Slashdot Mirror
Blizzard Made Me Change My Name
First of all, the reason that my account is in violation is that my name contains a title prefix. It took dozens of inquiries to get that explained. 'Cmdr' is the problem. I'm told that since the game has an internal honor system with titles, my name is not allowed. Never mind the fact that 'Cmdr' is not one of their titles. Never mind that countless other titles abound in the game: Mr, Sir, Sensei. Am I in violation of their policy? Probably. Is the policy stupid, meaningless, or inconsistent? I think so, but that's not really why I'm writing this.
I've been using 'CmdrTaco' online for around a decade now. It predates the existence of this website. It has followed me from game to game, both local, networked, and massive. My only problem with it is that as Slashdot grew in popularity, I started finding places where an impostor has taken it. I was excited when I was able to get it in Warcraft. It's like a warm blanket. It's stupid I know, but it's mine.
But Blizzard chose to take it from me. Now let me be clear: this is certainly their right: They own the dice and the board and the rulebooks, and I only play in their world. But If the US Government told me to change my name... let's say Congress passed a law making it illegal to have a first name that is a verb (Don't laugh, the White House cease and desisted The Onion!) Well I guess 'Rob' would have to go. My friends would still recognize me: I'd still have the same face, address, and social security number. I'd just have a cool new name like "Captain Fantastic Malda". With a name like that, the auto mechanics would never try to rip me off!
In this virtual world, two levels gives me a couple new pieces of armor, and suddenly I am unrecognizable to anyone who may have run an instance with me. In guild chat, I am a total stranger to people I may have chatted with for months. My history with other players has been erased. It almost makes me wish that I spent my first 45 levels ninja looting!
It's not like Blizzard decided to change gameplay dynamics. I spend a lot of time working on the Slashdot moderation system, and I never have any problem changing any "Rule" in the system if I believe it will improve the overall functionality of the whole system. If blizzard wants to make my mace have 5 less DPS and 3 less stamina because it's unbalanced, well I can accept that. Balancing gameplay is really hard. But in a massive multiplayer game, your name is different- that isn't about balance, it's about identity.
A friend of mine actually quit Everquest over a forced name change. His name was Marilyn Hanson and while fighting something he was disconnected without warning. When he returned, his name had been changed to a randomly generated one. When he asked GM, he was told that he could not have celebrity name. When my friend asked who Marilyn Hanson was, the GM could not answer, but instead just said arguing wouldn't matter. My friend quit EQ that day.
I don't think I'll quit WoW over this, but I will take away some lessons. The GM I talked to had a nickname of something like Lathanian. I found this disconcerting. If you were arrested by Officer Snuggles or found guilty by the honorable Judge Lawtron, it's hard to take that seriously. In this case 'Punishment' is being dealt. A real human is wearing a shroud of anonymity and handing out the bitchslap to a total stranger. That really makes the whole experience even more dehumanizing. In a massive virtual world, we're still people.
You don't see names and faces, which is why you'll see a 60 corpse camp a 30. When you don't see the real person on the other side, the tendency is just to forget. You expect it from opposing factions- but it feels different when it's the GM. Personally this is something I struggle with in my work too. You deal with a hundred support requests and it starts becoming abstract. Unreal. Virtual. I doubt it's much different if you work at the support counter at a retail store, but I think it's easier to forget when the only communication is chat.
Second, the GMs at blizzard really have no power. I asked for contact information. For email information. For names. For an appeal. To talk to a supervisor. And the best they would give me was the generic help phone line or a mailing address. Like with a stamp! I was told that almost every question I asked was unanswerable in game. I gave an email address but they never emailed. They wouldn't even tell me what was wrong with my nickname until after a half dozen inquiries of why. You have really no recourse against a GM. That scares me.
Lastly, I didn't really realize that I was so attached to my nickname. It's not because I'm "Famous"- We have a lot of readers, but these days very few actually know who I am. And of those, the percentage of people who play warcraft, and are alliance, and on azgalor... well it is very tiny. As CmdrTaco I probably had a total of 5 people actually recognize my nickname (and nobody ever gave me gold because they read Slashdot!). As Violated, nobody ever will recognize me for my day job. But that's really not what bugs me. I was really attached to my name. This character bounded through Azgalor slaying monsters and meeting new people. Now that character is erased and another character stands in its place. Same armor. Same class. But different somehow. I like my nickname. I wish I had it on every system I used. I'm annoyed that someone else registered my nickname on gmail before I could. It's always the first name I try when a system asks me to create an account. I feel strangely possessive about it. I doubt I'm alone in being attached to a pseudonym. And I feel kind of stupid admitting it.
Anyway, I've said my piece on the subject. And just to be clear, I'm not really mad at Blizzard. I think what they did was needless and inconvenient, but not evil. Their policy may be silly, but I still was in violation of it, so I guess I got what I deserved. But I wonder about others. And not just in Warcraft, on any online forum. I wonder about our attachment to virtual names. And if nothing less, it will make me take changes in Slashdot a little more seriously next time.
You could a) take your money elsewhere
b) keep giving them your money, and give them some publicity on /., too
With enemies like you, who needs friends?
Everybody's a libertarian 'till their neighbour's becomes a crack house.
While I too find this somewhat ironic, he does bring up a good point. In a virtual world where the only truly identifying characteristic is a character's name, how does a name change (forced or voluntary) impact relations with others in the game? A follow up question would be: how could developers, if they so chose, account for this to minimize any negative impact?
If the idea of MMORPG social circles seems trivial or unimportant to you, what about something like a seller's account on eBay? In a digital world when all someone has to go on is the reputation of your "unique ID," what happens when that ID changes such that it is no longer recognizable as you?
Speech is not an abuse of power and Slashdot is his journal.
I might also point out that he specifically said, more than once, that he was not complaining about an abuse of power.
Please keep the petty bitching confined to livejournal.
Et tu? Ahhhhh, the irony.
KFG
It disgusts me how little sense of real community /. folks have. CmdrTaco has been a major force in keeping this place together for years, and you constantly make use of the fruits of his labor. Now he wants to let off a little steam and all you can do is insult and yell at him? What's most interesting is that at least one of these posts are telling him he has no right to bitch, then in the same paragraph complaining about the quality of slashdot itself.
The "abuse of power" charge doesn't hold well, either. He's not asking for any action to be taken. We have plenty of basically editorial articles posted here every day, and many are much more trivial, biased, and/or political. If you can't stand it, maybe you should take your time and energy somewhere else instead of telling him what he can and can't post here.
Please keep the petty bitching confined to livejournal.
Isn't that exactly what Slashdot is? A blog site. Run by a guy called Taco and his friends. Albeit very popular, sold to a larger corporation and run as a business.
Is it his fault he came up with the idea and coded his own system long before Live Journal took off, copied the concept and then gave it to the masses? Does that suddenly invalidate his use of his own site for the purpose he came up with first?
I think we get proprietary about Slashdot. Because it's such a great service, we spend so much time with it, we forget it's someone else's and start to see it as our own. Thus, much like someone coming in and bitching all over our own blog, we take it personally. But, we forget, we're in his house. If we don't like it, we're welcome to leave. Hell, he even shares his code so we can make our own. But, no, we'd rather bitch about his use of his own site.
Everyone, take a second to look past that the submitter is Taco...
This article fits the requirement to be on slashdot even had it not happened to Taco.
1.) It is about technology
2.) It fits into the Games category
3.) It is a legitimate technology concern as to what you can and cannot do on someone elses network
With few exceptions, I've been "Short Circuit" or "shortcircuit" or some variations thereof since the mid 80s, when I could first pick up a CB mic, and when I first logged into a dial-up BBS. Almost 20 years, and I'm only 22.
I like my name. It's been my identity. It's simultaneously an indicator of my taste in movies and what I do for hobbies. People still see me in public places and shout, "Hey, Short, how's it going?"
And I still get irritated whenever someone registers my name on an IRC network, or on a free email server, or whatever. I still get hung up when trying to log into a friend's machine where he had to truncate my username because it caused formatting issues with tabstops in the config files.
There's a lot in a name. Especially when you've spent years with it, not constantly nym-shifting whenever your inbox got filled with spam.
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
I played Everquest for almost four years heavily. I really liked it, but I hated the GM's. Everyone I spoke to in the game had some crap thing happen to them because of a GM. Name change. Disconnect because you said "ass" in /ooc. There's nothing you can do about it.
They're not cheap either. Shit, you can get basic cable for almost the same money as some of these online games per month, and if you have a problem with your reception a cable guy comes to your house! In an MMORPG, you can't even get a name of a supervisor, let alone any actual help.
The customer service in online games is positioned in a way that the customer is always lying, cheating, and trying to pull a fast one. It's not true. The vast majority of players just want to play the game and have fun doing it, and the customer service people should be happy to make their customers happy.
So, I'm glad to see a gripe like this on a busy site like Slashdot. Maybe with more pressure from the actual players of the game, they'll start to pay attention.
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
You express your anger with abuse of arbitrary power in a virtual realm by abusing your own arbitrary power, in your own personal virtual realm?
/., you deserve to use it to opine on topics. It's his work capital, if you will. Those complaining about abuse of power are just jealous of that power. And based on my short time (har har) on /. (look at my number) I'd say he rarely uses that capital so he has a lot saved up.
I am disappointed in you. Please keep the petty bitching confined to livejournal.
Wait - so he has spent time, probably a bit(or a lot) of his own money to build this site initially, and this is an abuse of power? That's bullshit. Mod me down if you must - I will not stand behind the cloak of anonymity to voice my disapproval of this rediculous statement. I won't even use my KB.
If you build a site from the ground like
Personally this reminded me of years gone by when Slashdot had more CmdrTaco in it. I didn't think it was petty; you said clearly that you weren't mad at Blizzard, you were just writing a short essay on attachment to online identities. I enjoyed it. Keep up the good work.
Plus, it isn't like he does this ALL the time.
so I think I'll give him a pass on the occasional rant.
Not that Blizzard would ever be so smart as to apologize or anything. I wonder if they care? (not)
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
Thanks for saying it! Slashdot has always been my soapbox. It was my soapbox before any of you read it. And it still is. I just choose not to use it as often today as I did 8 years ago. But I felt that this was important enough to talk about.
Pants are still optional, but recommended for you.
This is no different than Dvorak bitching about Photoshop, or MOG bitching about PJ, or PJ bitching about anyone she perceives as anti-FOSS. Taco has a platform, he'll use it to talk about whatever he wants to talk about, and you're free to stop listening if you want to. Furthermore, you didn't NEED to read the editorial, did you? It was perfectly obvious what he was going to say from the convenient summary on the front page.
This has also been a rule in EverQuest for a very, very long time.
In response to Taco's claim that "Cmdr" is not one of the PvP ranks, I would just mention that "Commander" is, in fact, such a rank - it's the third highest rank, and the server I play on only has five of them at the moment.
In other words, whine more, noob.
I've noticed most of the people complaining in this forum about this editorial are those with higher uid numbers. Now, I'm sure many of them will claim they used to have really low numbers but "forgot their passwords" so they had to create a new account, but we all know that's bogus.
Taco has the right to post whatever articles he wants here. This one does bring up some interesting points for discussion, albeit points that have already been talked to death in other forums. However, he could have posted a long diatribe about the way the bagger at the grocery store put his canned peaches on top of his eggs in the same bag, and that would have also been a valid submission. If he replaced every article with that sort of thing, it would obviously change the whole character of Slashdot, but he (and his corporate parents) can go that direction if they so choose.
I also remember the JonKatz articles, and while Katz was a pompous blowhard who loved to hear himself type, it was a valiant effort at creating original content for Slashdot. It seems the editors have largely given up on that concept, probably due mostly to the slashbot issue you mentioned.
Oh, and don't listen to anyone who compares WoW's GMs with Slashdot's moderation system. Tell me, does WoW have meta-GMs??? If one GM slaps you down, can two more GMs bring you back up? Slashdot is really the only discussion site on the web worth looking at, despite the occasional misspelling or duplicate post, and it is all due to your moderation system.
Party on!
-Brian
Wasn't that the point of the article? I mean yes, there was some preachyness, but the "moral(s)" appeared to be that there needs to be accountability for people who make these descisions, and that these descisions shouldn't be handed out lightly, or without consideration.
"And if nothing less, it will make me take changes in Slashdot a little more seriously next time."
--Not to be worried, Pitr fix.
I am sorry for this pettiness, but not too surprised. GMs can become "little Hitlers" who relish in their power, much like the shift manager in the local burger joint who gets off on bullying the wage slave high school students.
Besides, how do you think the BNet.d creators feel after Blizzard tried to screw them out of their hard work?
I enjoyed Starcraft and Diablo 1/2, but I am not buying the kids another Blizzard game until they soften their policies. Besides, I get more work done without these crack-addiction games anyway.
My rights don't need management.
http://www.blizzard.com/support/wowgm/?id=agm01723 p#titles
Titles
Fantasy titles should be earned through the mechanics of the game, and should not be recreated through character naming. This category includes names which:
* Consist of any title prefix attached to a character's name be it fantasy-based or not (i.e. Kingmike, Presidentsanchez)
If a player is found to have such a name for their character he/she may:
* Be prompted to select a new name for the character upon next login
pooptruck
Reading over your story though, it doesn't sound like it's the same thing. There are supraficial similarities, but ultimately it's just that. Supraficial.
I think the difference between moderation and Blizard's rules enforcement system is the concentration of power rather than the diffusion of power. When someone mods down one of my post because they disagree with my politics, I'm annoyed - but not angry. If what I said is well thoughtout and relevant, the bad moderation will be canceled out. Many people can moderate - and so the odd jerk is canceled out by the weight of numbers.
Blizard has very few GMs -- which isn't really so much of a problem. But that the GMs are really the last level of appeal in the game and (more often than not) the last level of appeal at all makes the lack of oversight all the more troubling.
You go to great pains in your recounting of events to point out that this whole thing is probably silly - but I disagree with you there. Sure, WOW isn't your social security card, but it is a service you're paying for. Clearly, the name you chose is not confusing, nor does it in any way supplant any of the promotions that the game hands out. In any sane customer relations system, you would be granted an exception to the rule. That's what customer care is supposed to be about -- saving the individual from the system.
Killfile(TGK)
No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
When a name is all you know. I've got two perspectives on this. First, I a have had the same email address cross domain since my first in 1991. I Passed up on some services because my email name was not available and I was offered those annoying 'number+name' combinations. I value that name as a way for people to know I am me. As it stands now, I try to use Monkeyboy4 as my email name was a fairly common combination.
Second, I do research on virtual groups and social identity. Our names matter when we interact fora long time online. A name represents a person exclusively online. Even pictures are minimal in effect compared to names, because the name occrs every time you interact with the person. Psych research in onthis question is showing the importance of our online names both to us as individuals and to the smooth running of social structures.
Finally, to all those crapping on CmdrTaco for postin this, leave the discusion. If you don't think it is worth discussing, then DON'T. If you have aposition within the discussion that disagrees with his stance, byu all means chime in. But to dicuss about whether the post is worthy of being in discussion is ironic and a waste of time.
How did I feel when the clerk at the airline check-in desk told me that I was on the "no fly" list? He then corrected himself and said someone with my _name_ was on the "no fly' list.
You have been using your online name for ten years. I have been using "Daniel P. Smith" for, uh, my whole life.
The airline ticket clerk takes my driver's license away from me, along with the driver's licenses of my wife, son, and daughter-in law, and he and another airline ticket clerk took them to some inner sanctum and did something mysterious, and after about five minutes came back and said we could be issued boarding passes.
On contacting the TSA I'm told that I can submit a form called a PVIF along with notarized copies of three forms of identification (driver's license, birth certificate, passport, etc.). This will accomplish... well, it's not exactly clear what it will accomplish. "Please understand that the TSA clearance process will not remove a name from the Watch Lists."
So what does it do? "Instead this process distinguishes passengers from persons who are in fact on the Watch Lists by placing their names and identifying information in a cleared portion of the Lists."
And what does THAT do? Well, here's what it doesn't do: "Clearance by TSA may not eliminate the need to go to the ticket counter in order to check-in. While TSA cannot ensure that this procedure will relieve all delays, we hope it will facilitate a more efficient check-in process for you."
You're upset because some online game doesn't like the name you've chosen for yourself? Please.
_I'm_ upset because my government doesn't like the name I was born with. And, yes, I'm upset because I can see the look in the clerk's eyes... and in the eyes of the notary at my local bank stamping the notarized copies (yes, of course I caved... what do you think I am, someone with principles?)... thinking "Well, he's probably OK but, gee, he's on the TSA's list..."
I think I'm going to get a court order to change my surname to Cmdrtaco. Hopefully there aren't too many people on the no-fly list named Daniel P. Cmrdtaco.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
As Violated, nobody ever will recognize me for my day job. But that's really not what bugs me. I was really attached to my name. This character bounded through Azgalor slaying monsters and meeting new people. Now that character is erased and another character stands in its place. Same armor. Same class. But different somehow.
A hard pit began to form in the depth of my soul, and I began to realize that my life as I knew it was gone. I had been cut off from everyone who knew me, from who I was. I was faceless, nameless, alone in the world. Now I would wander the shadows of the worlds, a piercing invisible wind, striking terror in the hearts of the GMs. Not just for me but for all who are Violated.
Just a quick side note, I think if you and the other editors participated more in the discussion, you would receive less criticism and seem more "part of the crowd" rather than above and beyond as some posters like to make you seem. It would be good to see someone such as yourself bicker back and forth with someone on the merits of say running a large clustered site or if a game is worth playing. Flame on! :-) Excellent essay by the way, its important that issues like these are verbalized so innocent gamers can see the problem is on a larger scale than just them being personally targeted and unable to do anything about it. Regardless of what others are posting, I think this was a responsible use of your position and abilities (the site is after all *yours*).
Regards,
Steve
Long ago I was 'bitch-slapped'. What did I do? I down-modded one comment, apparently the wrong one. For this crime all of my karma (which was significant at the time) was removed. Apparently the guy I downmodded was some buddy of the slashdot inner circle (if I remember correctly, the notorious Signal 11). I was not aware that one could be 'bitch-slapped' for downmodding a single comment.
I received no explanation and my karma was never restored. I tried to explain that even if my single moderation was incorrect (which is arguable), my overall pattern of moderation was consistent and sound (in fact I rarely downmod, then or now). My arguments fell on deaf ears.
Keep whining Malda. I hope they ignore you.
Eh, that's somewhat more honest than when happens at most companies. Normally you call up and the rep tells you that his name is Steve (hint: it's not). At least you can be relatively sure that the rep's real name isn't CoolElf, assuming Blizzard's HR department isn't run by crackheads.
I read the internet for the articles.
Slashdot stopped being Taco's personal blog when VA Software bought it and employed him. Oh, and let's not forget the advertisements, slashvertisements and the subscription sales. This makes slashdot a BUSINESS VENTURE (granted a very poorly-run one, if VA's stock is any indication (it's lower in value than SCO's!)), and somebody's personal blog no longer. To paraphrase a previous poster: FoxNews may be Rupert Murdoch's property, but does that make it alright for him to have his "i didnt read the speed limit sign, how dare they give me a speeding ticket" story read as headline news by the anchors? Taco's bad experience belongs on his journal, because that's what the journals are for. He's abusing his ability as a site editor to put this on the front page.
This would be relevant to gaming if it were a well thought out article about online identity, instead of somebody whinging that they had to change their name in WoW because they didn't take the time to read the rules of the game. I've seen Taco point others to Slashdot's years out of date FAQ, so now I'll take the time to point him to one: Part 3, Section A, Subsection 13 (naming conventions) AND I QUOTE (though the emphasis is mine alone):
Now, if you're going to join a service that you must pay a monthly fee to use, that you're going to put in all sorts of time over, then don't you think it would behoove one to read the fucking rules of the service? it's pretty clear that Taco was breaking the rules, so what exactly does he expect to happen? Does he expect to get an exception just because he's That Guy Who Makes Slashdot Run? If it took him "dozens of inquiries to get that explained" then he needs to learn to read the rules of the game before he plays. I don't play Wow, and it took me about 10 seconds to find the relevant rules page and its section regarding names. It's really not that hard.
This is a non-story, the only reason it's on the front page is because of Taco's abuse of power. To be fair, at least it's something fresh and recent instead of the usual "news items" (or duplicate posts) that showed up on the BoingBoing RSS feed weeks ago...
I find it disturbing how many people just say, "who cares", "shut up", "this isn't the right place for this", "stop whinning/bellyaching" etc.
First, stop whinning about Rob whinning. It's hyppocrittical and innaccurate. If you want to take issue with a point of view in the article, fine, but the one line bashing is immature, and a waste of time. You're not contributing anything, you're just flaming.
Second, this article nicely falls into the "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters" category. I'm a nerd, this matters to me, so it's fine. If it doesn't matter to you, move along. There are planty of articles that don't interest me here, so I don't read them.
Third, it's an opinion piece, which I think is admerably objective. It might be a little preachy, and yes, even a little whinney, but it's heart felt. Why should that be a bad thing. There's no "call to arms to take down Blizzard", there's only a feeling of unfairness, with a realization that Slashdot has the potential for the same abuse and missgivings. There's a moral, or a lesson if you will.
Finally, this is Rob's place! HIS creation, brainchild, work, hobby, etc! Why would he not have a right to throw in something slightly personal now and then? Yes Slashdot would be nothing without the community, but the reverse is also true. And it's not like Rob writes these articles every day. So even if this were the fluff piece some of you seem to think it is, I think it's ok if he writes one every couple years.
The main point of the article, is that people with the power/ability to affect people they'll never see, should think before they act, and be accountable for said actions, and that Rob has a new appreciation for what this means in regards to him. And as a side note, he's upset he lost his name in WoW. Perhapse those of you who were so quick to object to the article, without stating anything meaningful, should take that thought to heart and put more thought into your posts from now on.
--Not to be worried, Pitr fix.
Get a blog loser and don't bore the rest of us with your childish rant about how you're not allowed to break the rules everyone else conforms to.
As others have pointed out, this *is* his blog, but more importantly, you clearly missed the point. First of all, there's a difference between "You should make an exception for me" and "This rule is silly." And the rest of the piece? Musings about online identity. Rather thought-provoking if you bother to think about it. Which you clearly didn't.
>> but as everyone who communicates via a chat system knows, subtleties of communication are often lost when translated to line-by-line text
Right. That must be the reason why human interactions, relationships, and perhaps even the entire scope of civilization could never advance until emoticons were invented.
-dZ.
Carol vs. Ghost
CmdrTaco, you can't take what you dish out? I've submitted articles in the past that have been rejected and then when I write to Rob, he says that his policy is to not discuss why articles are rejected. Well, that's VERY helpful. Think about your own processes before your condemn others.
>What should someone's UID have to do with the validity of what they post?
When it comes to history, lore, and general knowledge about the evolution of Slashdot itself, I'd say the UID matters quite a bit.
---- Take the Space Quiz!
Sometimes I enjoy what Malda writes, but this is just stupid.
Wow is very stringent on names. Always has been. Look around and you'll see players that have really awful names don't tend to stick around (and when they do, it's on the PVP servers where this is less enforced).
Not satisified on inference, however? Fine. He broke 3 rules stated right in the EULA and character FAQ page on the site:
1.) You cannot use a name of someone/something "famous", even if it's your own. Among nerds, CmdrTaco is a relatively known names. So far I've seen names like Rushlimbaugh, Petergriffin, etc. get changed the first day.
2.) You cannot use names that break fantasy convention. What's fantasy convention? Anything that wouldn't really fit the world. A name of a message board moderator (originally named after a food) doesn't fit.
3.) You cannot use a prefixed title, as he stated. There ARE commanders in the name (no, there are no "Cmdr"'s, but that's a moot point -- it was clear what he meant and he said in the past it's short for a made up taco shack).
This is pretty much the video game equivalent of going to a baseball game, getting 3 strikes and then complaining that you should get a 4th. No, the rules are that 3 strikes and you're out. You don't get to make up the rules. If that third strike was a curveball that was pretty outside, yeah, you can maybe argue that, but this was right down the middle. Live with it.
Hear hear. As an old-timer I must say I miss this part of slashdot. This site used to be, in part, a vehicle for smart, engaged, motivated and with-it individuals to comment on how their lives, as technology enthusiasts, are affected by their use of technology. This is an outstanding article in that tradition.
Write on, Rob. Write more.
Paul
The real Paul Vallee is slashdot userid 2192, and, what do you mean it's not cool to point out your low userid?
Those of us with 5 digit UIDs have been here for a while. We remember things like long user names, I was originally "Lord Kano-The Gangster Of Love". We remember Sig11. We remember when it was actually cool to get a "First Post".
We remember the days before the Karma cap. We remember numeric Karma. We remember when certain rules were imposed because they were necessary. We were here when Rusty was talking about K5 in damned near every thread just to generate some traffic for his site.
It's about perspective. If you didn't experience something first hand, you don't have the same perspective as someone who did.
Remember y2k? Who do you think was working non-stop to check all of that old code? It wasn't guys my age. It was guys 20+ years older than me who knew cobol inside and out. Sometimes youth is a boon. The creativity, idealism and energy of youth can take you far, but sometimes the wisdom that comes from experience can take you even further.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
I think SilentChris might be missing the point.
Our beloved CmdrTaco doesn't dispute that Blizzard has the rights to set and enforce naming conventions in its virtual world. I suspect that if his forced name-change had occurred early in his WOW career, we wouldn't be reading this monologue.
It's the forced name-change of an apparently well-established character in the WOW world, without having an effective avenue to appeal to or complain through that is the problem.
What's happened isn't necessarily wrong (in the "against the rules" sense, at least)...it's just very poorly handled.
Now, I don't play any of these games (I waste enough time on Slashdot), but it seems that "aimbot" is a very dangerous name from the vendor's point of view: the presence of such a name calls the integrity of the game system into question.
I think they have a pretty strong basis for rejecting such names.
All these games WoW, Eq, etc. Could outsource the name validation system to a third party who would allow people to register specific usernames across all such (participating) games. Ask people to pay US$1/month (US$12/year) to maintain a username, password protected, on all participating systems. That way, people who *really* want their names get them. Any violations (copywright, foul language, famous people) would be dealt with by this 3rd party - at the time of creation of the name. Perhaps it takes two weeks, or whatever, to reserve the name - and maybe there is some kind of setup fee I don't know - but once you have it, they stand by it. Appeal to them. If they reject your name, you pay nothing. If you don't want to pay for a reserved name, you deal with (a) your name not available, (b) your name accepted then rejected later - but you pay nothing (extra) and it's handeled by blizard/SOE/whomever.
a war on terrorism? How can we end a war on a method?
Nobody ever thinks that *they* need to be held accountable for how their actions affect others. It's always *other people*, people with "real power", who need to be challengeable or redressable.
Accountability is an inconvenience, and a threat to the target's power. Few people *want* to be accountable; it means that you can be penalized for doing something wrong, and people always do wrong things, so its inevitable that accountability will lead to penalty of some sort (however minor); the fear is that an irrationally vigorous redressing will over-penalize you (and this does happen).
The point is... Everyone says that those with power need to be accountable for it, except when it comes to the power *they themselves* hold. GMs aren't powerful -- not *really* powerful -- so they don't see any need to be accountable. Of course, they *do* have *some* power, but it's never "enough" to require accountability. (I'm using GM here as a relevant example, but it's hardly the only valid one -- insert the term of the agent of power you most love to hate here -- site admins, police, CSRs, etc.)
There's an annoying norm of disproportionate contraries, particularly in the online world. A GM making a bad, misapplied, or abused decision on another player will retort to complaints with "it's only game"; in the grander scheme of things (and there is *always* a grander scheme of things, in everything, which most people forget when they apply this adage) it "doesn't really matter". Well, if the actions of a GM aren't such a big deal, then accountability of the GM shouldn't be a big deal, either. But clearly, it *is* such a big deal, to the GM. The use of their power is not important -- but the fear over the questioning of that use *is*.
There's always a touchy-feely reason not to challenge the admins, either. They're volunteers, or they work really hard, or they are really good people, or they "could have done worse". All of these are provided as reasons why the individual should not be able to challenge the people who exert power over them. What this implies, of course, is that being a volunteer, or working hard, or being lenient (while still being wrong) all become licenses to abuse or misapply power.
I guess I can't entirely blame the unfortunate empowered individuals for treating accountability as a personal insult or unfair restriction on them; they for whatever reason don't recognize that they have power and that any power should come with appropriately proportional checks on it. Of course, the people above them, both within the paradigm and within society, are always looking to avoid accountability as well. Sometimes the people succeed in compelling accountability upon them; but sometimes they don't. And rarely does it work in your favor to wilfully invite accountability. You have to do it due to principle and selfless benevolence, not entitlement and self-aggrandizement.
What really is disappointing is that even intelligent geeks can't be expected to believe in the universal application of principles like accountability of power. They're just as susceptible to the allure of power, however minor, as the common masses. So much for geeks inheriting the earth.
Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.
No... he shouldn't have been able to create the name in the first place if it violated the rules -- if the rules cannot be programmed into the game, then they should not be "enforced" by plebes.
It's just like the DMV, getting a passport, credit reports, 401k rollovers and traffic tickets. You're not special. Figure it out and take responsibility for the consequences of your actions. This is what it means to participate in an egalitarian community and belongs to the real-life world. This aspect of the game is not the "fun" part.
Now, for the real issue at hand: I think you've run into a dichotomy between your desire for an on-line identity and the WoW game concept. You want an ID which represents a general, online persona, WoW wants its participants to immerse themselves in their fantasy narrative. You want to express an externally consistent individualism at the price of breaking the game metaphor.
You can probably appreciate how I may be glad WoW made you change your name, and impatient with your pleading with them to tolerate it. WoW is an escapist construction. I play expecting to get away (at least as much as I can) from Chr1st_LUVZ_U and N8_IZ_GR8. I see some dude running around named Taco, a "Cmdr" no less, and I am suddenly in some stupid chat room all over again.
As a thought experiment, consider going to see a production of Othello. Halfway through some dude runs on the stage shouting "I am SlackArtist!!!" and runs off. I'm not saying that WoW is the same, but it is: a) something I pay for, b) escapist, c) depending for its effect on the suspension of disbelief, and d) an artistic expression.
One possible compromise may be for WoW to have an interface option which hides the names which violate the policy. This way, you can be CmdrTaco, but I don't have to look at you or know you're there. This would mean Bliz implementing another poster's suggestion: a database of violating names. Already, though, this technical solution is kinda creepy and suggests to me that if it's necessary, then maybe WoW isn't the place for you to blow off steam.