On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 11:07, Kerim Aydin<ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > On Mon, 8 Jun 2009, Roger Hicks wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 10:26, Sean Hunt<ride...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Kerim Aydin wrote: >>>> I vote: >>>>> 6344 O 1 1.0 BobTHJ Nicked Off >>>> AGAINST. If this comes close to passing I'll start insisting on my full >>>> nickname before it passes. I shall also insist on the long version after >>>> it passes and violate the rule in civil protest. If you choose to blot me >>>> out of the game, so be it. Why not Agora the Beautiful while you're at it? >>> >>> As written, the proposal appears to grandfather old nicknames, since >>> there's no way to force established players to pick names. >>> >> Plus you provided a shortened alternative (G.) so your nickname >> selection would be in compliance with this rule anyway. It wasn't >> aimed at you. > > I will reject the shortened alternative before this passes. But there's > a rather more substantial bug; by legislating nicknames, it makes them > the "official" name, so officer's reports are inaccurate without them. If > I choose a new long nick (think *truly* long), and REFUSE to pick a short > alternative, I will *happily* take the 5-blot penalty in return for seeing > officers be required to reproduce the full nickname or be dinged for not > producing a full report. The way it is now, with no legislation and > flexible judicial guidance, coppro is free to use Goethe in eir report > with nothing but minor but ineffectual annoyance from me. Do you really > want to give me or any player the ability to formally declare such > expediencies to be inaccurate? > > -G. >
The rule uses SHOULD not SHALL. Officers are only encouraged to use the official nickname, not required to do so. BobTHJ
