Oman's Title Policy

[Oman]

Oman's Title Fairy policy has been implemented!

[Oman]

I don't agree with username puns being inherently bad. Many of them may be lame but you can't just ban them outright.

One of the cool things about Public asking for expressions of opinion on matters such as this is that when you're told you "can't" do something you've already done, it's very easy to say "you had your chance, mate."

You disagree, I get it, don't say I cannot ban them outright. I gave plenty of time for discussion and you didn't show up there, where it could have changed things. So I made my decision. Forcing a funny situation into a lame username reference is no longer acceptable. I promise, next time policy is reviewed, if you get involved, you might prevent this kind of embarrassment.

[Oman]

Flay, I was talking more about sirdanilot himself.

However, I am happy to allow an exceptional username based title, the reason I didn't say "username based titles are cool if they're really good" is because then everyone says "Well mine is exceptional, so I'll suggest that." If I can't qualify the "goodness" required to make an avatar based title, then I'm not going to open that door in policy.

Secondly, the policy I originally wrote just mentioned username titles not all that good, and mith suggested to me that it be emphasised. I made the decision to cast a blanket statement over all username+avatar titles, because I have no idea where to draw that line.

The term "usually" or "exceptional" don't qualify it enough to stop people from trying to cram nearly every title into a pun. I'm all ears on how to solve that. Unless you can help me out with a good qualifier, it stays.

[Oman]

Ani, titles aren't funny by their own virtue though. They're funny by the stories and personality linked to it. If I say "this is a funny title" it doesn't work for people who weren't around during that time, titles are a very interesting thing in that the words themselves aren't all that "lol".

To people new to titles, placing a title for a person they've only met in passing will not clear it up for them.

[Oman]

Yes, so while I'm happy you're helping, and giving input, it's just not the answer we need.

[Oman]

See, knowing the story, I find that hilarious. I bet there are several people that don't find that all that funny.

[Oman]

Regardless, I don't find a subjective example as a good enough measure. I suppose it's mostly covered under "reserves the right to deny any title" rule, but I wanted to be clear that I don't find them particularly clever and (as Flay put it) it would have to be exceptional.

[Oman]

I've altered the "offending" rule to be more in line with it's intent (even though it feels soft and ambiguous to me). Hopefully this clears up the issues that have come from it.

The policy has also been added to the first page.

[Oman]

Oman, any title that is 'good' should be allowed, whether it's crammed into a pun or not. I thought part of your job was to judge if its good or not? Why are you using that as an argument? And plenty of people gave their opinion.

It's dumb to just put up your policy and refusing to change it further, even though an obviously illogical element is part of it.

I'm so glad you're keeping up here. It's obvious that you're not spending any time on this other than the 30 seconds it takes you to type the post, and it really shows.

The major point is that the policy was altered, I never refused to change it. I even said to ani "if you can give me a solution i'll implement" (I ended up going for a variation of Flay's "usually" solution). I altered the policy, such an "obviously illogical element".

The secondary point is that I'm done with you right now. If you're going to put forward falsities such as this, you're going to lose my respect, and you're likely going to look stupid to other people too.

[Oman]

Yeah Flay, I do apologise that it was presented in such a way. Thanks for your assistance in dealing with it.