Assigned usernames--bad idea?

Who agrees that the new, assigned user names should be done away with as soon as possible (preferably before they even begin)?

This topic was edited
RE:Assigned usernames--bad idea?

Agreed but it may be too late to go back.

This post was edited
RE:Assigned usernames--bad idea?

I agree, fair criticism of the website is that at least "auto-generated" usernames are detrimental to the site.

I think pseudonyms might be needed for some people because some real people need pseudonyms because of the nature of this being a "nudist" social media website.

The Auto-generated pseudonyms are too much even for people who use pseudonyms. I do not want to lose anonymity, but nobody should get "verified" or "certified" if the person is not even creative enough to have a clever pseudonym. Nobody needs the auto-generation of usernames. It is too easy to go under the radar if that is the case.

At least getting rid of the computer-generated Pseudonyms is a good start.

This post was edited
RE:Assigned usernames--bad idea?

The assigned names are way to similar too each other - I can't make sense of lists of viewers or messages. The little bit of information and creativity in user names is the first, and very important, clue about the person. And these particular sets of names are just dreadful!

This post was edited
RE:Assigned usernames--bad idea?

I agree as well. The only good these auto-generated names serve, is to make it easier to spot scammers and trolls. It seems that almost every private message, and friend request, has been from new members with generated names for the past few months. FFS, you would think that these wankers would put in a little more effort to sign up.

This post was edited