Cheers my memory for names is useless.
I feel I’m missing something here, explain it? 
Is it irony the exact opposite of a circle?
That’s certainly a quantum leap. I wonder if Jesus would be comfortable with that? I wonder if Christ ate meat. 
I’m slowly entertaining the idea of dissolving windwalker. I mean, I can be one without labeling myself. Perhaps soon I shall become Simply-me - perhaps.
The rivers flow onward - do they change their names?
I would argue that they have no names, that nomenclature is innately human, and thus we cannot actually designate the identity of the thing in itself.
I’m slowly entertaining the idea that there should be limits on how often names can be changed, and that nomenclature is innately not supposed to be such a pain in the ass.
Just one man’s view.
why don’t you make it something like 1 name change per 3 months per member (including rank changes)
But why would you argue with me? 
Aside from the fact that humans must name and label, perhaps the rivers do have mystical names. We have to commune with them in order to find their hidden name.
I like your '____________ ’ user symbol. I might ask but you might not reveal what it symbolizes. The first thing that came to me was ‘flatlining’ but of course that would be a longer line I’m weird that way. The real beauty of it is that we ourselves in ilp can imagine who we are through your symbol, if that makes any sense.
Concedo tibi ut supra. Quid autem putas esse par?
Et in his omnibus annis Faust sapientia nunquam responsum amanter tibi?
It’s an intangible as a result of indecision–it is whatever you want it to be. Something of a mirror of evanescent truths and all the potential in the world, a wave function that never collapses.
Ah, perhaps not so much indecision but wei wu wei. 
Sort of like this…
Anomia is bad for the economy.
How about a spot under “location” for something like “formerly known as”?
Can my rank be Mr. America is a continent?
Yes.
Sure, but bankruptcy is good for it, and humane. If someone wants to lose or change their identity, isn’t there some benefit from that? And anonymity an unavoidable reality online anyway?
It’s probably possible (in theory, not for me) to add a mechanism that tracks the names a user has gone by. But it’s not too hard to tell who someone was (if you see a name you don’t recognize with a few hundred posts, you could easily check their old posts to see who they were/are), and I think the only harm, if there is any, is to the person changing their name, in loss of amassed cultural capital.
Thank y’all!
caarleas,
Then wouldn’t the logical conclusion be to simply remove all names and replace them with “anonymous”?
tent, I think that one’s taken, isn’t it?
But surely this is a commonwealth, no?
I don’t think so. If someone wants a consistent identity online, a username allows them that. If they don’t, they can change their username/email/IP address and start over. There’s nothing preventing that. Allowing someone to change the name on an account they already have is a sort of middle ground, whereby they keep the association with their work, but they change the name by which they’re labeled. It’s the difference between a name change and the witness protection program.
Perhaps what I should have said is that access to anonymity is unavoidable online, because my point was to rebut any argument that says we should do something to limit a person’s access to anonymity.
Yes, does that preclude letting a member squandering their reputation? In that case, should we adopt a policy of removing poorly argued or poorly written posts? Preemptively, it’s worth noting that the distinction between active and passive here is just an arbitrary fact of the software we’re using. If changing one’s name was a part of the software on which ILP runs, it wouldn’t take any moderator intervention and would be the passive act to let it happen. Because it’s not in the software, it takes active human intervention; the distinction is not inherent in the act.
I guess it bothers me that what is an identifiable community is lost as we have to play guessing games or ask, “who are you today?”. No small part of being a member with a screen name is the act of becoming an identity. That identity, for better or worse, establishes a reputation in the community through their posts. It isn’t that I’m not familiar with all the games people have employed to disguise their identity. Most of those reasons are questionable at best. But this latest spate of name changes seems more whimsical than having any reason beyond “I can change my screen name”. That ILP has granted these name changes without any consideration of the confusion this creates in the forums is a bit disturbing. People make judgements on what and who they read based on those screen names. I would suggest that screen name changes need to have a mandatory line of AKA: listing all previous names that an individual has posted under. Sure, adminstration can track names in that “middleground” by referencing IP’s, but that isn’t available to the membership in any way convenient. More to the point, why should members have to be involved in guessing games about who is who? Playing hide and seek was fun when we were six years old, but it loses it’s appeal for supposed adults. I’ve been to masquerade parties and they’re fun, but it isn’t fun on a daily basis.
I remember seeing one message board, and I forget which, but if there was a name change, then you had to state your old name in your signature for ninety days. Further, I don’t believe you could change your handle more than once in ninety days, do you guys think something like that would be a decent middle ground?
I say aye.