No rename token for purged communities

[tenkuu]

Title:
No rename token for purged communities

Area:
communities, rename tokens

Summary:
A purged username that someone wants to use as a community should not require a rename token.

Description:
Communities shouldn't need rename tokens because they're not a newly created username like someone would have for their own personal journal. Once purged, if a username can be used as a community, it should be as easy to claim it as for any newly created community. After all, purged should mean that it no longer has any association with its previous owner, and in this way it's like any regular unclaimed username.

Poll #2674 No rename token for purged communities

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 47

View Respondents

This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
6 (12.8%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
1 (2.1%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
32 (68.1%)

(I have no opinion)
8 (17.0%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)

Comments

[ratcreature]

After all, purged should mean that it no longer has any association with its previous owner, and in this way it's like any regular unclaimed username.

But it is this the case? AFAIK comments, community posts, poll responses, presence on other people's profiles and such from purged accounts don't vanish (at least they don't on LJ), that is only broken if the name is reclaimed, and that causes the extra effort that you have to pay for. And that would still be true if this was to become a community.

[pseudomonas]

Also, any openID permissions/settings/writings/bans on remote sites for the username remain unchanged - but I've ranted about this before.

[tenkuu]

Then isn't there some way to change that? Or at least, to notify the remote sites in question that the username has changed ownership? It seems as though there should be some kind of option for that in the purging itself. A purging should be, as the name implies, a new start.

[pseudomonas]

This was discussed a while back in this community; the consensus was that there wasn't a way to do it, and that a)warning people before deleting their accounts to notify anyone who'd given them access, and b) warning people who bought a rename, was sufficient.

[tenkuu]

Then should I add that to the details of my suggestion? Ie, that a purged username should at least have its own page completely empty? Also, that a purged username should have some way to differentiate between a comment made by the old owner and the new? Or perhaps that all posts made by the previous owner should be, as the name implies, well and truly purged by simply having them be automatically erased?

But either way, what you mentioned would be a concern even if one were to purchase a rename token for such a purged account, so it doesn't directly relate to the rename token issue.

[ratcreature]

Huh? I just didn't understand what the community part of your suggestion has to do with anything. As I pointed out, picking a "purged" username is not the same as choosing username that has never existed, and that that username still needs extra work before it is ready to be used again, for communities and regular accounts alike. And I don't see why this ought to happen to every "purged" account, i.e. with the purging rather than the reusing. It makes sense to only go through the trouble if someone else wants to use that name, whereas the majority of purged names is not of any interest to anyone so there is no need for that work.

[tenkuu]

It's just that when you create a community, it's different from registering a new username.

I understood perfectly what you were pointing out, and that is why I wrote the explanation that I did. What do you mean though, you don't see why it ought to happen to every purged account? A purged account no longer has the same owner, that's why.

People who work for Dreamwidth certainly have more resources than regular users, so if it is a lot of work to completely purge an account, it would be much easier for them to do it.

But what kind of logic is that, anyway? Purge a username so that someone else might be able to use it in the future, but then have the mentality that most of them won't be used anyway. That makes no sense. Not only that, it isn't a very nice thing to say, and just because you don't know someone who would like to use a purged username.

[yvi]

It's just that when you create a community, it's different from registering a new username.

How?

You say Communities shouldn't need rename tokens because they're not a newly created username like someone would have for their own personal journal

But they are. They are a newly created account with a username, just like a personal account.

[tenkuu]

Because a community does not work the same as a regular username. You manage a community under your current username.

When you register a new username, you will not be asked for a rename token.

[kyrielle]

A community is still an account and still exists at that name on Dreamwidth, even though it's not a person. Regardless of the type of account, the "space" it was in has to be cleaned.

To run with that as an analogy, it's not whether the apartment will contain a family or a business - it's whether the apartment previously contained something else and needs cleaning.

And in many cases the user name that was deleted and purged (the "apartment") is not desirable enough that anyone wants to use it again, so taking on the cleaning fees for it at the outset isn't worth it. If someone wants it, then the cleaning has to be done, and any cleaning fees dealt with - regardless of who/what is moving in.

[tenkuu]

I don't think the analogy is right... A regular username is more like a family, and a community is like a family member. Not unimportant, but part of the unit.

Actually, apartments get used because of usefulness more than desirability. But either way, with your analogy, the apartment needs to be cleaned in case it should be used again.

[kyrielle]

In terms of who's at the keyboard, yes. But a user name is a "space" and its prior activity, not its new activity, determines what use cleaning up is.

Why take the overhead of cleaning up all links, comments, etc., in a way that preserves them but doesn't tie them to the new owner if there is no new owner? How many purged usernames are ever reclaimed? A lot of usernames aren't something someone else would want, only the original owner. If cleanup were cheap and easy, then sure, but if it were then I don't think there'd even be a question of rename tokens in the first place.

[tenkuu]

I get your point. However, if it is that rare, then it's all the more reason not to ask someone to pay for a rename token to have an account fully purged.

[yvi]

When you try to register a purged username, yes, you are.

[tenkuu]

Someone who registers a new account won't pay for a purged username, they'll just use a different but similar username. Biggest turn-off for registering to a website is having to pay.

[yvi]

Okay, I really don't get your point then.

[tenkuu]

As in the original thread I started, my point is simply that we shouldn't have to pay for a purged account.

[yvi]

Yes, but you specifically single out communities. I don't get that line of reasoning.

[tenkuu]

Not specifically, no. But I mentioned communities because there was one purged username that I was interested in registering as a community.

[yvi]

Not specifically, no.

Seriously? The whole suggestion is titled "No rename token for purged communities", you said "Communities shouldn't need rename tokens because they're not a newly created username like someone would have for their own personal journal" and "Because a community does not work the same as a regular username".

I am letting this go now, but let me say that you did not, in my opinion, make clear what you meant.

[azurelunatic]

If anything, for this suggestion to make sense, it would be "Purged usernames that were previously used as a community should be freely available, because communities do not leave comments nor do they have old entries in other communities".

[yvi]

*nods* I didn't think of that, but yes, that might have made sense.

[tenkuu]

That doesn't make as much sense as you think; it's only easier to implement. I'll give you my own example for a username I wanted for a community. "dgrayman" is a username that has been deleted and purged, and I don't know for sure, but it seems to have been a personal account. D.Gray-Man is a popular series that has a manga and had an anime that covered most of the manga but ended. Several people still follow the manga though, as it's published monthly in Japan. That is why I'm interested in making a community of that name, because the series is one of my favorites.

[katieastrophe]

I may not be entirely or even slightly right (so any staff who know better than me, please feel free to correct) but my knowledge of how purging/selling new usernames is this:

* Person buys rename token for specific username which has been purged
* DW staff see rename token and manually change the purged username to something else non descript so that the usernames of comments change
* DW staff assign purged username to person who bought

This process is the same, irrespective of how the purged username was once used, or how it is henceforth going to be used.

i.e. it requires person-power to do some work and therefore, you have to pay for that.

[tenkuu]

But if it's so rarely done, then it isn't all that much work after all.

[denise]

At this point, as far as I can tell, your suggestion (and all of the subsequent comments about it) boil down to "I want to do something without paying for it, so I will suggest that nobody should have to pay for it."

You've made your case for your suggestion; let it go and let it be considered. Arguing with every commenter does nothing to change whether or not your suggestion will be accepted.

[tenkuu]

If this were any other issue, ie an issue not having to do with any kind of payment, you would not be saying such a thing. I think even you are aware that your comment is not at all fair, given this. As a few people pointed out, someone asking to use a purged account username happens rarely, so that is all the more reason not to charge for the rare times when it happens. If this became more commonplace, then there would definitely be more reason to charge for it.

I'm not arguing with anyone. If they ask me a question or dispute something I say, I reply to it. Everyone does the same.

[katieastrophe]

If Dreamwidth said they would do it for free, do you really think it would be rarely done then? People wouldn't go "hey, we're bored of this name, let's change it to $purgedname, just because we can!"?

I'm not convinced.

[tenkuu]

Maybe you're right. Actually, that thought hadn't occurred to me. As far as I know, Dreamwidth is not that well known yet, so when people said that it was rarely done, I thought it was simply for that reason.

[azurelunatic]

The current biggest factor in the way of renaming on Dreamwidth is currently the fact that the user-accessible interface to perform a rename does not exist yet. Right now all renames are done manually by staff, and I believe that to keep the volume of renames manageable, they are mostly doing this in case of typo on account creation.

I have no reason to believe that renaming would be a less popular feature on Dreamwidth than it is on LiveJournal.

I hope, when renames are implemented properly, that staff will release statistics on it (how many total and separately by personal journal and community, how many as a percentage of that type of user, maximum number of renames by one journal (or a curve of number of renames per journal, that would be even better), length of journal ownership and what point in the journal ownership the rename(s) happen, and probably more.

[tenkuu]

If a computer would be doing the renaming, one would think there'd be less chances of typos that can be caused by human error.

Is it even all that popular on LJ?

Yes, that's a good idea. So that one user cannot be changing his username everytime a whimsy strikes.

[azurelunatic]

Perhaps I phrased myself poorly. The "in case of typo" renames are not in case the staff has made a typo in the renaming process, but in case the user has made a typo when registering their account, particularly as creating a new personal journal for free costs an invite code, and buying paid time to get a new journal means you wouldn't want to be stuck with a typo.

Judging from the number of public support requests on LiveJournal asking for help in how to rename, and the number of people on my friends list who have renamed, I would say that it is reasonably popular. At least one person of my acquaintance is on at least her third rename, if not more.

[tenkuu]

Yes, but unless the user says so, how can you be sure that it's typo and not an intended mistype? Ie, I've seen usernames on LJ that have two words stuck together, and because the two words would be one or two characters too long, the person would take out one of the letters. For instance, "mitarashi dango", a japanese sweet: the person in this case used the nick "mtarashidango".

I know maybe two people who have had a rename, and my list is pretty full.

~jumping in here.

[awesome]

That's the point, the user says so. They message Support and ask for a rename because they had a typo in their username they didn't see before. No one's automatically fixing it. It has to be requested.

And as for the knowing people that use renames, on my lj friends list, literally everyone on my list has used a rename at least once, and a handful of them rename their journals every few months. It's a matter of the crowd you run in. They are very popular with all the people I know. You can't assume it's not popular because it doesn't happen in your circle of contacts.

Re: ~jumping in here.

[tenkuu]

My bad, I misunderstood.

True, but just the same, just because everyone you know has renamed their accounts at least once, doesn't mean it's *that* popular with everyone. :)

Re: ~jumping in here.

[awesome]

But that's the thing, you can't assume either way based on your personal opinion.

That said, I know that anytime they announce a purge, since it's not actually done every thirty days or anything close to that, there are pages worth of people saying they're excited because they've been waiting x amount of time to get a specific name. So by everything I've seen, which I admit is nothing close to hard data, it's still really popular.

Also, as someone pointed out before, if you make it free it makes people so much more likely to do it and to increase the workload to the point where money will be lost. By making people pay for it, automated or by hand, it means that the amount of people is down some and even if it's still a massive amount of people, no money is lost in the process.

And then, honestly, there's also the security issue. If someone hacks into your journal and renames it, then you can't ever get it back because renaming takes out any ownership you ever had. So if renames were free, sadly hacking into journals might be even more common or at the very least, ever getting your journal, and all it's content, back would be nearly impossible since the first thing they'd do would be to rename it. The cost off puts renaming it, maybe even for long enough that they can get their journal back. It's no the reason behind the cost but it's a reason I would always bring up to say no to free renames.

Re: ~jumping in here.

[tenkuu]

I'm not making anymore of an assumption than anyone else, just making an observation that neither of us can know for certain.

Yes, but there are what, millions of LJ users? And you see a few hundred, maybe, commenting about how excited they are? I'm just saying there's no real way to gauge it.

I'm not convinced by the security issue argument. If someone wants to hack your account, they'll do it no matter what. If they want it badly enough and want to keep you from getting it back, they'll even pay for it. And if they're not motivated enough, then they won't hack it and will simply choose their intended username. And the thing is, we already have free usernames, and it seems a bit excessive to charge for a rename. Imagine you have an account for 10 years and after that time you want a name change, a change of pace so to speak. If for instance we were all allowed a single rename within a certain time frame, that wouldn't be too excessive and would require less manpower. Also, what you said about a hacked account and how you can't get it back, that should not be happening. There should be a history of the username that would allow a mod to see what the username was previously called.

[azurelunatic]

That's sort of a mix between how it is now and how it's planned.

On LiveJournal, the flow goes:
Person buys rename token for their journal
Person applies rename token and desired destination username
(If destination username is a purged personal journal) automatic job is kicked off to change comments and community entries to the format of "ex_$whoeve###"
Automatic job assigns new username to the renamed journal, and either redirects or deletes the old username, depending.

It will eventually be automatic on DW; renames aren't being currently sold in the shop because it's not automatic. Right now it's mostly being done in cases of obvious typo on account creation.