Name change drama

[Ⓐaron]

Because Scott evidently cannot comply with our very simple aka field requirements even after being directly instructed to do so through multiple channels, his name has been changed back to his most frequently known name. Staff will furthermore refuse further name change requests from him for the next month. I regret that it has had to come down to this, but requirements are requirements and he has deliberately flouted them.

 

[Sheva Alomar]

Because Scott evidently cannot comply with our very simple aka field requirements even after being directly instructed to do so through multiple channels, his name has been changed back to his most frequently known name. Staff will furthermore refuse further name change requests from him for the next month. I regret that it has had to come down to this, but requirements are requirements and he has deliberately flouted them.

Okay, get the fuck over yourself.

 

[Madame Mayor]

If this is the way these forums are going to start being run now, count me the fuck out.

 

[Dana Scully]

Because Scott evidently cannot comply with our very simple aka field requirements even after being directly instructed to do so through multiple channels, his name has been changed back to his most frequently known name. Staff will furthermore refuse further name change requests from him for the next month. I regret that it has had to come down to this, but requirements are requirements and he has deliberately flouted them.

If the AKA field is such a big deal, maybe rather than namechange-ban for a month you could just go in and edit the AKA field? I know the rule is that staff should not be editing people's profiles, including the AKA, but I dunno, seems more reasonable that if the person in question doesn't edit it within a couple of days just go in and change their AKA rather than ban them from changing their name.

 

[Joker]

You've got to be kidding me.

Now, I'm apparently the most boat-sitting motherfucker on this board (as voted by you, the members of TLS ), so I'm going to fulfill my duties by asking the question that's come up multiple times in the past few months with a number of people:

Aaron is supposed to be the tech admin, right? Fixing issues and stuff, as opposed to active moderation?

Why, then, are we having this discussion/issue when the forum is still acting up (or at all, honestly)? When did it become policy to just do whatever you feel like it because someone doesn't comply with requests, as opposed to simply updating the forum rules weeks ago when the aka field thing first came up, which would most certainly have solved this "problem" to begin with?

Not to mention the fact that everyone knows Scott on sight, which makes me wonder why it's of such earth-shaking importance that he add *literally* one character to his AKA field. Does anyone else take such exception to it? Is it that big a deal to everyone? I mean, I don't sit around wondering who people are because I don't instantly recognize their usernames, and then think "GOD THIS MAKES ME SO MAD IT'S SUCH A BIG DEAL TO ME AND TOTALLY MORE IMPORTANT THAN TROLLING THE WEB FOR FUCKTONS OF REALLY DEPRESSING AND NEGATIVE NEWS STORIES" (which, btw, might explain why you always feel down, dude).

tl;dr: this is pants on head fucking retarded. And I echo Brooke's sentiments.

 

[Rumpelstiltskin]

Because Scott evidently cannot comply with our very simple aka field requirements even after being directly instructed to do so through multiple channels, his name has been changed back to his most frequently known name. Staff will furthermore refuse further name change requests from him for the next month. I regret that it has had to come down to this, but requirements are requirements and he has deliberately flouted them.

SAD

 

[Madame Mayor]

I was also under the impression that the rule was 'Staff don't edit people's shit' and 'Users should keep their aka field up to date'. Key word there is 'should'. Not a rule. Not something you get banned or warned for. Are we going to start changing people's stuff if they have the wrong sex or birthday or location?

Point of the matter is aka field is part of our personal expression on these forums. I leave mine as Brooke because that's how people know me best. Will I change it to add Deadpool on my next name change? Maybe, maybe not, but the choice is mine. No one gets hurt by not knowing every person on these boards when they post. If you get so upset by it, take the two seconds to look at their profile, or their signature, or one of the other dozens of identifiable things. If you still don't know the person, then who the fuck cares?

 

[Joe]

Scott lives outside of the law.

Also I agree with Brooke. Carry on like this and I'm out.

 

[Dana Scully]

If you get so upset by it, take the two seconds to look at their profile, or their signature, or one of the other dozens of identifiable things. If you still don't know the person, then who the fuck cares?

Plus they could always, ya know, ask the person directly who the fuck they are.

 

[Rumpelstiltskin]

Scott lives outside of the law.

I AM THE LAW!

It's hardly rocket science to check the person's profile to check on who they are, ya know seeing as how that is what they are for and all that jazz.

 

[Joker]

http://thelifestream.net/forums/showthread.php?t=7618

Most of these points are made in this thread.

By...someone.

 

[Alex]

Usernames are pretty irrelevant for most of us considering we just refer to each other by our IRL names anyway.

 

[Tifabelle]

I probably shouldn't get involved, but I'm going to chime in on this.

The idea of the AKA thread is more to help new people rather than the old folks. At least that's the impression I'm under. So while you may say, "yeah I can tell who it is", new people or guests might not be able to.

That being said. I know we had this discussion a while back and it was said that users need to update the AKA field with each name change. What I don't remember being discussed was what the consequences would be if you didn't. It was never said that a person would be "banned" from name changes, nor was there a time frame discussed where you have X amount of time to update it before being banned. And if this rule was agreed upon by staff, then the userbase should have been alerted to it.

Now I have another question. I know aaron has been reminding people in this thread after he's changed his name. Was Scott sent a PM that said, "you need to update it or we're reverting your name back and not allowing you to change names for a while."? If so, then he was given fair warning, so this shouldn't come as a total surprise. If not, then it seems unfair to not express what the consequences (or that there even are any) are to the userbase.

That doesn't mean I agree with this "rule". Because I don't. (And I am all about following da rules XD ) While I do agree with the idea of keeping an AKA field up-to-date for newbies or guests, I do think that this is a bit extreme. I think Yaccy had it right when she said that changing a person's AKA field rather than banning them would be better. However, I know that people were opposed to this as well, so even though it seems less extreme, I think people would still be unhappy with that.

In the end, while I strongly think that the AKA field should be reasonably up-to-date (and putting in your latest username is not an unreasonable request), I think that reverting usernames or "banning from name changes" doesn't seem to be in the spirit of these forums.

 

[Joker]

Because new users are familiar with our more recent and most common usernames, on account of them being new users?

Agree with the general sentiment expressed, but the logic behind it (which you're explaining, I know, so it's not a thing with you ) is silly and ridiculous.

It's also worth noting that most new members don't stick around beyond a week or two - and I somehow rather doubt it's because of people's usernames. xD

 

[Addison]

Maybe, sometimes, people have things that just keep them off? I don't think that it's got anything to do with user names, myself.

*is a lurker mostly*

 

[Super Mario]

Oh aaron, sorry to burst your bubble but I don't like how you're taking this AKA field too seriously. Drop it and leave my people (This extends to the new ones as well) alone please, we are like one big community of a family that I've come to love and I hate to see it torn apart by your 'strict' uptight rules. I don't want TLS to go down as another FCF because of your pretentious need to change people's profiles, not grant them name changes, and out right intimidate them with ban or whatever you have in power.


So please kindly, back off this matter and let things go the way it is. People don't need to argue over this if you just let them be and we all already know each other long enough to not need silly matters like these ruin the vibe this forum has got going. Don't alienate yourself by acting like this or whatnot and learn to respect other people's spaces, a little decency can go a long way. ; /

 

[Tifabelle]

Oh I definitely don't think it keeps people away. XD I think it's just more for their convenience.

Because new users are familiar with our more recent and most common usernames, on account of them being new users?

Yeah. So once a username has been gone a while, I think it's fine to remove it from the AKA field.

And keep in mind that while the Dessies almost always have their character art in their signature, not everyone does. So sometimes when people do name changes they do change their icon and signature as well (and sometimes even font color).

 

[Joker]

...no, that was sarcasm New users won't know our most common or recent usernames, on account of the fact that they haven't been around to know what they are

also as long as I see Tifabelle in your aka field, I'm obviously going to know who you are, because derp I can remember things like that, as can the average person xD

 

[Dana Scully]

Really, as long as a person has one name in their AKA field that's always there (unless that's their current username) I don't think it's really necessary to update the AKA field with every single name.

I mean Kimble has ALWAYS had Omega either as his username or in his AKA field. I wouldn't need him to put any other name in there to know who he is.

 

[Tifabelle]

...no, that was sarcasm New users won't know our most common or recent usernames, on account of the fact that they haven't been around to know what they are

oh. lol XD Well, I was just thinking that people tend to lurk before they sign up. idk, I just remember when I was new, I had trouble figuring out a few people. Especially when sometimes people use other people's real names and I didn't know who they were XD

also as long as I see Tifabelle in your aka field, I'm obviously going to know who you are, because derp I can remember things like that, as can the average person xD

Yeah, and I can easily get rid of the other ones - certainly Bloody Mary since that was a while ago, and people probaby don't even remember when I had that name

 

[Joker]

Also, sometimes a bunch of things in the AKA makes it all cluttered. For example, Kris (his current UN is Kyon, as I recall); he has actually hit the maximum character limit for the AKA field and it's just like EXPLOSION

 

[Zee]

The main purpose of the aka field should be whatever the poster prefers to be known as. Most of the people (like me) who change themes a lot keep their most common known username in their field so I don't see why it's a problem.

bleh I currently have a bunch of usernames in my field that I'd like to clear out so people can just easily refer to me as Zee/Lee/Leora whatever

...........i wish my work computer wasn't so slow oops

 

[Tifabelle]

Also, sometimes a bunch of things in the AKA makes it all cluttered. For example, Kris (his current UN is Kyon, as I recall); he has actually hit the maximum character limit for the AKA field and it's just like EXPLOSION

Well, yes. I do think it can get out of hand.

I'm not saying OMG YOU HEATHEN YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT EVERY TIME. I'm just saying I don't think it's an unreasonable request in exchange for the priveledge to have our names changed as often as we like.

Although I suppose as long as there is at least one consistent name that is always in your AKA field, it should serve its purpose. Because even if you change your name everyday, you will have that unchanging AKA for people to identify you by.

 

[Ⓐaron]

Scott was told to update his username field three times, and was given over two weeks to do so. The last time he was told to update it, he responded by changing his aka field to "Chuck Norris," which would be no help to anyone. All he actually had to do was put "L" or "Scott" in there and the requirement would have been satisfied. But he did neither. He was given his name change solely provisionally on the condition that he would comply with the aka field requirements within a reasonable amount of time. Since he did not do so, he has had his name change undone.

Many of you seem to be under the mistaken impression that user name changes on this board are a right. They're not. They're a privilege. Many message boards don't even allow user name changes more than once a year. As long as users comply with our very simple aka field requirements (leave something that will enable users who haven't kept track of the latest name changes to identify you), you are allowed to change your username as often as you want. If you are unwilling to comply with the requirements, you do not get the privilege of having your name changed at will. Users who do not visit the forum every day should not be forced to ask someone what their identity is. The aka field is there for a reason and if a person for some reason thinks they don't need to identify themselves in it, then we don't need to comply with their name change requests.

Now I'm perfectly willing to concede that disallowing name changes for a month is probably a bit draconian, but we have to do something, and we are disallowing him a name change for less than two days for every day he has not complied with the aka field requirements (which, by the way, he still isn't in compliance with). It's gotten absurd. I'll be willing to lower the time Scott can't have his name changed to a number of days equal to the number of days it takes him to finally update his aka field to something compliant with our rules if people really find it that offensive, but we gave him three chances and more than two weeks to comply with a very simple demand and not only did he not comply with it but he deliberately disobeyed it. Use of the aka field has never been an option when it comes to name changes; it's always been a requirement. If this is going to be such a source of drama then we can just stop performing name changes at all until people learn to deal with it.

Also, I've never been "just a tech admin" since I rejoined staff, and this was a decision made by several staff members after discussion had been open for a week.

 

[Joe]

I didn't realise that not running a tight ship on a message board would cause the universe to implode.