Your changelog says at the very bottom [Real name policy has been removed]
. A pretty big change in policy that it should be included in the [READ THIS FIRST]
post no? Does this mean people can use random aliases now? I thought a lot of us liked and even got used to the idea of using real names because of accountability.
Regarding multiple accounts, does this mean they can open 5 different accounts so long as they're not breaking any rules its okay? Say if someone uses 5 accounts and decides to use 3 of them in the same discussion using random aliases( no real name policy anymore so why not
) this should be okay then?
They don't necessarily have to be talking to themselves. I think you missed the point there or maybe I didn't explain myself well. The person with multiple accounts could be talking in a discussion not started by them using 3 different accounts, this visually to me or another OP comes off as 3 different people addressing my problem in the discussion. Worst case, the multiple account user can go around manipulating the agree and insightful reaction in the same discussion. This throws off the whole discussion. Reactions are there for a reason right to give you a quick idea of what is acceptable? But with multiple accounts it can be abused I believe.
Regarding changing policy, I think it's natural that things change, not only are we all learning and growing, but the community is too (hopefully). What made sense in the context of TD's foundation in 2012 may not make sense in 2021. I agree better transparency around policy changes would be good, but this is a process issue and I don't think James made the changes with any harmful intention.
Instead I think the new name policy is more akin to sitting at a big table in a restaurant with a lot of strangers where some people introduce themselves by their full name, and some only by their first name. As long as the discussions are interesting, on topic and polite – what does it matter? Don’t you talk to strangers in real life?
This is a public forum so all conversations are visible to everyone anyway.
that is a rather short-sighted reasoning. What if the no-names do pay that price and the named people won’t?