HN encourages people to pick their real names as usernames (or a variant of such) for 'real identities', but ignores the reality that people change their names when they get married. Is getting married a completely new identity? Now the username doesn't actually identify the poster by the name people might recognize, if they gained their rep after getting married.
HN encourages people to pick their real names as usernames
From what I've observed, HN encourages people to use consistent identities, not necessarily real names. 'dang has mentioned a number of times that pseudonymity is fine.
Workaround: Don't change your name when you get married. Less work, it makes genealogy research for your descendants easier. And the only downside is people guess the wrong name because of all the patriarchy.
There are always exceptions. I have a friend who had a bad history with her family, so she really wanted to take her husband's name. But I still believe that keeping your pre-married name is usually the best choice if you don't want your identity to be lost or subsumed.
That's incredibly dismissive of couples who decide to pick a shared family name. There are more downsides than people guessing wrong, but that's beside the point. You're basically arguing that the only reason people do it is patriarchy and giving up your native name is giving up your identity as if it were a form of oppression.
Eh, people choose oppression for themselves all the time. We have a right to determine our own identity, for sure. It's just unfortunate that people just happen to make the choice that supports patriarchy the most often, that you wonder what forces are really in play.
I don't know their policy, but I would guess that if someone has a reasonable explanation like this (or some other small change that doesn't materially affect the ability of readers to recognize the user), the HN team will try to be accommodating. They have always been responsive and gracious to me on the handful of occasions that I've contacted them, although I'm sure my questions were annoying.
My guess: the underlying database uses usernames as a primary key and they don't want to update all the comments and submissions just to make a specific user happy. Especially because doing it once would set a precedent for others.
I doubt they'd use the username as the primary key, but either way, I agree the precedent is the biggest concern. They'd get inundated with name change requests if they started making exceptions for people.
