Two-Token Username Swap

[garnetdagger]

Title
Two-Token Username Swap

Short, concise description of the idea
If you want to swap the usernames of two journals under your control, you should be able to do this simply and with two tokens, from a form that acknowledges this as a possibility.

Full description of the ideaYou can, currently, swap the usernames of two journals under your control

Comments

[lady_angelina]

I think the reason for the "shell game" is because the process behind renaming isn't as simple as it would appear on sight. It's a matter of remapping the new username to the existing journal's userid (the number you see on your profile page in parentheses after the create date) and ensuring that references to the new username aren't confused with whatever former journal used that username previously (if the former journal was deleted and purged). (This is hard for me to explain, and I don't actually know how the behind the scenes process works, but this is my best guess as to why it is the way it is.)

But if the developers can find a simple way to work it so that only the two journals in question are involved without having to use a middleman one, then I'm all for it.

[imc]

I think the reason for the "shell game" is because the process behind renaming isn't as simple as it would appear on sight.

There are a lot of "backend is really complicated" comments on this post, but I wonder if it really is that hard. Of course I come at this from the perspective of not having looked at the code at all, so I'm no more well-informed than anyone else and could be talking out of my hat, but the way I understand it is…

You have a userid number. That number has a name. When you post a comment, upload a userpic, write something in your journal or whatever, it's associated with your userid number. When you look at a post from someone else, it has their userid number on it and the backend goes and looks up what their name is. When you go to FOO's journal, it searches for user FOO by name to find their userid number, and displays the journal belonging to that userid number. When you type FOO it searches for user FOO by name, fetches their info and displays their name

[trixieleitz]

Even if the backend processes require a third username to be temporarily involved, I'd still support simplifying the user interface as the OP describes. And with a two-username interface, it's difficult to justify charging for three tokens.

[danceinacircle]

I love the idea of making it simpler, but the backend process is way more complicated than what we users have to go through, so I don't know if it can be simplified, haha.

I think if devs were going to undertake a project to simplify this process, why not take it one step further and make it a special one-token procedure that then costs $45?

[lady_angelina]

I think the piece here is that most users don't understand why this sort of thing should cost more than simply renaming two journals separately. ;) Although, eliminating the necessity for the third, throwaway journal would be nice (especially since desired journal usernames are kind of at a premium now). If the single "swap two usernames" token were offered at that price, there had better be a detailed explanation behind it, or the users may feel gypped.

[azurelunatic]

So use a reserved system name in the backend and purge it immediately after the rename process is complete, to free it up for the next time it's needed?

One might be forced to do renames asynchronously (your rename job has been queued. You will be notified in email and your inbox when it is complete.) in this case.

[charliemc]

In theory it does sound as if this should be possible and easy, but I have a hunch the backend is far more complicated than non-programmers might imagine...

But I do like the idea, I have to admit.

[diziara]

The other issue, aside from the claim that it is more complicated that it seems to the end users*, is that there are non-programming/backend issues that arise from account renaming. The LJ staff have taken a stance that they dislike the confusion that results from the renaming process, and regardless of how easy or hard it is to do for them, they do not like doing it. The rename tokens were their compromise that allowed people access to the feature, but was just enough of a hurdle to keep people from doing it willy nilly. So making it easier to do a direct account name swap would likely drive up the frequency of accounts being renamed.

*I can understand why it would be more complicated than it appears, but I do not care to get involved in the debate that has sprung up above.