> First let me say that I fully support the development of a respectful > and logically consistent way to name LoCo teams. I am positive that as a > group we can arrive at such a solution. Given that I do see some issues > with the current suggestion put forth in the original email.
Awesome. That's why it's an RFC and not a policy :) > > I would recommend including the use of the word 'state' for US States > because this will help avoid conflicts such as: Howabout we add a clause allowing state in the case of conflict? > > New York (the City) vs. New York (the state) > Washington (the City) and Washington (the state) > Kansas (the city) and (Kansas (the state) > Iowa (the City) and Iowa (the state) I agree totally. [snip] > > ---- suggestion ---- > Allow the loco team to choose the name of their 'region'; which allows > for New York State, Washington State, etc. That's fine, so long as it's consistent across the cases you mentioned > > ---- clarification requested ---- > Will previously grandfathered city locos be disbanded? (Chicago, Dallas, > Vancouver) All the teams you've mentioned are really bad examples, because they're all so fscking() awesome. We'll have to figure it out. For now, I'd say this is an edge-case that can be resolved over time. I know Texas has some state-identity issues, so we'll work through that as it comes up. > > Thanks, > Charles > > For now, let's get a sane and consistent policy that works in 95% of cases, and we'll work on the last 5% in a way that's sane later on. Love you all dearly, let's keep this great discussion up! -Paul -- All programmers are playwrights, and all computers are lousy actors. #define sizeof(x) rand() :wq -- loco-contacts mailing list loco-contacts@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/loco-contacts
