/tg/Station 13

3. This is a sandbox roleplaying server.
Keep IC out of OOC, and OOC out of IC. Your words and actions ingame should be distinguishable as an in-universe character, and not as a person playing a game. Playstyles that disregard all opportunities for engagement and roleplay can be met with administrative action. There is an exception for OOC in IC where terms like 'clickdrag X to Y, or look for the tab' is used to help a player.

Make a minimum effort to have your name fit in a setting involving a wacky space station in the future. A firstname lastname minimum is required for humans and felinids. Honorifics and nicknames are allowed as long as only one additive is used at a time, i.e "James Williams Jr." or "James "One-Eye" Williams". Excessively OOC names are disallowed, and are defined as names which are intentionally hard to read/spell, references to in-game mechanics or OOC terminology, historical/famous/media, and any form of nonsensical or low-effort name. Clowns, mimes, silicons, wizards, and nuke ops have significantly more leeway in choosing their names, within reason. Admins may get involved if your name is dumb and can approve or disallow names at their discretion.

Last update was viewtopic.php?p=579986

I propose removing the firstname lastname requirement.

Humans have, have had, and will probably continue to have mononyms.

Not all societies have patronyms or the same sorts of naming conventions. We can point to a lot of sci-fi media in which mononyms, phrases, or designations (clones with things like 'Iota-401' as their only name) are common if not the rule.

More broadly: we can judge if a name is OOC in IC or not, or dumb, without the hard requirement particular to humans and felinids that it follow a firstname lastname convention. We've already got other mononyms floating around, so it's not like this makes the game less legible - most people don't address each other by firstname lastname in-game anyway - but this seems like an unnecessary restriction on players' creative ability to come up with a character with one name or more that then begs the question "why?"

People should be trusted to come up with an answer IC if asked, and even if they don't, we should be invited to wonder as long as it doesn't take us out of the experience to even read the name - which the rest of Rule 3 above, left in place, addresses.

100% full send approve of this— I think the only case in which we should ever moderate someone’s name is when they are made in spite of the setting or common naming conventions just to dick around (Think Ben Dover or Eetwont Flush) and are common sense bullshit names. Mononyms grant a fair shake more freedom and creative ability to those wishing to stretch the bounds— however, as Higgin notes, players SHOULD be able to provide a sufficient IC reason behind this name if it sounds suspect. We don’t need pages of lore, but explain to me why someone named Mike Hawk is valid over Jenn-2 or some Sci-fi name like that.

I approve, the peasants shouldn't be allowed to have last names any more, as it is a sign that one belongs to a noble household or clan. The only person who should have a last name is Lady Penelope Dreadful on Manuel, as she is a noble Lady.

Jokes aside, it's kind of silly that we can have a moth named "Soup", but not a human named just "Tom", and it's also silly that humans would have the exact same common naming convention as 500 years prior when that isn't even the case right now, and human cultural evolution is speeding up constantly. Some probably will, but to claim that single names don't fit on humans in a sci-fi setting is far more silly than a human just named "Tom".

i know mononyms are a thing, but the last names of humans REALLY help keep them grounded admist all the other weird alien names.

human names are also historically known for being stupid as fuck. See: Literally "Dr. Gay Hitler", "Dick Bong", or the great and beloved Emporer... "Pupienus".

anyways, my point is that mononyms for humans could be ANYTHING. which should be left to the moths imo. it helps differentiate humans from moths.

also first name + last name puns are really funny and I think humans should keep doing them. god bless the name Brick Mortar

Nah I don't want EVERYBODY to have stupid names. They're fine, but if everyone is stupid, no one will be.

Striders13 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 12, 2024 9:33 am Nah I don't want EVERYBODY to have stupid names. They're fine, but if everyone is stupid, no one will be.

This isn't just the matter of stupid names, plenty of humans only have mononyms, especially in South India and South East Asia (Burma and Indonesia for example). Of course there should still be some "discretion" regarding human mononyms since a rather generic name like the aforementioned Tom isn't really that distinguishable, but I for one support removing Firstname Lastname from policy.

i oppose this

this policy will either lead to:

• humans running around with goofy moffic-esque mononyms (Soup, Spoink, Bugger, etc). i don't like this because it steals a lot of the flavor from the moths themselves (moths have a lore reason of being forced to adopt galactic common names)
• "well okay, we'll allow human mononyms but they can't be as goofy as the moth ones" great idea, now you've opened up a whole new naming policy can of worms. see ya in the appeal where an admin and a player disagree on where that line is

EDIT: I don't really endorse this opinion anymore

*obama voice*

if you like your firstname lastname, uh... you can keep it

/s

I think the fears are overexaggerated, but honestly, I also don't think we even need to go* so small as to say "mononyms but arbitrarily grounded."

Why is that human named like a sound or a food item? Did they grow up among moths? Are they otherwise being obnoxious/OOC to where you'd doubt there's something "there" there behind the character, or are they playing it straight and fair?

Like a few folks have pointed out, there's nothing about firstname lastname that keeps you from having an OOC or dumb name.

And more seriously, I think plenty of people are attracted to the naming conventions that have already cohered - it doesn't cheapen that attachment or make the lore less compelling to open the field.

this is one of the rare times i will break my own convention and say out the gate early that i fully support this.

when i was asked to change my name, it completely undermined everything i'd established up to that point. people assumed i was a new character. i had a crisis of identity because now i had to awkwardly twist my character's lore (which was based on in-round events) in order to explain the name change.

my own experiences with naming policy soured my feelings toward a game that i love and cherish deeply for a long while. i went from barely being able to contain my excitement about playing my character to dreading it because it felt like it had been altered in a wholly unnatural way that didn't make sense with the ongoing rp. it is paradoxical to protect the rp space by removing established names that have had genuine, good faith thought put into them and how they fit into our IC universe because they don't conform to a rigid naming structure which has no basis in that same universe to begin with.

naming policy should be to remove things like "adolf shitler" and "fga9rhg9h498hg49" not to police people's contributions arbitrarily. it restricts the scope of the depth and breadth of stories we can explore for no discernibly good reason.

as long as a player takes strides to explain their name in some IC capacity, it should be respected in that it's a genuine contribution not made out of malice or a desire to harm the RP space, but rather to enrich it. obviously the hurdle for explaining more creative names will be slightly higher, so intrinsically it still applies a higher standard for names which step outside of the norm.

AsbestosSniffer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 12, 2024 11:39 am

Striders13 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 12, 2024 9:33 am Nah I don't want EVERYBODY to have stupid names. They're fine, but if everyone is stupid, no one will be.

This isn't just the matter of stupid names, plenty of humans only have mononyms, especially in South India and South East Asia (Burma and Indonesia for example). Of course there should still be some "discretion" regarding human mononyms since a rather generic name like the aforementioned Tom isn't really that distinguishable, but I for one support removing Firstname Lastname from policy.

my point is if we blanket allow everyone to have mononyms then we'll have an overwhelming amount of mononym names.We kinda allow them sometimes if they're cool and it works in limiting their amount.

Higgin wrote: ↑Wed Jun 12, 2024 2:24 pm Like a few folks have pointed out, there's nothing about firstname lastname that keeps you from having an OOC or dumb name.

yes and part of my point was that even though people have mononyms in real life, that it’s not a good argument for including mononyms for humans in-game: because people have EXTREMELY stupid names. extremely stupid mononyms should be left for the moths, and extremely stupid firstname/lastname should be reserved for humans.

You can (usually) immediately tell if someone is playing as a human/felinid if they’re following a firstname/lastname convention. You can tell if someone is playing a celestial being or a bone man by the numbers in their name, even if you don’t recognize the celestial object/material.

people are extremely attached to their characters. it's not an easy thing to get them to change their name, and it's especially not easy if it's a sincere character that they've put thought and effort into portraying.

as people always say, we should be more understanding to the intentions and plights of players in the face of arbitrary application of rules-as-written. i would wager that a lot of people would soon rather stop playing than go through the effort of destroying their own contribution to the RP (in order to... protect RP?)

naming policy has always been based on vibes. has always been arbitrary. we should recognize the actual thing we're impacting and not reduce it to a simple request, because it's a lot deeper than that.

I don't mind the idea of doing this, but I agree with dendy in that vibes are kind of what's important here. If someone has a decently thought out character that just has one word for their name, I'm fine with it. If someone is just naming themselves "Joe" because they can't be assed to think up a better name and don't seem to be doing anything interesting with it, I'm not.

dendydoom wrote: ↑Wed Jun 12, 2024 5:26 pm people are extremely attached to their characters. it's not an easy thing to get them to change their name, and it's especially not easy if it's a sincere character that they've put thought and effort into portraying.

as people always say, we should be more understanding to the intentions and plights of players in the face of arbitrary application of rules-as-written. i would wager that a lot of people would soon rather stop playing than go through the effort of destroying their own contribution to the RP (in order to... protect RP?)

naming policy has always been based on vibes. has always been arbitrary. we should recognize the actual thing we're impacting and not reduce it to a simple request, because it's a lot deeper than that.

you take that risk when you make a character with a name against policy tho. You can also just clear it with an admin beforehand.

What we could do is keep the name policy but let people get weird names approved by posting them in a thread of funny names. That way you don't have to do a trial by fire when getting bwoinked for the name and admins avoid people trying to pull naming policy as a defense after naming themselves Pingas.

Striders13 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 12, 2024 9:30 pm you take that risk when you make a character with a name against policy tho. You can also just clear it with an admin beforehand.

you and i both know no one reads the rules. i didn't read the rules until i became an admin.

Striders13 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 12, 2024 9:30 pm You can also just clear it with an admin beforehand.

Naming policy is ruled on a per admin basis. One admin approving of it doesn't protect it from other admins.

I just want a naming policy that works as a guideline for most players and as something to point to when someone asks why they have to change their name from Ben Dover. I'd be perfectly fine with saying that admins can exempt good faith players from the letter of naming policy, because I still sort of prefer that the majority of players follow it. Stuff like mononyms can be fine unless literally everyone is using them.

dendydoom wrote: ↑Wed Jun 12, 2024 10:50 pm

Striders13 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 12, 2024 9:30 pm you take that risk when you make a character with a name against policy tho. You can also just clear it with an admin beforehand.

you and i both know no one reads the rules. i didn't read the rules until i became an admin.

If you wanna get a silly a name and not bother to check if it's against the rules to be named silly it's rapidly turning into skill issue

literal fearmongering itt not everyone is gonna name themselves 'skibiditoilet' (Valid because it's a mononym)
We have casket the catgirl
Or had idk if they still play but that name was cool
I might be partial to goth catgirls tho and also I think they got an exception for having OC art with the 'Casket Clause' I vaguely remember that
make a mononym whitelist u have to apply on the forums to have a mononym better bring 3 pages of lore; mononym rationing man fr /s
Alternatively it could be walked back if I'm wrong and EVERYONE names themselves 'John' (Though this could be funny for a round) and then we obliterate all mononyms from orbit. but then we risk going over what Dendy is saying where u fuck w/ someone's static fnr and it feels back.
Unless they have art ofc in which case leave bro alone frfr

Only actually valid counterargument I can think of is "If u want a mononym just play non-human like moth or something 4head" and I mean kinda yeah but wot if u wanna play head of staff??
Checkmate atheist

It's nice to know my irl name is banned by naming policy. I'm clearly not a real person.

Jackraxxus wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2024 6:59 am literal fearmongering itt not everyone is gonna name themselves 'skibiditoilet' (Valid because it's a mononym)
We have casket the catgirl
Or had idk if they still play but that name was cool
I might be partial to goth catgirls tho and also I think they got an exception for having OC art with the 'Casket Clause' I vaguely remember that
make a mononym whitelist u have to apply on the forums to have a mononym better bring 3 pages of lore; mononym rationing man fr /s
Alternatively it could be walked back if I'm wrong and EVERYONE names themselves 'John' (Though this could be funny for a round) and then we obliterate all mononyms from orbit. but then we risk going over what Dendy is saying where u fuck w/ someone's static fnr and it feels back.
Unless they have art ofc in which case leave bro alone frfr

Only actually valid counterargument I can think of is "If u want a mononym just play non-human like moth or something 4head" and I mean kinda yeah but wot if u wanna play head of staff??
Checkmate atheist

I don't think that this suggested change is going to allow players to have names like that. We still reserve the right to bonk people for having overly OOC names. We're not going to see someone who's named themselves "cumbucket" and throw up our hands and go "Oh welp, guess we're fucked, welcome to the game cumbucket!".

Not really a fan of normalising monomers, I've nothing against them being an occasional thing overall and perhaps there are other things that could be changed about naming policy to accommodate better those few cases so they're not constantly under the sword of damocles from an admin deciding it's not okay at some random point down the line.

But overall just opening the gates so people start rolling from scratch with normalised monomers may well just start others doing the same. I don't think a potential end state where rounds have 3 "Bob"s is great ; we already do have first name overlap but there's then last names to help distinguish between people in the same round (aside from where such things are intended antag effects), similarly when talking about people between rounds its nice to have a "globally unique identity" (which statics pretty much are) to reference without it being ambiguous. Similarly players identities are rather protected in terms of people shouldn't impersonate others, this becomes complicated or meaningless for duplicated monomers.

And if we do get to that point and it feels like a mistake, rolling it back and pushing that out to players likely via bwoinking all monomers will suck.


I just don't think it's worth removing the lid and making it a "free for all" on monomers aside from obvious OOC/inappropriate/etc names. But I do feel for players who have established under a name that most admins have no issue with but our policy leaves them constantly at risk of any single admin deciding this isn't okay and ending their run. But I don't think making it open season is a good idea generally.

Perhaps some way of getting exceptional names actually approved and that overrules the more arbitrary "any admins can ask you to change your name" condition.

I didn't like the change to firstname lastname name policy in the first place, and I definitely didn't like letting people put "nickname" in their name, but alien names have shown up in the meantime so who knows? I think its an interesting change to test. I suspect that if the default names remain firstname lastname most people will just stick with it.

Just slap "Provisional change don't be angry if this goes away" on the announcement post and review it in a month or two.

I think we should give an special pass to names which originate in cultures with prevalent mononyms instead of just allowing it in general. Having that last name requirement makes you put just a little bit more effort into your character and although I don't think the apocalypse will happen as some here are suggesting, it definitely will worsen the believability of the names on the crew monitor

i personally think that cultural boundaries and origins should be a general guideline to keep a consistent naming convention as a basis for that species, but i cannot see any good reason why players shouldn't be allowed to experiment with the realistic ways in which cultures and identities mix, if they're willing to explore it in earnest. what about a felinid who grew up among moths? what about a human who has never visited earth, but rather has spent their entire life in space, entirely detached from any real world human culture? what about a lizard who *is* from earth, and who's named John Smithson?

i believe that the imposition of this rule as a blanket way to restrict the presentation of characters made in earnest pointlessly restricts the scope of stories we can explore in our vast and cartoony universe. it is often used to uproot and unnaturally modify established characters who have stories which were born out of natural emergent circumstances. i don't believe we should stratify cultures the same way we do, say, the dichotomy between carbons and silicones.

I will say that I would definitely support removing this restriction, but I would only do so if admins reserve the right to ask someone to change it if the vibes suck. I want people to pick a mononym because they're doing something interesting with their character, not because they're lazy and can't think of anything better.

Vekter wrote: ↑Sun Jun 16, 2024 12:41 am I will say that I would definitely support removing this restriction, but I would only do so if admins reserve the right to ask someone to change it if the vibes suck. I want people to pick a mononym because they're doing something interesting with their character, not because they're lazy and can't think of anything better.

Agreed. I would not and do not want to see that last bit removed, "Admins may get involved if your name is dumb and can approve or disallow names at their discretion." We just shouldn't put arbitrary restrictions in prior to that judgment that short-circuit considering the name as a whole - one word or more.

The problem I have is that if its up to admin discretion you can get a cordswitch situation wherein you're playing a character for a few months then one day the wrong admin spots you and its over. On the flipside, something feels off about mononyms. I don't want to see several same name characters just going by "John" in a round (Or any other normal human first name). I say try it, let the people be free, but be prepared for shitty naming convention note appeals.

britgrenadier1 wrote: ↑Sun Jun 16, 2024 5:34 pm The problem I have is that if its up to admin discretion you can get a cordswitch situation wherein you're playing a character for a few months then one day the wrong admin spots you and its over.

That's never not going to happen as long as names are up to admin discretion, and I feel like that aspect should not change. If you're running a name that is outside of what someone might consider a regular name or might be against the typical naming conventions, you're going to have to deal with the fact that you might eventually be asked to change it.

You are in a lot better of a place if you ask an admin if it's okay for you to have that name and tell us why you want it/what gimmick your character is using so we at least know the situation.

britgrenadier1 wrote: ↑Sun Jun 16, 2024 5:34 pm The problem I have is that if its up to admin discretion you can get a cordswitch situation wherein you're playing a character for a few months then one day the wrong admin spots you and its over.

This rarely happens for actual statics. Long-time statics are usually granted as an exception; for instance, I bet at least one admin has thought about using naming policy on Swamp Water and Gay Johnson, but they've been around for so long that no one is going to prevent them from using those names. This is, however, a very subjective topic since there isn't a specific period of time after which a static is "untouchable" (they're never really untouchable, but there is an overall consensus within the admin team not to touch these names), so we try to, in a general way, keep it fair for the player.

I am not a big fan of letting people go around with singular names. It doesn't really fit the setting very well tbh

However, if we do decide on letting people have singular names it shouldn't be up to the staff team to decide on which singular names are acceptable. All names should be acceptable unless they are very blatantly OOC.

Bmon wrote: ↑Wed Jun 19, 2024 6:04 am I am not a big fan of letting people go around with singular names. It doesn't really fit the setting very well tbh

However, if we do decide on letting people have singular names it shouldn't be up to the staff team to decide on which singular names are acceptable. All names should be acceptable unless they are very blatantly OOC.

This is basically also my feeling, but even within "OOC" there's a measure of discretion involved - a name that is a quiet or inoffensive hat tip to something OOC/IRL, doesn't set me off - especially if I have to work for it and there's a payoff. Others have different limits on things like IRL/media references, so it's fair to acknowledge that there is still a judgment call being made. I'd generally agree though - as long as it's not nakedly OOC, we should suspend any presumptive and particular judgments of taste.

Mononyms rise up.

Also there's nothing wrong with us deciding on which singular names are acceptable, we literally do that with all names. We can already kill any name we think is stupid. Allowing mononyms doesn't change that.

recently got noted over having a mononym when i forgot to change it and honestly speaking it doesnt make sense for my character lore wise anyways???
being a vatborn felinid and having no family whatsoever = no last name
i am sure there will be plenty of other cases where other people dont have family or last names for lore reasons...

I'm in favor of loosening naming rules. I am still ever so mildly peeved that I got told to change my moths name from Nonneya Bu'ness.

Bmon wrote: ↑Wed Jun 19, 2024 6:04 am However, if we do decide on letting people have singular names it shouldn't be up to the staff team to decide on which singular names are acceptable. All names should be acceptable unless they are very blatantly OOC.

If you mean by 'blatantly OOC'', you mean pun names, then I don't support restricting those at all. There is a degree of absurdity that I think is acceptable if only of the absurd nature of the games setting and tone. Also, for real, people have pun names in real life. Stage names are extremely common examples of this and often the names some people go by in their day to day life, even if it isn't their birth name. Celebrities are usually the biggest example in western society of both mononyms and unconventional names. Just look at Prince as the strongest example of this.

The most that the policy should handle is the following; References to memes and current internet trends (we've had too many clowns named Skidibi Toilet right now), anything that is bigoted in nature or alludes to racial stereotyping (The hundreds of Tyrone Watermelons we have on record as the most primary example), literal real people (even though it is very funny when Carsh appears in-game as Tony Abbott wearing only spandex and eating onions), characters from other IPs (not inspired by, such as Paulie Soprano, our most eye raising fake New Jersey mobster name and best example of an inspired-by name), other peoples statics or anything that would fall under our other rules as a direct violation like Rule 1, 8 or 11. Then yes, I agree.

The above is both just simply enforcing the rules, but also preventing people from disrupting the game in a less than creative fashion for cheap laughs.

I also agree with Vekter that we can handle names that don't pass the sniff test for one reason or another as necessary. But this is simply an affordance already given to admins as a part of Rule 0.

Anything outside of this should be generally okay. Mononyms, stupidly long names, cross-cultural names (Imitates-the-Lizards is a great example of this), all of it should be fine. Because they're contributing to the game and the vibe, not detracting or distracting. Key difference.

I don't know. I support mononyms getting actual policy precedent... but I don't think it should apply to humans. The few times i've hopped on Monkestation (where i'm pretty sure they just lack naming policy entirely?), half the humans are named "Joe" or "Tom."

iwishforducks wrote: ↑Wed Jun 12, 2024 6:02 am i know mononyms are a thing, but the last names of humans REALLY help keep them grounded amidst all the other weird alien names.

^ I agree with this. I think humans should keep their bog-standard naming. If every other race got the ability to have mononyms, humans would act as the base for all those wacky mononym characters to bounce off of. doesn't mean humans can't have silly names, but I think people should have to put more effort into their human names than just slapping a "Michael" on it and calling it a day.

Winterseasalt had an interesting case where their mononym name appeared due to in round roleplay. They had a character that had a different name at first but they didn't like it in character, so they asked around for new names.

Nobody suggested last names.

The name Aris was born from in round events.

Banning that is sad but I also do agree on having a cohesive naming system.

If we have banned a name despite a cohesive narrative around the name existing, then the system has simply failed and is not working. End of story. It exists only to be enforced and not to further roleplay, despite contradictorily being made to improve it. We shouldn't have rules that don't actually contribute to the in-game experience, or detract from roleplay potential occurring in an otherwise non-confrontational manner.

NecromancerAnne wrote: ↑Sat Jun 22, 2024 12:34 am If we have banned a name despite a cohesive narrative around the name existing, then the system has simply failed and is not working. End of story. It exists only to be enforced and not to further roleplay, despite contradictorily being made to improve it. We shouldn't have rules that don't actually contribute to the in-game experience, or detract from roleplay potential occurring in an otherwise non-confrontational manner.

preach sister. it's what i've been saying for years!

if a rule that seeks to protect the rp space by policing contributions to it and in its enforcement hurts genuine good faith rp then it is not only failing in its purpose but actively harmful to it.

I'm sort-of torn on the idea of human mononyms vs. forced grounding to make the setting feel more cohesive— I understand and can appreciate the positive addition that John Lastname brings to the table as a foil, but seeing cases like "Aris," while irregular, still really just jumps out to me as "we really shouldn't be fighting this unless it's bad faith."

Of course, it's not always easy to determine if someone is playing/naming in bad faith, but really, there's a better way than the current ruling and I'll be happy to see it go in favor of whatever this thread brings up.

Personally I think it should be framed like this:
You are working at a job. What appears on your ID is probably your character's legal name, and is what is on the paperwork that NT has from when you signed up for the job. It isn't always the name you want to be called, but that's how corporations are. Over time people may pick up nicknames or have lore reasons to adjust their paperwork and maybe have IC reasons for abnormal names, like when you go into a retail store IRL and someone has a nickname or preferred name written over their real name on their name tag. This is all well and good but is the idea of an admin messaging you and grilling you on your character's lore really what we want?

In my opinion, whatever your name is, should be in line with whatever race you're playing, and seem like a relatively real name that someone can have, but this is from my primarily MRP perspective. LRP is really the only situation where I could see names that are obvious puns and references being okay. I think a lot of this issue comes down to what people individually expect out of their RP experience, and that isn't something that you can easily make an all-encompassing ruling about. I hate to say it, but the people that are really against it are people that already skirt the line for appropriate names. Unfortunately, it's one of those things that the more lax you make the rules, the more admin intervention that is involved with case by case situations. As much as I would like people to have their names be whatever they want, I don't necessarily know if it's the right choice for the game.

Appearance rulings are fairly uncommon on MRP. You only see it everyone once and a while and usually it is for something genuinely inappropriate for reasons beyond 'the name is absurd'. MRP is not meant to be completely serious roleplay, it is meant to be less mechanically focused and more narrative focused. That does not mean entirely grounded in reality, just grounded in the somewhat silly reality the game occupies.

Speaking of that reality, if you're talking from the perspective of only using randomized names to avoid policy issues, our curated list of randomized species names is not the exhaustive list, nor even comprehensive list for potential cultural examples that could be drawn upon for various species. You'll note the extremely Western/European focus in the human names, even though supposedly there has been enough cultural development that the lingua franca of the game's setting is derived from possibly Chinese. The list was just arbitrarily put together years before either of us even started to play this game. Even what a 'human', 'lizard', 'plasmaman' and 'moth' name should be was likely an equally arbitrary decision made long ago, and I think particularly for moths it was just an off-handed remark that people stuck too. Our randomized lizard names don't even use the actual typical convention accepted for them, which is Verbs-the-Noun. It uses more fantastical sounding names, which I think people just accept as 'the pronunciation in Draconic' or something.

People just made it up, probably because it is easier to let people be creative than necessarily put them into simplified boxes. The randomized name system is mostly a functionality solution and helpful fallback. Not every role you occupy necessarily allows you to customize it.

NecromancerAnne wrote: ↑Sun Jun 23, 2024 9:54 pm Speaking of that reality, if you're talking from the perspective of only using randomized names to avoid policy issues

Not sure where you got that from I didn't mention the randomized name list at all, yeah I use random names, but that's just personal preference because I'm lazy.
what I meant was, you can pick your name, just within what people already agree upon as standard naming conventions for certain races as it fits within the lore of said race. It isn't a perfect system, but in my opinion, I would prefer if names were more on the immersive side.

while we are at it can we liberate plasmamen from their shitty restrictive boring name system that makes every fucking skeleton sound the same

i agree, having played human literally every single one of my rounds my entire time playing ss13 except for 2 rounds, i genuinely don't see any harm in it, at least not enough harm that it'd be any worse than what some nonhumans get up-to, which i also support because its funny (looking at you baseball and housekeeping), admins can and will already stomp shithead names, and it opens alot more avenues for funky ass characters, the more ways i can be someone the more enjoyable it becomes to make that someone actually BE someone, y'feel me?

naming policy has been updated. the full policy now reads:

Make a minimum effort to have your name fit in a setting involving a wacky space station in the future.

Honorifics and nicknames are allowed as long as only one additive is used at a time, i.e "James Williams Jr." or "James "One-Eye" Williams". Excessively OOC names are disallowed, and are defined as names which are intentionally hard to read/spell, references to in-game mechanics or OOC terminology, historical/famous/media, and any form of nonsensical or low-effort name. Clowns, mimes, silicons, wizards, and nuke ops have significantly more leeway in choosing their names, within reason.

Species have naming conventions that are part of their in-universe culture. These may be subverted if they have a sufficient amount of in-character reasoning and effort explaining their non-standard name. Non-standard names are held to higher scrutiny and you may be questioned on why your name breaks these conventions.

Naming Conventions:
Humans/Felinids:
Firstname Lastname
Examples:
John Smith
Jane Doe
Lizards:
Verbs-The-Noun or a hyphenated Firstname-Lastname in a suitably lizard sounding language.
Examples:
Mops-The-Floors
Shira-Thaskan
Ethereals:
The name of a celestial body, followed by an arbitrary identification marker.
Examples:
Delphini A
Gemini DF
Plasmamen:
The name of an element followed by a Roman numeral.
Examples:
Oxygen VI
Erbium IX
Moths:
A moniker usually related to something the person likes or is known for, or a Firstname Lastname which emulates a Latin species classification.
Examples:
Tulip
Vilmaxia Virmonis

this has been reflected more clearly on the rules page.