Naming your kids

happynova · 2019-10-02 00:38:54

jasonrohrer wrote:

However, a bunch of sibs all named the same thing is also immersion breaking,

Immersion breaking, and really freaking confusing. Please let us never go back to the days of having 27 people named Jesus in one town.

jasonrohrer · 2019-10-02 03:25:35

Someone in this thread asked about HELGA.

I figured out the problem.

The names I took were from Social Security in 2016. These were only the names of people BORN in 2016. That was kindof a dumb mistake on my part. Yeah, it's a big list of 36,000 names. I guess I was just trying to get something working quick, back when I added this feature.

But looking at the actual data available from SSA, it goes year-by-year for all YOB back to 1880. This is really an amazing resource.

What's more, it also includes GENDER for each name, along with frequency.

And yes, there's a lot of cross-gender naming going on, but it's pretty easy to figure out what's what. There are thousands of boys named Robert, and only 12 girls named Robert, most likely by accident.

I think I'm going to make a new list of first names, separated by M and F, and enforce that when picking a name for you bb. And there will be WAY more than 36,000 names, including Helga and a bunch of cool, antique names.

Here's another funny idea.... kindof a weird one, and I probably won't do it, but...

The pool of available names could change as the arc wore on. So, for example, in the beginning, the name MAUDE would be available, and at the end of the arc, CLOE would be available.

So you'd look at the family tree and see these old-fashioned sounding names for your ancestors. Probably won't do it....

DiscardedSlinky · 2019-10-02 08:51:19

Jason you troll LOL

I love it

Last edited by DiscardedSlinky (2019-10-02 08:52:16)

Twisted · 2019-10-02 10:37:53

jasonrohrer wrote:

I think I'm going to make a new list of first names, separated by M and F, and enforce that when picking a name for you bb.

I don't like the idea of enforcing M and F names. They're not enforeced in real life, so why enforce them ingame? Sure, most names have a gender that they're most associated with, but there's plenty of exceptions.

Starknight_One · 2019-10-02 11:15:07

Twisted wrote:

jasonrohrer wrote:
I think I'm going to make a new list of first names, separated by M and F, and enforce that when picking a name for you bb.
I don't like the idea of enforcing M and F names. They're not enforeced in real life, so why enforce them ingame? Sure, most names have a gender that they're most associated with, but there's plenty of exceptions.

And they change over time. Lynn and Evelyn, for example, used to be considered very much male names... until someone decided it sounded good on his daughter, and societal norms changed.

I think just having the list of available names, not separated by gender, is better. That way, you can call your daughter Bob and your son Cindy, if you want, or vice versa.

CatX · 2019-10-02 12:21:53

In the case where the name is unavailable, I prefer that the auto-name-picker chooses a name based on gender. But I'm okay with mothers selecting any name regardless of gender.

jasonrohrer · 2019-10-02 14:39:01

Well, I have the data, so I can tease these things apart pretty well. Here's an example of the data analysis from a recent year:

https://www.mother.ly/child/top-50-gend … bsess-over-

We have exact counts for each first name. You can see, for example, that Michael was used for many thousands of boys, but only 12 girls. The 12 girls were likely a typo. On the other hand, you can see that Charlie is close to 50/50.

And we can also see how these preferences changed over time.

I can run this analysis for each year available (138 years), and come up with the "sure thing" Male and Female names for each year (those that are > 95% one gender), and the names that are on both lists for each year (those that are < 95% one gender).

So then I have M, F, and M/F lists for each year.

Then I can merge these lists.

This will give us a list of names that were 95% male for all 138 years, 95% female for all 138 years, or M/F at some point in the past.

So you can name your girl Charlie but not Robert. And if you try to name her Robert, she becomes Roberta automatically.

The point of doing this is really just to give this much-used and much-loved system the attention it deserves. When I implemented it, it was a quick test to see if people liked it. Time to revisit it and go a bit deeper, so the system itself is a bit more textured.

I mean, think of the moment when someone names their girl baby Robert by accident, and then thinks, "oops," but then mouses over and realizes that the game caught the mistake for them.

And then, just as people have dug into the current name list for gems, people will dig into the gender lists for funny gems, or hunt for interesting names that made it onto both lists.

It just gives the naming system one more interesting facet.

jasonrohrer · 2019-10-02 14:41:07

And not to mention a LOT more names (b/c I'm merging the lists from all 138 years). HELGA here we come. But not for a boy, k?

Grim_Arbiter · 2019-10-02 15:50:57

Gat dayum J

All cause i mentioned helga haha.

I like this the more I think about it with the M F names..

Yesterday I held a baby tarr over the radio and said "you are famous baby, say hi" and his name corrected to fannie, but he was a boy. I then apologized profusely haha.

Last edited by Grim_Arbiter (2019-10-02 16:01:47)

Amon · 2019-10-02 16:15:56

I like it so much more common yet excluded names are finally joining the roost!

Anhigen · 2019-10-02 18:55:08

Up next, only female characters can wear dresses.

CatX wrote:

In the case where the name is unavailable, I prefer that the auto-name-picker chooses a name based on gender. But I'm okay with mothers selecting any name regardless of gender.

Yeah, if this process is a sophistication of "a similar name will be selected" then David is probably not the closet name to Davina. The player would probably be happier with Daffodil instead. But if the updated list is implemented because "girls have boys names" is seen as a problem, the case presented here, and is solved by using the naming conventions (read: view points) of people from the last hundred and forty years... sounds whack.

It's the assumption that naming the bb Robert was a mistake.

jasonrohrer · 2019-10-02 20:17:05

These are naming conventions from each individual year from 2018 all the way back to 1880. There's nothing arbitrary about it. It's what people actually named their babies during this comprehensive swath of modern history in one of the most culturally diverse places on the planet.

BladeWoods · 2019-10-02 20:21:25

Could there be a better way to see before you name your kid an invalid name what name they would get?

It is annoying when your child ends up with a name you don't like and didn't name them.

happynova · 2019-10-02 21:08:39

jasonrohrer wrote:

Well, I have the data, so I can tease these things apart pretty well. Here's an example of the data analysis from a recent year:
https://www.mother.ly/child/top-50-gend … bsess-over-

That URL doesn't seem to be working. I'm getting a 404 error on it.

I myself am kind of torn on this issue, because I'm not super thrilled about enforcing gendered names -- I generally dislike the idea of forcing gendered anything -- but, on the other hand, I do get genuinely miffed when I try to give my son a name that turns out to be taken, and going to the next one down the list slaps an "a" on the end and turns what I tried to name him into the feminine version. (My apologies to Michaela and Gabriela and probably quite a few others I'm forgetting.)

WalrusesConquer · 2019-10-04 15:39:17

Pretty sure this thread is dead, but just wanted to say the more old fashioned names idea sounds pretty funny! It's weird having a Wolf and Thanos at the same time

Kinrany · 2019-10-10 17:39:44

Jason, you justified using the US-sourced names by saying that it has lots of names from other countries anyway. But now you're using US statistics to decide which names are male and which are female, and that clearly will not generalize well to other countries.

Frankly, I see no reason whatsoever to enforce this. At the risk of being uncharitable, it seems you just thought it was cool that the data was available, and really wanted to find a way to use it.

One Hour One Life Forums

#26 2019-10-02 00:38:54

Re: Naming your kids

#27 2019-10-02 03:25:35

Re: Naming your kids

#28 2019-10-02 08:51:19

Re: Naming your kids

#29 2019-10-02 10:37:53

Re: Naming your kids

#30 2019-10-02 11:15:07

Re: Naming your kids

#31 2019-10-02 12:21:53

Re: Naming your kids

#32 2019-10-02 14:39:01

Re: Naming your kids

#33 2019-10-02 14:41:07

Re: Naming your kids

#34 2019-10-02 15:50:57

Re: Naming your kids

#35 2019-10-02 16:15:56

Re: Naming your kids

#36 2019-10-02 18:55:08

Re: Naming your kids

#37 2019-10-02 20:17:05

Re: Naming your kids

#38 2019-10-02 20:21:25

Re: Naming your kids

#39 2019-10-02 21:08:39

Re: Naming your kids

#40 2019-10-04 15:39:17

Re: Naming your kids

#41 2019-10-10 17:39:44

Re: Naming your kids

Board footer