Signing contributions with initials ('-- qc') instead of a WikiName ('-- Q''''''uentinCrisp') is a WikiSmell of over-reliance on ThreadMode. If you're writing so much that you find this shortcut handy, try DocumentMode.

In addition,

* Initials aren't good identifiers. In September 2004, there were 310 unique sets of initials vs. 393 sets that were ambiguous*. For example, 'jb' could refer to any of 53 WikiZens. [*computed from all pages in CategoryHomePage with two- or three-part WikiName''''''s; there are probably a few ringers.] 10 years later there are over 4400 pages categorised as HomePage''''''s (an unknown number of homepages are not categorised). Given there are 27 letters, the probability of a set of 2 initials being unique is 0.00137. And 4400 * 0.00137 = 6.04 therefore every such set should have more than 6 similar in the average by now. In other words: When the number of sets of 2 letters reaches 729 than the probability that any given set has one similar is 1. So initials become more confusing than helping with communities over 700 members.

* LinksAreContent, and initials aren't links. They don't offer a way to learn about and leave comments for contributors.

* Initials aren't friendly to newcomers to the WikiWikiWeb, and make Wiki feel like a private club. Wiki is already more than enough of a challenge for newcomers; please don't make it more so.

* Signing with initials creates more work for refactorers. Before moving a quote to a different context, a refactorer either must determine who the initials belong to, or refactor away the signature. DontMakeWorkForOthers.

The one place where signing with initials is harmless is one's HomePage, where there's an obvious connection between initials and authorship.

On the other hand, if you use a full signature early in a thread, it's not too bad to post follow-up stuff with your initials. This happens a lot and WikiGnome''''''s can pick it up pretty easy. Ideally, refactoring out of ThreadMode will eliminate most signatures anyway, so it's only when we want to maintain a thread that this is a big deal. Make sure your full signature is on the page somewhere though, or don't sign at all.

----

Most of these arguments apply to other non-WikiName signatures too, e.g. '-- quentin'.

----

A particular offender is 'dl', whose initials grace ~200 pages. Who is DL? Hard to say. There are twenty-five people with those initials who have home pages on the WikiWikiWeb.

''That was DavidLiu. Feel free to fix.''

------

I personally do not care as long as a signature is '''unique''' among a topic or related topics in which the person is participating to avoid confusion. If one letter is sufficient to achieve uniqueness, that's fine. SixThinkingHats can also achieve this, although that is not its original purpose. Wiki has always accepted anonymous contributions, and short-cut signatures can be viewed as simply anonymous contributions with extra info in order to have a continuity of discussion beyond a few paragraphs. It sort of reminds me of scoping rules withing software code. We can roughly break it down as follows:

* '''No Signature''' - Uniqueness only within paragraph
* '''Short-hand/Abbreviations''' - Uniqueness only with a topic or topic grouping
* '''CamelCase Nicknames with a wiki "home" page''' - Uniqueness within WikiWiki
* '''RealNames''' - Uniqueness over the whole WWW (approximately)

I hope we can welcome all as long as they follow the necessary conventions to know which is which. Some propose only the first and last be permitted (RealNamesOnlyOrAnonymous). I don't understand why scope must either be very small OR very large, but nothing in between.  

(If this discussion belongs better somewhere else, feel free to move-and-link.)

--top
----
CategoryWiki