#41
|
|||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Potatus / Havona <Castle> / Seaglass <Castle> / Tala / Havona
Quote:
| ||||
|
#42
|
|||
|
Trihardah is a legitimate role playing name.
| ||
|
#43
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
| |||
|
#44
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
#45
|
|||
|
Lol -- this is a pathetic thread and pathetic OP. Personally -- had my surname taken. (One I've had for nearly a decade on Blue). Meanwhile name after name exists that can be considered a rule violation and it will continue.
Hell -- even the GM names are breaking naming conventions. (See Galach) Why waste time on this? How does this improve the server? Classic EQ was not "roleplaying" to this degree, ever. Just incredibly pointless. | ||
|
#46
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
#47
|
|||
|
I haven't been playing recently, but the naming situation on green/teal when I was was awful. Felt like every 1 in 3 people had a stupid, inappropriate name.
| ||
|
#48
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
#50
|
|||
|
Is there actual GM interest in enforcing the naming policy? I've been assuming the current staff has several higher priorities and/or personally disagrees with the rule. Because it seems like more than half the people on green violate the name rules.
EDIT: that'll teach me to post before I read all the way through the thread | ||
Last edited by Tnair; 04-18-2020 at 01:12 PM..
|
|
|
|