Posts: 33277
Threads: 1417
Joined: March 15, 2013
Reputation:
152
RE: Can we seriously change this "User formerly known as" bollocks?
November 5, 2015 at 10:48 pm
(November 5, 2015 at 10:45 pm)Tiberius Wrote: Yes but if someone has a good reason for changing it within that time frame we'll allow it, so in some circumstances a user might have multiple names per year.
If they have a good reason for changing it, shouldn't the change be anonymous?
I could understand if one was abusing the system, but do you not have your own implements in place to ensure that one must provide a good reason to allow a name change outside of the 365 day rule?
Therefore, I fail to see to what you are referring since there is no reasoning behind it.
"Never trust a fox. Looks like a dog, behaves like a cat."
~ Erin Hunter
Posts: 14932
Threads: 684
Joined: August 25, 2008
Reputation:
143
RE: Can we seriously change this "User formerly known as" bollocks?
November 5, 2015 at 10:57 pm
Why should it be anonymous? The entire point of showing previous names is so that people know who they are talking to.
Chuck changed his name recently and wants to make a minor change because he misspelt his username, but it still makes sense to have "Chuck" in his previous usernames still, as most people know him by that name.
Posts: 33277
Threads: 1417
Joined: March 15, 2013
Reputation:
152
RE: Can we seriously change this "User formerly known as" bollocks?
November 5, 2015 at 11:32 pm
My point is that logically it is a waste of code space.
Considering that one can only change his name once a year.
I can understand using it as a means of recognition so that we cannot misconstrue a member due to a name change, but even then we always recognize each other because we spend enough time here getting to know one another.
"Never trust a fox. Looks like a dog, behaves like a cat."
~ Erin Hunter
Posts: 43162
Threads: 720
Joined: September 21, 2008
Reputation:
133
RE: Can we seriously change this "User formerly known as" bollocks?
November 5, 2015 at 11:41 pm
I love the way it is now. It's perfect.
 to Tibs.
Posts: 14932
Threads: 684
Joined: August 25, 2008
Reputation:
143
RE: Can we seriously change this "User formerly known as" bollocks?
November 6, 2015 at 12:02 am
(November 5, 2015 at 11:32 pm)Kitan Wrote: My point is that logically it is a waste of code space.
Considering that one can only change his name once a year.
I can understand using it as a means of recognition so that we cannot misconstrue a member due to a name change, but even then we always recognize each other because we spend enough time here getting to know one another.
I just gave you an example of how a user can change their name more than once a year, so your point and your logic are both invalid. It's not a waste of code space; the forum contains hundreds of thousands of lines of code. This takes up a few at most.
You might "always recognize" people who changed their names, but not everyone does. The main reason I thought it would be a good feature is because I came back to the forums after a short absence and found that a load of users had changed their names. Rather than have other people suffer the same confusion I did, I thought it would be simpler to have a feature which lets people know what members used to be called.
In any case, it's implemented now, and it's not going away unless there are actual major objections to it.
Posts: 33277
Threads: 1417
Joined: March 15, 2013
Reputation:
152
RE: Can we seriously change this "User formerly known as" bollocks?
November 6, 2015 at 12:05 am
But why would I take advantage of you to change it more than what is already offered?
Therefore, my logic is intact.
"Never trust a fox. Looks like a dog, behaves like a cat."
~ Erin Hunter
Posts: 14932
Threads: 684
Joined: August 25, 2008
Reputation:
143
RE: Can we seriously change this "User formerly known as" bollocks?
November 6, 2015 at 12:32 am
(November 6, 2015 at 12:05 am)Kitan Wrote: But why would I take advantage of you to change it more than what is already offered?
Therefore, my logic is intact.
Again, someone literally just did. It doesn't matter if you wouldn't. but someone just asked us to change their username and we did it. If you're interested, the logical fallacy you are committing with your argument is known as personal incredulity.
Posts: 23206
Threads: 26
Joined: February 2, 2010
Reputation:
106
RE: Can we seriously change this "User formerly known as" bollocks?
November 6, 2015 at 12:40 am
(November 5, 2015 at 8:17 pm)Tiberius Wrote: I don't think a link will suffice; people should be able to see at a glance who someone with a new username is.
The curious will click. The uncurious get what they deserve.
Posts: 23206
Threads: 26
Joined: February 2, 2010
Reputation:
106
RE: Can we seriously change this "User formerly known as" bollocks?
November 6, 2015 at 12:43 am
(November 5, 2015 at 10:48 pm)Kitan Wrote: (November 5, 2015 at 10:45 pm)Tiberius Wrote: Yes but if someone has a good reason for changing it within that time frame we'll allow it, so in some circumstances a user might have multiple names per year.
If they have a good reason for changing it, shouldn't the change be anonymous?
I could understand if one was abusing the system, but do you not have your own implements in place to ensure that one must provide a good reason to allow a name change outside of the 365 day rule?
Therefore, I fail to see to what you are referring since there is no reasoning behind it.
Cat-herding 101. Pay attention, folks.
Posts: 23206
Threads: 26
Joined: February 2, 2010
Reputation:
106
RE: Can we seriously change this "User formerly known as" bollocks?
November 6, 2015 at 12:49 am
(November 5, 2015 at 11:32 pm)Kitan Wrote: My point is that logically it is a waste of code space.
Considering that one can only change his name once a year.
I can understand using it as a means of recognition so that we cannot misconstrue a member due to a name change, but even then we always recognize each other because we spend enough time here getting to know one another.
Not everyone recognizes a new screenname. "Always", you say.
Logically speaking, if it doesn't affect you, why are you spending so many keystrokes on it?
And if it does affect you so deeply, why aren't you complaining here?
|
