There is a name under a name!?

[Saeglopur]

as far as discussion goes I will be honest and say I personally don't like the outcome of this and I am kind of surprised to see it as well ?? I think it is going to end up being more of a tool for abuse than as an actual helpful function like it was possibly intended to be

[Taku]

So everyone is aware, we are discussing the issue with Ud and he is trying to find a great solution to the issues. The point behind this feature is actually pretty neat, and we will get there, it just needs some debugging. Please feel free to post suggestions, and keep it civil as always. We will make this idea work!

[Pught]

This has already been pointed out I'm sure... But I have 857843059 nicknames people give me. heylification, dr/stick, steeksticklystickerstickington, doctre, or for my characters kota, dak, dakky anything like that.

What if someone were to make a nickname of 'doctre', 'kota', anything of the sort and claim to be me on a side account?
this could happen so often, the whole thing just seems like a much easier and quicker way to a huge idenity crisis occuring on a daily basis.

edit: oops apparently it's being discussed
then i am done lol ;___; im just concerned.

[Taku]

Feel free to keep posting concerns and suggestions, I just didn't want people to think that this is a WHAMBAMTHANKYOUMAAM kind of feature. UD does want people to like it, or he wouldn't have put it in place.

[Bonsai]

This is not an idea I can get behind. And it seems like the overwhelming majority agrees. Even if you close the abuse holes by putting in a strict filter (filters don't work) and not allowing other people's names to be used, there are a litany of other problems.

It is very confusing to me, an adult, none the less to your typical WH user who is much younger. You can tell everyone that it is simple and just to report the name in the ()s but some users have trouble figuring out the report system at all, without adding another thing to worry about. It also makes little/no sense to report the small, subscript name when you have this BIG GIANT ONE in your face. That is the name that is going to get reported, regardless what you post on the main page that you should be reporting. Being able to change nicknames so quickly, it is going to cause a huge headache for admins tracking down the person who got reported. They will probably have to pull logs just to find out who they are looking for. They have enough to deal with, it seems unnecessary and unwise to add another layer to a difficult job in the name of 'hey, cool feature'.

Visually, it is both cluttered and unappealing. With 12-15 users in a room already, speech bubbles everywhere and such, I don't need another 15 names on my screen. Yes, the () can be turned off, but that feature doesn't work right, at least, I hope it isn't working the way you intend it to. Turning off the nicknames removes the "master" account from underneath it, leaving only the nickname under the avatar. So no, you can't keep track of users unless you have it on. Adding another layer to the confusion cake, if you do turn them off, you get the nickname under the avatar, but you get the master account name on the scroll bar.

It has been touched on already, but I will voice it too. We're adding interesting new features and gadgets that serve little/trivial purpose but we're leaving real, important things unattended to. I agree, this is UD's site and he has the right to work on whatever the heck he wants to. But keep in mind that it is the users who are paying for this site. We love getting fun new features, even if everyone doesn't enjoy them as much, but we'd so much more appreciate a stable, reliable chat site. It has been quite good lately, but it seems that every time something gets adjusted or added, the bugs come out of the woodwork and break things for a lot of people. I know this tends to happen when adjusting the code and I can deal with it. But when I find out that I've been paying to be locked out of the site for 12 hours yesterday to implement a trivial feature, it doesn't make me feel too good. I know I am not the only one that experienced this and it is really poor customer service.

Exactly my thoughts. I really don't like this idea at all. >.<

[Hiccup]

The only reason I wouldn't like it is because of impersonators and trolls. But, that's being looked into, so. I like it, lol.

[Colo]

The thing is, we already have impersonators and trolls, they abused usernames. I understand the dislike for this feature, it was implemented in what feels like a rush with little development but we are working on it and it should be ironed out soon. Developing ways so that users who have no care to see nicknames aren't affected is something we want to do.

[Redrum]

Is there... a possibility for a filter? Perhaps admin names from all sites can't be used, as well as swears/racial slurs? That would help a little at least.

[Colo]

That has already been suggested to UD :)

[Redrum]

Oh good. I would love that, it would definitely help over at CPI..

[Mimichi]

Shouldn't things have been ironed out before this new thing was implemented though? @ . @;
I mean it's just like throwing it out there AND THEN fixing all the problems, but in the mean time people can/will abuse it as much as they possibly can.

[Dragoncat]

I didnt post a suggestion, I posted a bug.

n number of people can have the same nickname, btw, but I think its caused a glitch ;p

[Hocus]

i feel like wolfhome should have looked at the suggestions that were being put out by users and also way more important than this, instead of putting something silly and useful that backfired in a matter of hours.

[Dragoncat]

Also another bug, unless its intentional.

You can see ignored people's nick changes.

[Kita]

guys I honestly doubt UD meant any harm in providing this feature. I'm sure he thought it would be something fun to have (if used properly) and I really don't think anyone apart of it expected it to be a flop. give them credit, they made an effort to change something small about the chat to our liking and because nearly everyone dislikes it, it's getting bashed which is unnecessary. UD and the staff are being respectful to everyone's dislike and it's been removed, or disabled or whatever. like I mentioned, I personally enjoyed it and thought it could be fun and I'm sure I'm not the only person who felt that way. it's a shame it got removed so fast because of everyone's poor reactions. yes you are allowed to have an opinion and to share what you think of it, but next time, try not to be harsh about it? remember, they did this for our benefit with our best interest in mind. if they had any idea so many people would absolutely hate it, I doubt it would have happened at all.

on another note, I would be happy to see this feature again but with an option to hide it or turn it off to avoid so many complaints. it was nice while it lasted. :)