[James]

Originally Posted by k!riosh

No problem for me, Hobarthel. is good too Hope this one is allowed.

Basically the "ho" part can't be used. Whether you use a big or a small b is not essential.

[Wert.]

Poor every Howard on this planet.

[James]

Originally Posted by Wert.

Poor every Howard on this planet.

No, regular words or names that happen to have "ho" in them are fine. The problem arises when it is used like here, creating a non-existing word.

[coolfish1103]

H0barthel then?

[Mattographer]

Is Matt. still taken?

If so, can I change my username to Mattographer, please

[Sabinator.]

Originally Posted by coolfish1103

H0barthel then?

Yeah, is it possible with 'o' like zero?

[James]

Originally Posted by Sabinator.

Yeah, is it possible with 'o' like zero?

Let's take that as a compromise. I will change it tonight (not able to access the required system at the moment). Should it lead to complaints, it might be changed back though.

[Raiden]

Admin(s)/James, please change mine to Raiden

Thanks in advance

[James]

Originally Posted by jerriy

Admin(s)/James, please change mine to Raiden

Thanks in advance

I will change it later today (see my answer to Sabinator). It appears to be available (unless there is still an account without any posts). Maybe Meelis will change it if he has time, otherwise I will do it later.

[Raiden]

Yes I kno it's available (I checked before I decided)

[James]

Originally Posted by jerriy

Yes I kno it's available (I checked before I decided)

Yes, it should be. If you do a search, it will only find users that have posted. It does not show posters that have zero posts. It could be possible there is one by that name, although it is not very likely.

[Raiden]

Originally Posted by James

Yes, it should be. If you do a search, it will only find users that have posted. It does not show posters that have zero posts. It could be possible there is one by that name, although it is not very likely.

You know that is unfair - damn non-posters holding back names.

Don't you here have a common forum policy of periodically purging zero-post accounts? That should be almost a routine (for system resource cleanup purposes and so forth - while at the same time letting dormant-but-once-used accounts stay alive, you can and should get rid of zero posters without any loss to anyone (if it's a long ago lurker they can always lurk back with a new nick

[James]

Originally Posted by jerriy

You know that is unfair - damn non-posters holding back names.

Don't you here have a common forum policy of periodically purging zero-post accounts? That should be almost a routine (for system resource cleanup purposes and so forth - while at the same time letting dormant-but-once-used accounts stay alive, you can and should get rid of zero posters without any loss to anyone (if it's a long ago lurker they can always lurk back with a new nick

No, we don't purge zero-post accounts. There is always a chance someone will want to post in the future. At that point they should still have their account available.

It is different for banned accounts. Their names are freely changed when needed.

[SilverSlam]

Originally Posted by James

No, we don't purge zero-post accounts. There is always a chance someone will want to post in the future. At that point they should still have their account available.

It is different for banned accounts. Their names are freely changed when needed.

Wait so anyone can become Queenpova now?

[James]

Originally Posted by SilverSlam

Wait so anyone can become Queenpova now?

No, it depends on the actual username requested. It would be very confusing if a poster would request Queenpova. It would not be allowed.