Posts: 721
Threads: 77
Joined: Apr 2014
Thanks: 0
Given 8 thank(s) in 89 post(s)
05-25-2015, 02:40 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-25-2015, 05:32 AM by LogicParrot.)
This is not a debate. Do not debate here, do not post counter-arguments, and generally do not post anything other than this:
List your arguments against changing to Cuberite the name, not necessarily to Cuberite..
Keep it short and to the point, preferably 1 argument per post / a bulleted list of arguments.
This is not about changing the organization name to Cuberite and retaining MCServer as the server name. It's about changing the whole thing.
NO DEBATING HERE.
Posts: 721
Threads: 77
Joined: Apr 2014
Thanks: 0
Given 8 thank(s) in 89 post(s)
05-25-2015, 02:46 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-25-2015, 02:47 AM by LogicParrot.)
The genericness of MCServer brings us some side traffic from people searching for other stuff.
Changing the name in the code base / documentation requires some effort.
Posts: 52
Threads: 5
Joined: May 2015
Thanks: 0
Given 0 thank(s) in 4 post(s)
05-25-2015, 03:58 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-25-2015, 03:58 AM by Shadowraix.)
I am all for a name change, but I don't agree with Cuberite.
It's mostly just personal preference, but it doesn't sound right to me. When I think of Cuberite, I don't think of Minecraft but of some new crappy rip-off. I feel like we need to delve into more name options then have a vote based on the available options and pick the winner, even if the winner is Cuberite.
Posts: 274
Threads: 48
Joined: Mar 2015
Thanks: 0
Given 0 thank(s) in 10 post(s)
Arguments... let's see.
> The project lead should be in favor of a name change.
> Discussions about it are to bringing smiles for everyone involved.
> Never change a running system.
> The current name has been used for a while.
> It's a hassle.
> The current name is straightforward.
