Board Thread:Community Discussions/@comment-30683785-20161013183431/@comment-5369341-20161015041246

Brick425 wrote: Michaelyoda wrote: Brick425 wrote: Michaelyoda wrote: Brick425 wrote: Keplers wrote:

Michaelyoda wrote:

Keplers wrote:

Michaelyoda wrote:

Brick425 wrote: Michaelyoda wrote: Brick425 wrote: BusyCityGuy wrote: Slicer Vorzakh wrote: nope, of you're gone youre gone Will you explain why you don't want to give people who lead the wiki in past days any respect in this way in modern days? I agree. We should make George H.W., Bill Clinton, and George W. all honorary presidents of the United States. After all, we want to give people who led the country in past days some respect in modern days. This is already done when we refer to them as "former president." Are you kidding me? No. No, that's not how it works. If I met Bill Clinton, I would address him as "Mr. Clinton". You don't call former leaders "Mr./Madam former *position*".

If I were referring to Bill Clinton, I would just say Bill Clinton. I wouldn't say "Former President Bill Clinton" unless I were introducing him in some news story or whatever. We all know who Bill Clinton is.
 * points out every time Bill Clinton is introduced to an audience*

Formal setting. The same setting anyone would use "honorary president." "Honorary" implies "current." I do believe the tag is for retired admins who no longer retain power. 1. LMBW is not a formal setting, as Kep said. So why should we grant the title of honorary admin?

2. If anything, we should have a tag that says, "Former admin". And I don't even agree with that. 1. That was your own sarcastic suggestion, which isn't even applicable as you give the title "honorary" to someone who has never been in that position. Don't talk to me about my sarcasm, pal. You're the one that started this chain because you took my reply to BCG seriously. I responded to the underlying point in your comment.

That is, if there was a point in your comment, as it wasn't "serious." Touche. But wait, are you implying only serious statements can have points? lolwut? No, my reply was purely in response to yours.