I'm thinking about names like super user, superuser and superuser.
-
At least ♦ is not valid as part of a user name.– Daniel Beck ModCommented Sep 28, 2011 at 18:42
-
But then again, which new user really knows what the ♦ means? Even the FAQ doesn't mention it.– slhckCommented Sep 28, 2011 at 21:16
-
1How about a slightly different question - "Does anyone care if user names can be confused with the site name?" - My answer: "Me no carey"– James T SnellCommented Sep 28, 2011 at 23:32
-
@slhck Any new user reading the about page will quickly learn what the diamond means. We also usually introduce ourselves quickly if we need to intervene.– BinaryMisfit ModCommented Sep 29, 2011 at 7:10
-
@Diago I know, but not always. I've often had users thinking I was a mod/admin because I edited their post.– slhckCommented Sep 29, 2011 at 8:11
-
@slhck. You are a moderator. The reputation system is working since you received the ability to do that. That's 100% correct. Diamond moderators are enforcers, but, we still abide by the community. We are not one law to rule them all. We've often had to reverse decisions because the community wanted them reversed, but personally did not agree with them.– BinaryMisfit ModCommented Sep 29, 2011 at 8:44
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
The Stack Exchange engine doesn't enforce unique names and this shouldn't extend to us having to "protect" arbitrary names from re-use except where impersonation is occurring.
"Impersonation" varies, but in this case I'd be looking for a pretence that they are a moderator or affiliated with the site - this could include what they post, comment, say in chat and/or the content of their gravatar (if, for example, they used the SU icon).
I don't think there's currently a cause for concern.
answered Sep 28, 2011 at 14:50
-
1
-
@simon yeah, I removed the dead users so there's at least less possibility of confusion. One of them is active. Commented Sep 30, 2011 at 1:44