[=v=tehwally]

phd, on 24 October 2013 - 02:26 AM, said:

imo, considering this to be important is ridiculous

imo, you considering this to be non-important and ridiculous is ridiculous in itself. If you had a clan with this tag you would see it as important as well.
Please don't make useless posts, at least contribute to the topic without stupidity.

Biddle, on 25 October 2013 - 09:54 AM, said:

Please give me an example Nikkerz :D

Example; we've been a clan with this tag since I departed from *THC* and that was YEARS ago.

Nitro, on 23 October 2013 - 11:44 PM, said:

if we use special chars its the same (especially if we add suffix support)

like clan tag: n'

player name: jumpin'

Imo, the check should only be for if the clan added it to a traillist or a main tag.
For instance, if main tag is "n'" then it would not kick this person(jumpin') but if the tag "n'" is included in the clans traillist then it would carry out the kick theft.

Or instead of even kicking the person have the auth system warn you that the tag is taken and force you to rename, and then finally kick you if you make the mistake again.

A suggestion you guys should think about.

This post has been edited by tehwally: 26 October 2013 - 02:51 AM

[=v=tehwally]

Accidental post.

This post has been edited by tehwally: 26 October 2013 - 02:47 AM

[|P|Nitro]

Nikki, on 24 October 2013 - 01:56 AM, said:

So clans that were around long before this tag protection have to change their face to adhere to a policy that isn't even clearly stated? That's kind of ridiculous, imo.

No they don't have to adhere to anything tag protection is not forced on you. You chose to enable it. 3 chars min is the rules if you have less than that then you can disable tag protection and go back to how it was in 4.1