rols
Experienced member
- Messages
- 1,621
- Likes
- 336
why are members changing their nicks ?
dd
I echo Tony. Changing nicks ain't fooling anybody.
"What's in a name? That which we call a turd
By any other name would smell as sweet."
why are members changing their nicks ?
dd
It just makes more work for my ignore button.
That's rich coming from you Socrates....
OK, so does anyone actually see any value in name changes? Nika and I discussed it, but were under the impression everyone was quite attached to them.
The only purpose I can see for them are 1) lulz, 2) because the lulz weren't so luly and you are trying to distance yourself from them or 3) there's a genuine security and safety issue.
Are people genuinely not attached to name changes? they are kinda a pain in the rump for everyone involved.
Jodh.
p.s. the ignore list automatically updates when names do change.
And that would be....?
Compromise is what people do when they have no clear idea what they really want or if they do, no real passion to achieve it, and the result is a muddy-brown mixture that satisfies nobody.It does not matter to me, it seems to matter to you. Why not live and let live by way of a compromise?
Agreed.That handles t2w admin position on the basis for a name change (sort of...).
What about addressing the apparently wider need of the non-psychotic t2w community to know who was who and who is who?
Regardless of the why, there still seems to be a need in many to know the 'who was' regardless of the why..
The problem with this Tony, I suspect, is that it's essentially the same as multi-nicking - is it not? Even if membership 'history' attached to the profile of the new name, it will artificially inflate the size of the forum.Alternatively, if folk feel that strongly about a name change - let them completely drop the past, leave that nick and all its posts etc dead in the water and take a new nick and start from scratch?