We have had an informal policy of allowing players to found historical families by having them submit an application to be able to found using that historical family name. However, there have always been issues with making sure that enough players are free to join the new historical family and we've had cases (well, at least one) where a historical family has all but died because of inactivity of players. Therefore, we are contemplating a new procedure.

• Historical names are only given to EXISTING families upon application.
• The families have to have at least 10 active members who agree to the change and account for at least 51% of the total members of the family.
• If the application is approved, then the existing family name is changed to the historical name. (RP-wise, the old family has "discovered" their roots.)

For example, the members of the Smith family want the historical name of Traderbob. There are 15 active members in the family. Ten members sign on and want to change the name. Since ten account for over 50% of the active membership, they are allowed to apply for the historical name. If the application is approved, the Smith family ceases to exist and are now called the Traderbob family.

Anyway, this is a new policy we are thinking of implementing. Let us know your thoughts!

I think this sounds great! Definitely a good way to save historical families from failure when they're "reinvented."

The only thing I can think of is that part of the application process might ought to include a description of how the family plans to transition from being the Smiths to being the Traderbobs (to use your example). Cause it's pretty unrealistic to assume that all of a sudden a whole family of folks all agreed with no issues at all to change their names. But maybe that's just me.

But other than that, I don't see anything wrong with it. Seems like a good way to make sure a historic family has a better shot of lasting and all that.

Sure, we'd want to make sure that the RP is in place to explain the transition. Old great-granny Smith was an outlaw in the Great Fink Trade Wars and had to change her name! OMG, we're actually Traderbobs!

That made me giggle-snort. (Mostly cause I thought of apples when I read it. )

I know this doesn't apply to me, but if there is one or two members semi-active left in that family, would they have a say in the application process? Does this just apply to families that are completely inactive? Not that I think you would have poor judgment in this field, but I'm sure some people would like some say in who they are suddenly related to.

eg: I'd hate to wake up one day suddenly be the sister/cousin of someone I had been married to.

I support this. I remember when Forren discovered he was really a Shervalian, apparently he got a letter delivered by a mob saying that he was adopted or something. It was awesome

This also creates a major problem for any subsect of a major family that would like to fracture off for this purpose. Not sure what to think or suggest.

(if this was said, forgive me as I didn't read every word)

The only issue I can see is that if the other 5 Smiths (of the 15) say "No we are not Traderbobs, you (the other 10) are crazy" and don't want their family name changed.

Maybe it could need more (or all) of the active members to agree to it. 10 would be bad if there are another 10 who don't agree to it.

Well that's why we suggest 10 members or 51% of the family. If a family had 30 active members, then you have to have at least 16 members agree. It would be impractical to get a consensus because some members may show up as active but not really log on anymore, etc.

But maybe it should higher than 51%? 76%?

Yes, this is tyranny by the majority but there's no helping it in this case. It would be impractical to "split" families apart.

Perhaps make it so that you require a 66% agreement instead of 51%. Other than that though, I like this idea and show full approval.

This is going to happen either way, atleast I think so. The ones who don't want to name change could/will just reject the new family and restart the old one? Would that even be possible under this new system?

You could probably restart the old name under a new family.

I like this, very much.

I think the 66% thing is good, but what about my other question about consulting current members of the historical family?

Well, the dissenters can always opt to not show their name in their title and put the old name in with their suffix title. Sure, honorsing them would show they were active in the Traderbob family and they'd show up on the Family Tree and all - but just cause a branch of a family decides to pretend the rest of the family doesn't exist, it doesn't mean they're not still related, after all.

I like this a lot. It'd save a lot of grief in sending an application, waiting, being told they are reading it, waiting, then being told, "Yeah, but how are we going to know you're active?", finding x number of people, submitting them, waiting more, and then... getting approved or not.

I don't think that would ever happen. If someone already is part of the historical family, then your application to become the new historical family would be rejected.

Maybe he means consulting denizens! Oh, Rooooweeeena....