bobo's just upset that there haven't been any Chocodonations lately.

SOMEBODY SEND HIM SOME MONEY. WE NEED THIS FEATURE AGAIN.

Consistancy. What a crock. You want consistancy? You can turn the display off! Sheesh.

And I'm being honest, the customizable username is one of the sexiest feature you couldnt find anywhere in other forum. :(

I'm sorry, that's a straw man. I don't agree with bobo's removing the feature, but you can't equate something like that with avatars or signatures. Virtually all vBulletin boards have customizable avs and sigs, so if I register at a new board, it's expected that I will understand it. Customizable names, however, are something else.

I also take a notice, when this feature was pulled down, suddenly bobo also changed our gender into asexuals.:edgartpg: Is that punishment bonus?

No that is a temporary fix to a problem with the gender icons.

Actually, it's been this way for a while. Blah just fixed the icons so that everybody is this way to make it look like something is there. Has nothing to do with bobo.

PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO CHANGE THEIR AVATARS, GENDERS, TITLES AND SIGNATURES. IT'S TOO CONFUSING. I mean, WHOA, THIS GUY HAS A NEW TITLE, HE MUST BE SOMEONE ELSE NOW AND IT'S NOT AS IF I CAN JUST VIEW HIS PROFILE TO CHECK WHO HE IS.

CAPITAL LETTERS

Yes! We all know bobo is man of consistency!

Like how he's consistently never here, except for that one week of inconsistency where he is here!

This feature was fairly awesome. I can understand Bobo's reason for taking it down, but I sure as hell don't agree. I think this feature entirely fitted the character of GFF, and I'm really dissapointed that it got taken down.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to make a post that would require someone to pull out their fancy debate terms on me. My point was that his argument was weak, and I emphasized that point with an extreme and unrealistic example.

His point that he wants a consistent username is valid, until you take into account the hundreds of theme weeks with member name changes, other member name changes and the fact that the feature was not board-wide and easily disabled, as has been said before.

Anyway, if you don't agree with the decision as you say...why did you vote against it?

I was actually wondering why nobody was changing their name anymore to the utter confuddlement of me, until I tried to change my signature and found this strange feature in the menu.

"How useless, and that just encourages people to change their name", I thought, but then I noticed it was optional. "Hey, that kinda makes sense. I don't get bothered with their community bonding experience stuff anymore, and they can change their names every other post. Everybody wins!"

Having said that, I would prefer if people would just stop changing their names altogether. But that's just me.

But you just said before that, that everbody wins.

Yeah, that's true, that's why I said I don't agree with removing the feature. I was using it myself, so how could I say that I didn't like it?

I just liked the way that option was worded.

Thanks, Aardy. =)

Oh fuck, you're right. He wanted to make money off of name changes, but never bothered to tell anyone. :(

Well shit, if he wants to make some :10bux: features I'll pay for them if they're actually worth it. Fuck.

More like, let's pay Blah to add new features.

That way, we'd actually see new features.

Yeah, you fucking DICK. COMPLETELY RUINED NOW ALLYOURFAULT

Okay. Here's my two cents--if anyone cares.

I NEVER participated in a name-change week for a few reasons:

1) The admins would have to change the name, and when you have half of GFF participating, they'd go crazy. Remember Miles' going nuts? "I'm NOT doing this again!"

2) For god's sake, even using Password Manager, I'd have to login at least once, and I'd probably forget it.

3) Searching for members was a pain in the ass. No one was who they should be.

I particiapted in this one because the display was optional. No admin had to change it, I didn't have to remember a new Logon, and searching for people was a snap.

Bobo, I can understand where you're coming from, but isn't this a community? A group of us were united in changing our names, but instead of hassling the admins about this--first when the event began and second when it would end--we were able to change it ourselves. And the option to display names can be turned off.

And how is the option to display names any different than the option to display signatures?

Personally, I think this is much ado over something inconsequential. Buut, be that as it may, the feature was harmless and completely reversible. So, aye.

Is it possible yet to find out what the "catch" bobo mentioned earlier is about the display names?

My personal guess is that they'll be time-limited this time around.

Mo0, I believe Miles said something about this feature only being activated during board wide theme chains.

I don't quite understand exactly why ANY restrictions should be put on display names. After reading over Bobo's responses in various areas on the issue, I can't help but think Bobo doesn't even understand how the feature works.

Bobo has said he want's to minimize "clicks." That's a retarded reason in itself, but we'll go with it. The feature is disabled upon registration of an account, so the real actual username of someone is still displayed in plain view, not obstructed by any sort of access system such as clicking an avatar.

Bobo has also said he want's consistancy. The best counter to that would be how GFF has allowed theme weeks and name changes in the past anyways, that is permanent ones, not temp ones like display names would be. Also, of course, the feature is turned off by default to a newly registered user, so everything is still "consistant."

Any point Bobo brings up can be countered with the fact that the feature is off by default. What then is the problem here Bobo?

Arguing this any furthur would seem to be a pointless endeavor. I don't even see why you would need to change your name outside of a theme chain, anyway.

Okay, being usable only during theme weeks sounds like a reasonable compromise to me.

Taco, I'd have to say I'd avoid arguing the issue since this is the issue that caused the forums to nearly get shut down. :/