Midnight

Paril
EDIT: Also, during the reservation period, your old name will redirect to your new name, with a special "this user's name has changed, change bookmarks/links" indicator. After that period though it will show the usual "user not found" page.

What about those rare instances when uses change their name to get away from people who may be harassing them offsite? Would users PM a supermod and ask for their old name not to redirect?

In that case it might be nice to have a "Redirect users to my current username" box or some such thing in this case.

Paril
EDIT: Also, during the reservation period, your old name will redirect to your new name, with a special "this user's name has changed, change bookmarks/links" indicator. After that period though it will show the usual "user not found" page.

What about those rare instances when uses change their name to get away from people who may be harassing them offsite? Would users PM a supermod and ask for their old name not to redirect?

I don't see why you are making such a big deal out of this OP.. Name changes are very insignificant and do not affect your use of the site. You seem like you are trying to stir up some trouble over a moderator who did something you did not like. Just message Paril or the Super mods and don't drag the entire community into this.

hi , i have a problem, basically i haven't used my account in 2 years but now that i want to play it wont let me because it says i have incorrect email or password, and when i try to change my password using my email it says that it has been transfered or something like that.... and then i go to that other website and try to recover my password it says that they have sent the recovery email to my inbox but it doesn't show on there... now i have made a new account with the same email and it doesn't remember my old minceraft account .... please help.... (im talking about minecraft.net account because i cant sign in the minecraft game)

I thought I had two name changes 0.0

Might have not though.

Just a question, didn't read much of what is going on in this thread (maybe this was mentioned on some page on this thread) but how will those "automated-name changes" work? Would it be like your PMC username will sync with your minecraft username or? Oh and if you did wrote about this in earlier post just tell so and Ill go and try to find it.

Yuki

ParilConsidering she's the only one(again I'm fairly certain there is one non-moderator who has had two name changes, but I can't think of who it is at the moment)

To back this up, I, a non-moderator, have had two name changes.

I think you're the one that I was thinking of but couldn't put my fanger on it. It didn't help my point but I think there is an ex-moderator who also got two name changes, but the second name change was because of a very personal issue and not because of an MC name change.

My main point was that the rules are worded in such a way to discourage people from sending name change requests unless they have an actual reason to do so. Before the "official" guidelines, we did a trial period where we checked to see what kinds of requests we get from users. The guidelines were based on that. That being said, I don't feel that it's ambiguous to getting more than one name change, but being the one who co-authored it I am biased in that point of view.

ParilConsidering she's the only one(again I'm fairly certain there is one non-moderator who has had two name changes, but I can't think of who it is at the moment)

To back this up, I, a non-moderator, have had two name changes.

Edit: Paril, you were actually the person who changed it both times.

PizzaPenguin_
I've personally had two name changes, and I know of users who have had 3+.

@CaptainMurica - It's not just mods, although I do agree with you that the ambiguity in the rules can be a bit confusing at times.

Eyy there's one! How you doin' bud. A lot of the rules are direct copies from the old forum rules that we had before the Rules system was implemented, and even some of those haven't been touched for a year before that. There's probably still some spelling errors that somehow haven't been fixed. I think a few of the site mods went through it again and checked, but we'll see in the next commits I suppose.

I'm glad that this is in the works and the current system appears to be working. However, I still do not think that users should be left in the dark. It appears you think the same way, but do not wish to make any major changes until there is a greater need to make those changes. I don't think that's a wise thing to do because once the need is apparent, wouldn't any action taken be too late? A stitch, in time, saves nine.

Because I don't feel they are in the dark. If we had gotten inquiries about it it would have been modified as soon as we got to a PC. This is literally the first one. We have had people ask if they could get a second name change because of xy reason, we linked them to the rules page, they thanked us and the Super Moderators got a PM a while later. I'd like to pull specific examples to show you but I don't think they'd appreciate me snooping through their PMs at the moment. If these people (as in, the ones who are looking for a second name change) were confused by the rules they woulda said so and we woulda changed them, simple as that.

ParilI didn't assume it was related to the other issues until this:

CaptainMuricaTo be fair, the only reason I was able to recognize her was based on how she was treating my friends.

Considering she's the only one who had this come up recently (again I'm fairly certain there is one non-moderator who has had two name changes, but I can't think of who it is at the moment), paired with this and Namechange explicitly linking it out loud earlier, it's hard not to see it that way. Like I said, grain of salt. Lots and lots of tasty salt.

It doesn't take a judgementally-compromised person to notice a correlation in behavior, and it also doesn't take a judgementally-compromised person to see the username change on previous posts the person made. I said what I said because it truly was the only way I recognized her. It was an objective observation.

Paril
Yes, I would eventually like to make the change logs visible to the public (at the very least the last commit vs the current commit). It's on the list of things I want to do, alongside a site-wide notification in the form of an icon that the rules were changed within the last 3 days or so to make it easier to find. With the new navbar, the rules are placed in a good spot for new users to find and hopefully it's encouraged its visibility a bit more. I'd have to ask Cyprezz to see what the traffic on that page is to see how well it's working, though.

There's a lot of things that aren't even mentioned in the guidelines, like that moderators can move submissions between users so long as both users PM a Super Mod with the request & permission from author, as well as changing the URL of a submission. All things that I'd like to have listed, although luckily people have caught along to the "if you need something PM a Super Mod" thing and have been requesting these despite them not being listed, which is cool.

It's quite possible, but like I said there are a lot of users who have PM'd us for name changes. It's not a small number. It's probably the majority of Super Moderators' PMs at this point, and most of them follow the format that we list in the rules and don't point out that they feel it is ambiguous or that they are unsure about a second name change.

I'm glad that this is in the works and the current system appears to be working. However, I still do not think that users should be left in the dark. It appears you think the same way, but do not wish to make any major changes until there is a greater need to make those changes. I don't think that's a wise thing to do because once the need is apparent, wouldn't it in a sense be too late? A stitch, in time, saves nine.

Paril

CaptainMurica
Perhaps a revamp to the rules page is in order then. The project doesn't need to be top priority, but the rules pages could be changed so that you can view what was changed with each update. It'd be a sort of changelog for the rules, and it wouldn't be hard to implement.

I need you to stop assuming this is related to issues people other than me have had with a moderator I don't frequently communicate with. As I stated earlier I was not involved in that conflict and it is not affecting my reasoning.

Also, it would be my guess that not many people have brought this up because not many people read over the rules, and those who do probably aren't looking for the section on name changes. It's kind of sad but I'd put money on it being true.

I didn't assume it was related to the other issues until this:

CaptainMuricaTo be fair, the only reason I was able to recognize her was based on how she was treating my friends.

Considering she's the only one who had this come up recently (again I'm fairly certain there is one non-moderator who has had two name changes, but I can't think of who it is at the moment), paired with this and Namechange explicitly linking it out loud earlier, it's hard not to see it that way. Like I said, grain of salt. Lots and lots of tasty salt.

Yes, I would eventually like to make the change logs visible to the public (at the very least the last commit vs the current commit). It's on the list of things I want to do, alongside a site-wide notification in the form of an icon that the rules were changed within the last 3 days or so to make it easier to find. With the new navbar, the rules are placed in a good spot for new users to find and hopefully it's encouraged its visibility a bit more. I'd have to ask Cyprezz to see what the traffic on that page is to see how well it's working, though.

There's a lot of things that aren't even mentioned in the guidelines, like that moderators can move submissions between users so long as both users PM a Super Mod with the request & permission from author, as well as changing the URL of a submission. All things that I'd like to have listed, although luckily people have caught along to the "if you need something PM a Super Mod" thing and have been requesting these despite them not being listed, which is cool.

It's quite possible, but like I said there are a lot of users who have PM'd us for name changes. It's not a small number. It's probably the majority of Super Moderators' PMs at this point, and most of them follow the format that we list in the rules and don't point out that they feel it is ambiguous or that they are unsure about a second name change.

I've personally had two name changes, and I know of users who have had 3+.

@CaptainMurica - It's not just mods, although I do agree with you that the ambiguity in the rules can be a bit confusing at times.

CaptainMurica
Perhaps a revamp to the rules page is in order then. The project doesn't need to be top priority, but the rules pages could be changed so that you can view what was changed with each update. It'd be a sort of changelog for the rules, and it wouldn't be hard to implement.

I need you to stop assuming this is related to issues people other than me have had with a moderator I don't frequently communicate with. As I stated earlier I was not involved in that conflict and it is not affecting my reasoning.

Also, it would be my guess that not many people have brought this up because not many people read over the rules, and those who do probably aren't looking for the section on name changes. It's kind of sad but I'd put money on it being true.

I didn't assume it was related to the other issues until this:

CaptainMuricaTo be fair, the only reason I was able to recognize her was based on how she was treating my friends.

Considering she's the only one who had this come up recently (again I'm fairly certain there is one non-moderator who has had two name changes, but I can't think of who it is at the moment), paired with this and Namechange explicitly linking it out loud earlier, it's hard not to see it that way. Like I said, grain of salt. Lots and lots of tasty salt.

Yes, I would eventually like to make the change logs visible to the public (at the very least the last commit vs the current commit). It's on the list of things I want to do, alongside a site-wide notification in the form of an icon that the rules were changed within the last 3 days or so to make it easier to find. With the new navbar, the rules are placed in a good spot for new users to find and hopefully it's encouraged its visibility a bit more. I'd have to ask Cyprezz to see what the traffic on that page is to see how well it's working, though.

There's a lot of things that aren't even mentioned in the guidelines, like that moderators can move submissions between users so long as both users PM a Super Mod with the request & permission from author, as well as changing the URL of a submission. All things that I'd like to have listed, although luckily people have caught along to the "if you need something PM a Super Mod" thing and have been requesting these despite them not being listed, which is cool.

It's quite possible, but like I said there are a lot of users who have PM'd us for name changes. It's not a small number. It's probably the majority of Super Moderators' PMs at this point, and most of them follow the format that we list in the rules and don't point out that they feel it is ambiguous or that they are unsure about a second name change.

Paril
Because changing the rules isn't just an edit-and-save situation. We try to lump together as many amendments and changes as possible so that we don't change the 'rule changed' date, which frustrates users when they see that they have changed. We learned this early on, and we aren't going to be repeating those mistakes. We have a few rule commits built up but we are waiting until the next system is implemented before we globally commit them.

If it was a glaring mistake I would do it, but it's not a mistake. Myself and the majority (the people actually sending name changes, as they understand it perfectly) feel that its worded fine, this is the first I've heard of it being ambiguous and like I said, considering it's linked to some other issues that are going on and that it wasn't something that others were explicitly denied for, I don't feel it's a big enough problem to warrant a rule change at the moment.

Perhaps a revamp to the rules page is in order then. Such a project wouldn't need to be top priority, but the rules page could be changed so that you can view what was changed with each update. It'd be a sort of changelog for the rules, and it wouldn't be hard to implement.

I need you to stop assuming this is related to issues people other than me have had with a moderator I don't frequently communicate with. As I stated earlier I was not involved in that conflict and it is not affecting my reasoning.

Also, it would be my guess that not many people have brought this up because not many people read over the rules, and those who do probably aren't looking for the section on name changes. It's kind of sad but I'd put money on it being true.

CaptainMurica
And I think it's great that the profile update will make this a non-issue. But until then, it is an issue that could easily be resolved by amending the rules based on how the name changes process works. It might sound unnecessary to amend a rule that may very well be gone soon, but it should still be amended in order to avoid future misunderstandings.

Because changing the rules isn't just an edit-and-save situation. We try to lump together as many amendments and changes as possible so that we don't change the 'rule changed' date, which frustrates users when they see that they have changed. We learned this early on, and we aren't going to be repeating those mistakes. We have a few rule commits built up but we are waiting until the next system is implemented before we globally commit them.

If it was a glaring mistake I would do it, but it's not a mistake. Myself and the majority (the people actually sending name changes, as they understand it perfectly) feel that its worded fine, this is the first I've heard of it being ambiguous and like I said, considering it's linked to some other issues that are going on and that it wasn't something that others were explicitly denied for, I don't feel it's a big enough problem to warrant a rule change at the moment.

Paril

Kirito SwordsmanOn another website, I had to change my name to join a group. I then was getting. Harassed by another group, and therefore had to change my name to get away from them. What if, say, people hate you because of your name. When I first joined the anime hub, I was hated because SAO wasn't very popular. I didn't change my name, because it was not within the guidelines.

For your first name change it would be fine, but as a reason for a second one it would be case-dependent. I'd be more concerned about the people in the group being judgmental towards another anime despite being an "anime group" than I would about the users changing their names.

NameChange, no, I don't have any proof, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that the decision didn't occur on PMC and that the decision to use the same image, placement and text wasn't coincidental from the same group of people. I'm not trying to blackmail anybody. Just like case-by-case moderation, under a normal circumstance of personal attack this would be a situation where people should be given bans or at the very least warnings for their behavior, but seeing as the issue was spelled out to us I'm not as concerned about it, so long as it doesn't continue happening. I'm being open about what is happening here on PMC, why are you afraid to be open about why the personal attack decided to take place?

EDIT

It's a website where you can change your name to whatever you want, at any time, BUT it has to be approved by a mod.

Why can't we have a system like that? You can change it whenever, but it has to be approved by a mod.

That is the system we have. The rules are guidelines, you can send a request to a Super Moderator at any time but they are the ones making the judgment whether or not it's a valid change.

When the Profile Update is out, you won't need to follow these guidelines and you'll be able to change it yourself with no moderator intervention at all.

Oh.... Then excuse me while I change my name...

Paril
That is the system we have. The rules are guidelines, you can send a request to a Super Moderator at any time but they are the ones making the judgment whether or not it's a valid change.

When the Profile Update is out, you won't need to follow these guidelines and you'll be able to change it yourself with no moderator intervention at all.

And I think it's great that the profile update will make this a non-issue. But until then, it is an issue that could easily be resolved by amending the rules based on how the name changes process works. It might sound unnecessary to amend a rule that may very well be gone soon, but it should still be amended in order to avoid future misunderstandings.

Kirito SwordsmanOn another website, I had to change my name to join a group. I then was getting. Harassed by another group, and therefore had to change my name to get away from them. What if, say, people hate you because of your name. When I first joined the anime hub, I was hated because SAO wasn't very popular. I didn't change my name, because it was not within the guidelines.

For your first name change it would be fine, but as a reason for a second one it would be case-dependent. I'd be more concerned about the people in the group being judgmental towards another anime despite being an "anime group" than I would about the users changing their names.

NameChange, no, I don't have any proof, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that the decision didn't occur on PMC and that the decision to use the same image, placement and text wasn't coincidental from the same group of people (EDIT: see the "race car/prius" thread that was started to poke fun at a decision). I'm not trying to blackmail anybody. Just like case-by-case moderation, under a normal circumstance of personal attack this would be a situation where people should be given bans or at the very least warnings for their behavior, but seeing as the issue was spelled out to us I'm not as concerned about it, so long as it doesn't continue happening. I'm being open about what is happening here on PMC, why are you afraid to be open about why the personal attack decided to take place?

EDIT

It's a website where you can change your name to whatever you want, at any time, BUT it has to be approved by a mod.

Why can't we have a system like that? You can change it whenever, but it has to be approved by a mod.

That is the system we have. The rules are guidelines, you can send a request to a Super Moderator at any time but they are the ones making the judgment whether or not it's a valid change.

When the Profile Update is out, you won't need to follow these guidelines and you'll be able to change it yourself with no moderator intervention at all.

On another website, I had to change my name to join a group. I then was getting. Harassed by another group, and therefore had to change my name to get away from them. What if, say, people hate you because of your name. When I first joined the anime hub, I was hated because SAO wasn't very popular. I didn't change my name, because it was not within the guidelines.

Where am I getting at:
It's a website where you can change your name to whatever you want, at any time, BUT it has to be approved by a mod.

Why can't we have a system like that? You can change it whenever, but it has to be approved by a mod.

Paril
Several of them acted together and they had all decided it in their PC Group chat, from what I understand.

It's not a rule. Name changes aren't something that members can do, so I don't think they can be pooled under a rule. All it is is a "you may get your name changed if" and "you may not get your name changed if" list. It's similar to the blacklist of illegal activities in the rules - there are way more illegal activities than the ones we list, but we can't list every single one that we can think of at the time. We give a few examples that we know will come up.

Whether we know at the time if it will be accepted or not, if a user asks a non-Super Moderator if they can change their name from x to y, they are directed to message a Super Moderator even if it doesn't fall within the bounds of the rules. If there was enough confusion about the process, the Super Mods would have changed the section themselves as they have access to commit the rules.

If this was a common issue, then it would be changed, yes. It isn't common. Nobody else has thought of it as an issue except the people within a group that appear to have issues with her moderation, so I have no choice but to take it with a grain of salt.

You seem to be misunderstanding where I'm coming from. You assume that I have an issue with Snowy's moderation and that "butthurt," if you will, is affecting my judgement. I can assure you that this is not the case. I may be annoyed by things she has said and done, but I have yet to play a part in that conflict myself. What I personally have a problem with is when a rule/law says one thing and those who are supposed to enforce that rule enforce it another way/interpret it in a way that is not documented for the public to see.

Paril
Several of them acted together and they had all decided it in their PC Group chat, from what I understand.

Do you have proof of this? Please do not assume what we are doing and blackmail the PC Group, especially for something that never happened.

CaptainMurica

ParilIf anybody out there has been denied for a third name change in the exact same situation that Snowy has been given hers (after Mojang's name change system was implemented), then I will step aside and I will understand your point of view. Without that, all I see is nitpicking. Combined with the personal attacks with the whole "No Fun Allowed" signatures nonsense, it appears like a conflict of interest from your point more than anything.

This is not nitpicking. A site rule is ambiguous and needs clarification. If this happened anywhere else (like MCF or any high-profile site for that matter), the issue would be resolved swiftly.

I find it rude that you tossed the entire PC Group into one pile. Only a select few ever had the "No Fun Allowed" signature, and I was not one of them.

Several of them acted together and they had all decided it in their PC Group chat, from what I understand.

It's not a rule. Name changes aren't something that members can do, so I don't think they can be pooled under a rule. All it is is a "you may get your name changed if" and "you may not get your name changed if" list. It's similar to the blacklist of illegal activities in the rules - there are way more illegal activities than the ones we list, but we can't list every single one that we can think of at the time. We give a few examples that we know will come up.

Whether we know at the time if it will be accepted or not, if a user asks a non-Super Moderator if they can change their name from x to y, they are directed to message a Super Moderator even if it doesn't fall within the bounds of the rules. If there was enough confusion about the process, the Super Mods would have changed the section themselves as they have access to commit the rules.

If this was a common issue, then it would be changed, yes. It isn't common. Nobody else has thought of it as an issue except the people within a group that appear to have issues with her moderation, so I have no choice but to take it with a grain of salt.

ParilIf anybody out there has been denied for a third name change in the exact same situation that Snowy has been given hers (after Mojang's name change system was implemented), then I will step aside and I will understand your point of view. Without that, all I see is nitpicking. Combined with the personal attacks with the whole "No Fun Allowed" signatures nonsense, it appears like a conflict of interest from your point more than anything.

This is not nitpicking. A site rule is ambiguous and needs clarification. If this happened anywhere else (like MCF or any high-profile site for that matter), the issue would be resolved swiftly.

I find it rude that you tossed the entire PC Group into one pile. Only a select few ever had the "No Fun Allowed" signature, and I was not one of them.

ParilIf anybody out there has been denied for a third name change in the exact same situation that Snowy has been given hers (after Mojang's name change system was implemented), then I will step aside and I will understand your point of view. Without that, all I see is nitpicking. Combined with the personal attacks with the whole "No Fun Allowed" signatures nonsense, it appears like a conflict of interest from your point more than anything.

Those signatures are for something else

If anybody out there has been denied for a third name change in the exact same situation that Snowy has been given hers (after Mojang's name change system was implemented), then I will step aside and I will understand your point of view. Without that, all I see is nitpicking. Combined with the personal attacks from the PC group with the whole "No Fun Allowed" signatures nonsense, it appears like a conflict of interest from your point more than anything.

While this is indeed in the rules, the circumstances under which one can have a second username change are not.

Because this wasn't considered at the time. We wrote that section almost a year before Mojang implemented name changes. We went over it afterwards and determined that it was fine the way it was written and we wouldn't have to apply a site-wide rule change just for that one small section, and only to say that there is an additional potential exception if you have your name changed with the Mojang system. Based on the PMs the Super Mods have gotten, there appears to be no confusion about why you can change your name, as there is no shortage of "because I changed my MC name" messages. It's an extremely rare case that somebody who does this also had their PMC name changed before this, but again it's already written that "1 name change" is only a guideline and exceptions will be made if we feel that it is a warranted change.

I feel like there was at least one other member who has gotten three total by this point but I can't verify for certain as we didn't log name changes as far back as a year ago.

Paril
The rules already list that an MC name change is within the validity for a name change, and that exceptions can be made.

While this is indeed in the rules, the circumstances under which one can have a second username change are not.

ParilI feel like you're just trying to validate your issues towards one specific person rather than actually feeling that this is a legitimate issue, because it's not a legitimate issue.

This is a legitimate issue. A rule says one thing ambiguously and members are left to take guesses as to what it means (as I did in the OP), and the staff acts on how it interprets the rule. There is a disconnect between how the staff interprets the rules and how users interpret them, and this is a result of a lack of communication through the rules page.

Honestly I would have no problem with anyone getting a second, third, or even fourth username change if the rules stated that it could be done. Until the user profile update rolls out, this will be a communication issue that frankly leaves users in the dark.

Namechange
Even though shes the only one Ive ever seen that has gotten 2* name changes

Edit: the feels ;(

There's plenty of people who have gotten that many name changes. It's not favoritism towards moderators. To me, it's more of an outdated section of the rules. Because "exceptions" happen frequently enough for it not to be an exception any more. Besides, Paril already said that with the Profile Update, there will be an entirely new system for name changes, so there's no real reason to argue about it now.

Paril

CaptainMurica

Paril
I don't see any lack of communication, it is entirely written in the rules that exceptions to the "once only" rule can be made. Just like Teamades had his name changed to Team, if he also got his MC account name changed he'd still be within our guidelines to get it changed again. This isn't a special exception to a moderator like you think it is.

Obscure wording in something as important as rules for one of the largest Minecraft sites in existence is certainly a communication issue. If the site allows multiple name changes, then list under what circumstances you can have your username changed multiple times.

The rules already list that an MC name change is within the validity for a name change, and that exceptions can be made. I feel like you're just trying to validate your issues towards one specific person rather than actually feeling that this is a legitimate issue, because it's not a legitimate issue. Name changes are visual, they are material, they mean nothing. It doesn't affect how the site is run, it doesn't affect member submissions or anything else apart from perhaps a few days of "who is this new moderator - oh nevermind it's just a name change", which happens for nearly all name changes anyways.

Even though shes the only one Ive ever seen that has gotten 2* name changes

Edit: the feels ;(

CaptainMurica

Paril
I don't see any lack of communication, it is entirely written in the rules that exceptions to the "once only" rule can be made. Just like Teamades had his name changed to Team, if he also got his MC account name changed he'd still be within our guidelines to get it changed again. This isn't a special exception to a moderator like you think it is.

Obscure wording in something as important as rules for one of the largest Minecraft sites in existence is certainly a communication issue. If the site allows multiple name changes, then list under what circumstances you can have your username changed multiple times.

The rules already list that an MC name change is within the validity for a name change, and that exceptions can be made. I feel like you're just trying to validate your issues towards one specific person rather than actually feeling that this is a legitimate issue, because it's not a legitimate issue. Name changes are visual, they are material, they mean nothing. It doesn't affect how the site is run, it doesn't affect member submissions or anything else apart from perhaps a few days of "who is this new moderator - oh nevermind it's just a name change", which happens for nearly all name changes anyways.

Paril
I don't see any lack of communication, it is entirely written in the rules that exceptions to the "once only" rule can be made. Just like Teamades had his name changed to Team, if he also got his MC account name changed he'd still be within our guidelines to get it changed again. This isn't a special exception to a moderator like you think it is.

Obscure wording in something as important as rules for one of the largest Minecraft sites in existence is certainly a communication issue. If the site allows multiple name changes, then list under what circumstances you can have your username changed multiple times.

If this is indeed a lack of communication on the site's part, then please fix it.

Namechange

ParilIt's like asking why moderators are allowed to post "Locked." on hundreds of different threads in the same day - if a user did it, it would be spam, but obviously moderators have a better reason to do it.

It actually isn't the same. Locking something is a command that only moderators can do, while normal members can't.

The difference is: Anybody can get a name change for the right reason, it isn't only a small group of players such as moderators.

What are you talking about? Posting in a thread is a command that any member can do, that's what I was saying. The actual locking isn't relevant, it's that moderators are allowed to "break" the spam rule in this case because they want to mark down publicly who locked the thread. We didn't write "unless a moderator is locking a thread" in the rules because it's a silly exception to make, just like how we didn't feel we had to write "unless we are absolutely sure that we know you aren't trying to abuse the ability for Super Moderators to change your name" in the account guide.

Here's the deal, and since it's not like it's a secret who gets their name changed I'm sure she won't mind me explaining her specific case. Snowylips got her named changed a long time ago to Snowy - she had a damn good reason for wanting this change. She was getting harassed by users over a specific misinterpretation of her name, and it's not hard to verify it since we have the tools to verify that sort of thing. Alongside that, she was well within reason to shorten her name and we had no problem with it, even if the former wasn't an issue, as some members have already done (Teamades -> Team, for instance).

When Mojang officially introduced name changes, internally we released a "memo" so to speak that if a user has changed their Minecraft name, we will give them leeway and accept that as a condition to change it for members even if they had already had it changed before. The rules page has not been updated since months before that time, as we generally don't like making amendments to the rules unless we absolutely have to, and again since this is already listed in the rules we didn't feel that it was important enough to warrant the "last updated" time changing. Since Mojang put that out, I also have written a system for automated name changes that is very similar to Mojang's system, albeit with minor changes. It will be rolled out alongside the Profile Update.

Why you're all caught up on this is entirely silly, and you've all taken it too far.

Friends = The entire PC Group.

I haven't seen any mistreatment. Several issues about the group have come up in our discussions and most of them were decided on as a team.

CaptainMurica

ParilThe fact that you knew exactly who the moderator in question was that changed their name confirms to me that my biggest concern for writing the specific guideline for "1 name change only" (that members will get confused about names that change) isn't as big of a deal that I originally thought it was.

To be fair, the only reason I was able to recognize her was based on how she was treating my friends.

Friends = The entire PC Group.

ParilThe fact that you knew exactly who the moderator in question was that changed their name confirms to me that my biggest concern for writing the specific guideline for "1 name change only" (that members will get confused about names that change) isn't as big of a deal that I originally thought it was.

To be fair, the only reason I was able to recognize her was based on how she was treating my friends.

ParilIt's like asking why moderators are allowed to post "Locked." on hundreds of different threads in the same day - if a user did it, it would be spam, but obviously moderators have a better reason to do it.

It actually isn't the same. Locking something is a command that only moderators can do, while normal members can't.

The difference is: Anybody can get a name change for the right reason, it isn't only a small group of players such as moderators.

Automated name changes will be publicly available to all members fairly soon. The guidelines to name changes are there to prevent abuse and to keep the Super Moderators' inbox from filling with requests from the same people. We know moderators aren't going to abuse name changes, since we're right there to watch them anyways, so of course it's easier for us to get them done. The fact that you knew exactly who the moderator in question was that changed their name confirms to me that my biggest concern for writing the specific guideline for "1 name change only" (that members will get confused about names that change) isn't as big of a deal that I originally thought it was.

Nobody is exempt from any rules, but you've also got to understand that the rules are only guidelines in a lot of cases. It's like asking why moderators are allowed to post "Locked." on hundreds of different threads in the same day - if a user did it, it would be spam, but obviously moderators have a better reason to do it.

1. 3 times for some moderators
2. Apparently moderators dont enforce the rules, they are above them
3. It sure as gosh seems that way