|
For new members it's hard to get a display name that's your actual name. Almost impossible. However, we have tons of members who really don't care if their name is the same as someone else's name.
I was thinking that it could be interesting to open up Display Names so that you can choose whatever name you want, even if it's been taken by someone else, with a small cavet: If you haven't contributed a message or article, question or answer, your display name is plain text and it will be displayed in gray.
Each time you contribute, or each time you change your name, your name is checked against the list and if you're account is the only account with that name that has made a contribution then your name is yours and is unlocked to accept HTML, and will (by default) be displayed in a dark font.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: it will be displayed in gray.
Cool, someone could be Gandalf the grey. 
|
|
|
|
|
and if they write an article, they could be Gandalf the White.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
I'd be inclined to restrict all display names to plain text. Are there any good examples of HTML display names?
Letting users choose and use display names which are already in use could easily cause confusion. Imagine how many spam posts we'll get from "Chris Maunder"! Even without the radioactive Bob icon on the post, we might still fall for it.
You could try adding a counter or member ID after the name, but after a couple of pages of arguments between "Chris Maunder 3276412" and "Chris Maunder 3267412", would anyone be able to keep track?
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: Imagine how many spam posts we'll get from "Chris Maunder"!
We'll just ban that guy... nobody likes him anyway...  
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: Imagine how many spam posts we'll get from "Chris Maunder"!
That's the point though: to make anything posted by the not-real-me to be clearly from not me.
|
|
|
|
|
And letting people set their display name to "Chris Maunder" (ignoring @jeron1[^]'s "Chris<space><space>Maunder" trick) will make it easier to spot that they aren't you? 
Eminem didn't write:
I'm Chris Maunder, yes, I'm the real Maunder!
All you other Chris Maunders can just take a wander.
So would the real Chris Maunder please stand up?
Please stand up. Please stand up.
I've already got my coat.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: (ignoring @jeron1[^]'s "Chris<space><space>Maunder" trick)
Oh, there is a far better trick to become a Maunder
Veni, vidi, caecus
|
|
|
|
|
Does it involve zero-width spaces, or do you have to marry into the family? 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
|
I always thought the Swiss were sneakier than they appear to be. 
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
Damnit, that was hilarious.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: Are there any good examples of HTML display names?
yes
|
|
|
|
|
Who? 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: I'd be inclined to restrict all display names to plain text. Are there any good examples of HTML display names?
That gets my five.
[edit] Or it would, if an error wasn't preventing it [/edit]
Richard Deeming wrote: Letting users choose and use display names which are already in use could easily cause confusion. Imagine how many spam posts we'll get from "Chris Maunder"! Even without the radioactive Bob icon on the post, we might still fall for it.
Then simply display duplicate names in a different colour, or in italics. If non-dupe names are plain text, then the dupes'll stand out as dupes.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: You could try adding a counter or member ID after the name [...]
I think this would be the much better way to solve the problem of letting users choose the name they want.
May be a little reference to the Battle.net of Blizzard; they let users choose the name they want but add automatically a hash <#> followed by a random (at least I guess so) 4 digit number. So all users, even with the same name, have unique Displaynames.
|
|
|
|
|
I think it makes more sense to 'retire' accounts that haven't been active at all for (say) 3 years. That way you free up display names of people who really aren't here, without getting into a position of allowing clashes of active members, or silly games (for example imagine Griff decided he wanted to troll me, he could set his name to mine and he would get priority as he's made more contributions lately).
|
|
|
|
|
But some legends, like Luc, who haven't contributed lately shouldn't be affected.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe some sort of sliding scale: if you have less than 1K rep points, your account is retired after 18 months of inactivity; 10K for five years; 100K for 10 years; etc.
Of course, that means Griff's account would still be alive and kicking at the heat-death of the universe. 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Christian will be the only one left to wave goodbye to him! 
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wow! That shows how much attention I've been giving rep points! You almost think that Griff was one of the Founding Sheep Shaggers Members! 
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Wright wrote: That shows how much attention I've been giving rep points!
Ditto! I didn't even know or care that that link existed. Now, all I have to do is increase mine by 300 times to rival Griff's!
|
|
|
|
|
I've been around for over 9 years now and unless you get a ton of up votes your points don't rise very quickly.
|
|
|
|
|
With an average of 37 messages per year, I'm not surprised!
I've posted an average of 210 messages per year, most of which have been utter rubbish.
Griff's posted an average of 5547 per year, almost all of which involve sheep. Plus an average of 2669 QA answers per year. Not forgetting 2245 comments, 12 tips, and 1 article.
The point is, the more time you waste spend on the site, the more points you're likely to pick up. And when you get more points, you get ... well, a higher score. Which is nice. If you like that sort of thing.
If it makes you feel any better, open your profile page[^] and press Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
