"Not everyone has credits to spare. Not everyone purchases credits with real money. Some donate all their extra cash to their leaders as most of them expect their members to do just that. It gets pricey after a while."

"if you have a name reserved and don't use it after 3 months (or 6) that you either lose your claim to it or have to pay another 3 credits to keep it."

not sure how the suggestion to pay an extra credit per month for a reserved name works if the claim that people are donating IG cash and don't buy credits with real monies is real.

I think a better solution would be, if a player has never used a name or only played as the name for less than 4 hours (or another suitable amount of time to be determined by admins/players) they can't reserve it. As such, if Rockefeller comes along and decides to d-bag it up by buying the best known names of players to spite them, he'll have to actually play as them to do so.

If the admins code it so that any name not played on is surrendered and any name that was played on but not for long enough to justify reserving it, they've got a time limit to actually play as the name or else it's lost.

that way, those of us who do use the names we've reserved and have clocked serious time on them don't have to keep subscribing to it (and if I decide to take a year off won't come back to find my name reserved by someone else) costing muy creditos.

and another possible solution. reserved name limits. can't see people realistically (if they're genuinely reserving names for the intended reason as opposed to the douchey reason) having more than, what... 3-5 names? even then, your name only needs to be dead a month before it becomes re-useable.

I like the idea of a limit to reserved names in the 3-5 range, Bender. Pick the ones you really like, and hamstring the profiteers substantially.

I side with the status quo - if you want it, you should have bought it. It's not the fault of the community if someone decided the right to "your" name was worth 3 credits and purchased it.

Of course, if we wanted to implement a leasing feature, that would be nice. I commonly rotate the selection of my names to keep things fresh. Sometimes I may feel like a WildTurkey, other times I may feel like a JadedButterfly. Reserving names is a lot like going from the lower class pissant (like my good friend FitzChivalry ), ascending to the joy and prosperity that is of the middle class, and purchasing an SUV. I may not ever need to haul anything, but I damn well want the option too.

I rotate the usage of my CA aliases, but I am capped at 2 a month. If the concern here is that the names are not being used, then I would be all for increasing the account base cap of CAs to increase the amount of names used. I haven't had a Zmei CA yet if I recall correctly, and I'd be honored to have one.

As a side note, if it was your name technically you would own it. I don't own Telkin, therefore I am not Telkin.

:)