Thread: Should natural landmarks be named?
View Single Post
  #1  
Old 06-04-2009, 12:55 AM
DustyPorViva DustyPorViva is offline
Will work for food. Maybe
DustyPorViva's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 9,589
DustyPorViva has a reputation beyond reputeDustyPorViva has a reputation beyond reputeDustyPorViva has a reputation beyond reputeDustyPorViva has a reputation beyond reputeDustyPorViva has a reputation beyond reputeDustyPorViva has a reputation beyond reputeDustyPorViva has a reputation beyond reputeDustyPorViva has a reputation beyond reputeDustyPorViva has a reputation beyond reputeDustyPorViva has a reputation beyond reputeDustyPorViva has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to DustyPorViva Send a message via MSN to DustyPorViva
Should natural landmarks be named?
Classic is an old server... the oldest in fact. It was developed around the idea that it would be the only server to represent Graal officially. Therefor, nothing was really named. Hell, the 'server' didn't even have a name because it was the only official server, therefor referred to as "Graal" or the "Official server".

So, 10 years down the line it seems we're officially screwed. Lakes have no names, mountains have no names, hell, even whole continents and islands have no names. Nothing has a name.

Now I find it hard to even refer to the server because all it's come to be known as is 'Classic', which to be honest is a dumb name. It reflects nothing beyond the fact that it is a classic server, which is even more confusing when ALL the 'official' servers are called classic servers.

In summary, do you think it would be a dishonor to the nostalgia of the server to start naming things now?
Reply With Quote