Username Changes

[Catzsy]

I would support this suggestion as the argument that they are a member and may log in after all that time is
virtually nil in my opinion. Also it would be an incentive to our loyal and dedicated members as the forum owes nothing really to somebody who last signed in 5 years ago. I would say though that it should be reserved to a member who has been active on the forum regularly for a time to be agreed.

[Mr-Trainor]

I think it should be no posts within five years rather than no posts at all.

I agree with this; would be much better than just five years offline and no posts at all.

[Jessie]

Yeah I agree, I wanted the username Jessie but I wasn't allowed it because it has 2 posts even though they last signed in 5 years ago. Odds are people can't even remember their username or password anyway, it would be really good if it could be changed

[Inseriousity.]

I could but I'd prefer it without the dot and hopefully with feedback from other users we could get this changed and benefit any other users wanting name changes.

dots ftw
yeah good idea

[RandomManJay]

I agree with that as well, it just makes more sense to be honest.

I agree with this; would be much better than just five years offline and no posts at all.

[Cosmic]

I totally agree with this suggestion. I think the chances of someone who hasn't been on the forum after 5 years (and already has very few posts) are close to nil. Habbo clearly deletes names that haven't been active for a couple of years (or was it a year from the merge in the last case?) and so I can't really see why we shouldn't do it either.

[Richie]

I think it should be no posts within five years rather than no posts at all.

I agree.

[xxMATTGxx]

We are considering changes to the username changes system so just wait and see what happens over the next couple of days for the outcome.

[nvrspk4]

I think it should be no posts within five years rather than no posts at all.

Agree - sort of. It should be activity, not posts. The idea is that people might browse without posting so the criteria should be based on activity.

Although there should probably be a post-based backstop. Anyone with 100 posts or so should get to keep the name even though they're inactive.

[Alex3213]

Agree - sort of. It should be activity, not posts. The idea is that people might browse without posting so the criteria should be based on activity.

Although there should probably be a post-based backstop. Anyone with 100 posts or so should get to keep the name even though they're inactive.

Yeah I looked at this thread earlier and I was gonna say pretty much what you said tbh, although I was thinking about 75 posts but that doesn't make a difference! Good idea though as there are some accounts which are just sitting there not being used.