Can we have a new rule, please, that UserName987654321987654321 has to

[Maryz]

namechange before they post a new thread.

Because I'm getting confused. There are so many people with UserName in their UserName that I'm in danger of being extremely rude to one of them mixing them up and thinking a new one is an old one or a previously banned one.

I am old and confused.

I think they have to take the name allocated to them when they register, for some reason, but could they not be auto-sked to namechange before posting? Pretty please.

I know it's been said before but I think there needs to be a WELCOME TO MUMSNET sticky on Active with advice to read guidelines, a link to acronyms and a stipulation to change your username before posting.
Otherwise you will be henceforth known as Bob.

What I don't understand is - this is only a recent phenomenon. What did MNHQ think was wrong with the old system that led them to think this was a better solution?

Bottom line: it's a ridiculous system and I have no idea why anyone thought it would do any good, tbh.

The thing is even if someone says "I'm not a troll" and then starts their thread, people will be so even if they respond to OP it won't be their usual responses IYSWIM.

And already people are saying they just won't respond to user###

Or about at joining
We will issue a temp user name. You have 15 minutes to create a permanent name or the account will be locked.

A suggestion is just that. Most people would ignore it and clearly are. Unless of course all the existing user### are the same.

I wonder if there is a goady fucker site out there. They all gather and talk about the best sites to go on and how to do it. What can they post about. Maybe a point system with bonus points for pissing off X amount. Double bonus for going viral type thing.

What did MNHQ think was wrong with the old system that led them to think this was a better solution?

This q, please

Beyond

If an online retailer could cut out a step in its checkout process that led to agreater number of baskets being paid for, it would.

That's what MNHQ have done.

Yes, thanks for that
But if the new shortened checkout process led to more time spent querying fake purchases, it may not be the better solution it appeared to be.

Yeah, fair point!

Beyond yes, but if a business changes their processes and in so doing devalues their core products and alienates their existing customers they are seriously damaging the future of their business.

Unnecessary but