> I AM REALLY NOT SURE WHY "cha" is aceptable to "ch"
> - Would you please explain it.
Fundamentally, because "cha" looks like it could actually be a complete last name, and "Ch" does not. In fact I have a co-worker whose last name is "Cha". I've never met, nor do I expect to meet, anyone whose last name is "Ch".
In Dip's defense, I don't think the written policy is quite as clear as Thomas says. Let's look at the actual text:
> For your user name, use a first name,
> a space and a last name.
By saying a
first name and a
last name, rather than "your", we're implicitly acknowledging that the user name need have no connection whatsoever to one's actual name.
> No commas or underscores, and the last name must be more than
> one letter.
Clear enough. Dip obeyed this - the problem appears to be that he thought these explicit rules were the complete set. But on the next line...
> Obviously fictitious names or improperly formatted names may
> be locked out.
This is the key part. What constitutes "obviously fictitious"? The longer form
of our name policy does explicitly acknowledge that shortened forms of names can be acceptable. (E.g. Maha Anna.) So I don't think it was at all unreasonable for Dip to think that "Ch" might be a valid name, given these rules. As it turns out, most all the moderators (including myself) think it's too
"obviously fictitious". No, we never thought to explicitly put in a rule requiring a vowel, mostly because I don't think anyone had previously attempted such a minimal adherence to our stated rules. Usually people either don't read the rules at all (all too often), or they choose a username which looks like a real name. If we increase the complexity of the rules, we'll just increase the size of the first group at the expense of the second.
The thing is - we'd really like to encourage as many people as possible to use their real names here. We recognize that we can't get everyone to do so, because (a) we can't really verify if people are using real names or not, in most cases, and (b) some people are legitimately uncomfortable about releasing personal information in a public forum. Fine. In this case we ask people to please adopt aliases which look
like real names, and do not encourage too many other people to adopt even-more-fake-looking names. There will always be some gray areas here, no matter how we define our rules, but for the most part people have been pretty understanding when we inform them that their names are too fictitious for our taste. We're open to suggestions as to how we can improve this process - but please remember that we're all volunteers here, and don't respond too well to demands.
> 2.How to let a person know that one has created a new identity
> so the previous one may be removed- No answer to that also.
Unfortunately one of the limitations of the UBB software which we utilize here is that users cannot edit their usernames, nor can they delete their accounts. However it's usually no problem if users simply create a new account - there's no real need to delete the old one. Except
that if the user later forgets their password and tries to get the system to mail it to their registered e-mail address, UBB balks if there is more than one account with the same address. (I'm not sure why the UBB designers thought this was a desireable security feature, but we're stuck with it.) At this point the user usually sends mail to firstname.lastname@example.org
(me), and I delete their old account for them, which allows them to receive the password for their remaining account. I can also do this for anyone who asks me to before
they forget their password - I just deleted "dip dh" for you. Usually though it's easier not to bother until it becomes an issue for a person.
Dip, I'm sorry we seem to have gotten off on the wrong foot, and I hope you will continue to participate at JavaRanch. Cheers...
[This message has been edited by Jim Yingst (edited July 28, 2001).]