I meant to include. Jon - here are the FX and TNT links to save you a google.

FX Buffy:

[link]

TNT Angel:

[link]

I love my nick, it's not at all a real name. It feels kinda odd to see all this gunk about real names.

I love the fact that even my nick ended up getting a nick, almost everyone here refers to me as ND, I love it. I feel that it's part of my personality here. I don't want all this "Choose such and such type of name" stuff in the FAQ to be honest.

ND has a point. How about a Very Buffista FAQ Entry on this point? I'm thinking along the lines of:

We began at Salon.com's TableTalk. TT encouraged posters to register under their real names. You will see that a good number of us use our given names or some form thereof. Another (and just as good) number of us use pseudonyms, and wouldn't have it any other way. Then of course, there is another (also good) number of us who use given names, but um...they weren't given to us.

So what was our point? We're not sure, except we'd like to encourage you to please use care in selecting your name. While some of us are nudging you towards using your given name, and others are nudging you towards a pseud, we will all be nudging toward choosing something effable. We're looking at you: sD2F_QWrt007

There could be something in there about the too-similar-name-thing too, but I'm too lazy to go back and look at what we already have.

Cindy -- Did you see Ginger's post on that same topic? I think it's more concise.

Ginger "Bureaucracy 2: Like Sartre, Only Longer" Apr 5, 2004 10:02:52 am PDT

There seems to be consensus to put this on the registration page, rather than the FAQ.

More concise? Than I? Pshaw.

I did see it (but thought it was further back), and wanted to support everyone. Even though this isn't email. And I'm not lurking. Ginger's is better, though. So here we are. More coffee? Thanks.

eta Pshaw, because everything goes better with Pshaw.

eta, again... Tricksey Jon. Editing out the concise comment (which I failed to quote). I already look crazy. I don't need help, silly.

No comments on the new FAQ. Other than: Thanks, tina, for your work on this!

Editing out the concise comment

Huh? Given that I didn't edit that out, I think you're doing a fine job of looking crazy all by your lonesome.

Nice work, tina! There are (trans)scripts at [link]

Doublepost, sorry.

I think we should check with shrift to see if she's okay with linking to that in our FAQ. (Then again, she posts links on the board, so maybe there's no difference?).

Also -- is there any polite way we can ask in the FAQ/Etiquette that people not sign their posts? I do not know why it's so hard for me to scroll past, but it is.

If in Etiquette, it could read something like:

• Like all boards, we have a somewhat unique posting style. In particular, we tend to quote someone (with a > tag) when replying to them; we do not usually put names in bold; and there's no need to sign your name at the bottom of your posts, because your login appears at the top of each post. While none of these things are musts, they will make fitting in a little easier.

Huh? Given that I didn't edit that out, I think you're doing a fine job of looking crazy all by your lonesome.

Yes. Yes I am.