[plug] re: User names

[Michael Hunt]

> From my point of view (I don't have to deal with the sys-admin problems
> such a scheme may cause) it seems like a very sensible way of doing
> things.  Having worked inside a large organisation that does have such a
> system, it made it very easy to remember somebodies email address - far
> easier than other systems I have seen such as:
>    first six letters of surname, then the initials from their christian
> names.  Or, if they have only one christian name then use seven letters
> from the surname and then their single initial.  If the surname has less
> than the required number of letters, fill in using the christian na....
>
> you get the point.    (pardon the pun :)
>
> Although you _can_ set up such a system personally (using an address book
> or something) such a standard allows you to find out addresses for people
> you rarely communicate with.  Anyway, all I really want to say is - seems
> like a good system to me.

But what are really talking about here is the difference between a username
and an alias for an email address.

I personally like the first.surname at mydomain for email addresses as it is a
natural human way of communication. I naturally respond (and people remember
me) by the name Michael than by the cryptic userid huntmj. However the
second has advantages in other ways (for admin and email purposes alike) and
many of them are very good and valid and have been used historically for
many reasons.

However you don't want pointed names when doing sysadmin as to many things
break be3cause they don't get the point (pardon my pun). For this reason
there are aliases.