anyone to name change immediately coming off a DNT / TWC / Ban. Sure it could just be a coincidence that someone wants to request a new name coming off that, but a majority of the time it's just so their reports will never link back to them, so every new user that hasn't seen them before thinks they're extremely innocent. In the situation with Bus, he saw the tons of negativity / backlash that occurred after the recent temporary ban he received, and most likely requested this immediately coming off of the ban as an attempt to run away from those issues. That's just my perspective on it, but I know majority of others feel the same way. This should've been implemented a long time ago to prevent this from happening, but yeah hopefully it's implemented in the near future.

 

This was indeed accepted, but this was already a rule; albeit, through the "account just be in good standing." We have since fleshed it out with specifics which was definitely needed.

Thanks Dank, HHN, and everyone else