Enough with this "Co Owner" business

Echos · #1 01-18-2002, 09:20 AM

Alright, I find it annoying, the inproper usage of "Co Owner". Most Graalians use it in place of "Assistant Owner". There cannot be an Owner and Co Owner of the same thing at the same time, yet I see it all the time. Co Owner just means multiple owners, that are more or less equal. By saying "more or less", that is an expression, please, do not think that it means that all Co Owners are more powerful or less powerful than everybody else. Please, use it in the correct terms, I can think of somebody over 20 who uses the term Co Owner in place of Assistant Owner, and yet I am only a mere 15 and I understand this term, so please, make sense people...

<3 for logic!

WHIPENIE4 · #2 01-18-2002, 09:28 AM

(X-Mann)
lol. so detailed :-)

BocoC · #3 01-18-2002, 09:40 AM

I kinda agree with you. Instead of co-owner, just be "owner".

LiquidIce00 · #4 01-18-2002, 09:43 AM

.. what r u talking about .. its like Founder and Co Founder.. its not Assistant Founder .. so its not Assistant Owner ..
and is this bothering u that much u need to post a thread about ??

Echos · #5 01-18-2002, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by LiquidIce00
.. what r u talking about .. its like Founder and Co Founder.. its not Assistant Founder .. so its not Assistant Owner ..
and is this bothering u that much u need to post a thread about ??

If there is a founder, then there is no co founder, and vice versa. If 3 people founded something, then they're all the co founders, if only 1, he/she is the founder. Yes, this has been bothering me since playerworlds started using it, it's built up...

LiquidIce00 · #6 01-18-2002, 09:46 AM

WHIPENIE4 · #7 01-18-2002, 09:51 AM

(X-Mann)
Basically shauns right, 3 people are founders, they make it (Founder) thats it.
co-
pref.
Together; joint; jointly; mutually:
a. Partner or associate in an activity

LiquidIce00 · #8 01-18-2002, 10:18 AM

co-
pref.
Together; joint; jointly; mutually:
a. Partner or associate in an activity

u said it .. co owner would be an associate ;x

r_u_f_u_s · #9 01-18-2002, 10:18 AM

Owner and Co-Owner are pretty much the same position, with same rights, powers, and duties, however if you want to keep things maintained and run properly you should have a system set up. The system could either be that the Owner has slightly more power than the Co-Owner in organizing everything but not in running it, or that the Owner and Co-Owner have equal power but should verify everything important with each other. Look at it however you want, it's not a big deal ;-)

LiquidIce00 · #10 01-18-2002, 10:19 AM

u can have a co owner have less power..

freddyfox · #11 01-18-2002, 10:40 AM

Co-owners are the guys who do the owner's job while he's busy or away or whatever.

Ziro- · #12 01-18-2002, 10:46 AM

argh....ehrmm....yea.....i think both owners of something should each be called an "Owner" but the word "co-owner" would be used to show that the person doesn't completely own it....like......

"Ryan W and LiquidIce are co-owners of that stripping club"

and

"Ryan W and LiquidIce are owners of that stripping club"

or

"Ryan W is co-owner of that stripping club."

but not

"Ryan W is owner of that stripping club. LiquidIce is co-owner." this would seem as if you're trying to imply that LiquidIce is nothing compared to Ryan W, because saying one of the first two things should mean the same thing.

Torankusu · #13 01-18-2002, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by LiquidIce00
co-
pref.
Together; joint; jointly; mutually:
a. Partner or associate in an activity

u said it .. co owner would be an associate ;x

Then the original term "Owner" would apply to that "Co-Owner," also.

What he means is,
People are using the term as "I am more powerful than the co-owner because I OWN this playerworld.

Instead, it should be:
"We are both equal, because we both own it, making us co-owners."

Love for logic, actually.

SkooL · #14 01-18-2002, 11:06 AM

Yes. Co-Owner is improper if you are wanting the "owner" to wield more power. The people you work with, they are your co-workers, and you are their co-worker. You are all equal workers, but are co-working together. Each should have an "Owner" tag. If you are the supposed "owner," you are co-owning with someone else; so you are a co-owner also. If the "owner" wanted to make it proper, he would have to use something such as "Vice Owner."

LiquidIce00 · #15 01-18-2002, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ziro-
argh....ehrmm....yea.....i think both owners of something should each be called an "Owner" but the word "co-owner" would be used to show that the person doesn't completely own it....like......

"Ryan W and LiquidIce are co-owners of that stripping club"

and

"Ryan W and LiquidIce are owners of that stripping club"

or

"Ryan W is co-owner of that stripping club."

but not

"Ryan W is owner of that stripping club. LiquidIce is co-owner." this would seem as if you're trying to imply that LiquidIce is nothing compared to Ryan W, because saying one of the first two things should mean the same thing.

what strip club ?;X