On 11/14/02 4:11 PM, "Brion Vibber" <brion(a)pobox.com> wrote:
On Thu, 2002-11-14 at 10:40, Jimmy Wales wrote:
The Cunctator wrote:
As you can see at
http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/TMC%27s_sysop_request
I basically agree, but I'll ask you to consider a more scalable resolution;
that is, have the Recent Changes etc. display the nickname only, and enforce
innocuousness of the nickname.
Is the nickname actually in the database? (Forgive my cluelessness on
this point.) Or is the nickname just whatever someone happens to
write?
An optional nickname can be set in the user preferences (so it's stored
in the chunk o' options in the user table, but not in a conveniently
accessible fashion). Its sole purpose is to appear as the text of a user
page link in ~~~-signings in talk pages.
Showing the nickname *everywhere* would make the independent existence
of the username both pointless and confusing.
That's its sole current purpose, but why should the nickname only appearing
on talk pages be any less confusing?
The tagging of RecentChanges and revision edits with the username can be
seen as equivalent to signing comments on the userpages. I don't think it's
inherently confusing.
The majority of people don't use a nickname, so this change wouldn't even be
an issue for the majority of the people.
I'm not saying this is a perfect idea; I just don't think its consequences
would be mass confusion, and it certainly wouldn't be pointless.
Why not? Because we can't perfectly adjudicate the inoffensiveness of
usernames. People have even thought that my username is vulgar.
The downside, as I see it, is more one of added complexity, and possibly
just shunting off an issue that will come back later. But I'm not going to
panic about unpredictable future possibilities.