Update some event codes

[mintydev789]

I think it would be good to change the codes of the events that have "person" in the icon file name. Namely, the following:

• 333bf_2_person_relay
• 333bf_3_person_relay
• 333bf_4_person_relay
• 333bf_8_person_relay
• miniguild_2_person

The nomenclature for events like this has almost always been something among the lines of "N-man relay", and I think it would be good to use the established nomenclature. I understand that the counterargument to this is that it may sound like it only involves men competing, but I don't think that's what this indicates at all. When it's said and written as "N-man", it looks more like a counter for people, which is something that's common in languages like Chinese and Japanese. If we said "... with N men", that would really make it sound like it's a gender-specific event, but I don't think the "N-man" nomenclature indicates that. The "N Person" nomenclature also has the downside of adding 3 more characters and an extra syllable to all of these event names, which are already quite lengthy.

[lgarron]

I am strongly against this.

[mintydev789]

I am strongly against this.

Can you explain why?

[lgarron]

I am strongly against this.

Can you explain why?

I don't think any of the counterarguments outweigh the more inclusive and more accurate choice of "person" over "man".

[mintydev789]

I actually just had an even better and more concise idea that doesn't require us resolving this argument: changing "person" to "p". For example: 333bf_2_person_relay -> 333bf_2p_relay, miniguild_2_person -> miniguild_2p. This is also used in many old school videogames (although it stood for "player", but still), and is much more concise. I am strongly against having such long and descriptive codes. If we keep going like this, we'll eventually have codes like "so_this_is_the_one_where_you_solve_a_333_blindfolded". Would you agree to this change? @lgarron

[jfly]

I prefer "Np" to "Nman". I also prefer just leaving these the way they are. I personally am not too worried about growth of the length of these slugs.

(As an aside, I never expected this repo to become the play where we'd debate things like this. In retrospect, I guess I should have anticipated this: the WST/WRT doesn't have opinions about unofficial events, and it's not like there's some other place to "standardize" this. We should either create/find another place to have these debates, or put together a style guide and some sort of acceptance policy for new/changed slugs)

[mintydev789]

@jfly is it okay if I open up a PR with the following changes?

333bf_2_person_relay -> 333bf_2p_relay
333bf_3_person_relay -> 333bf_3p_relay
333bf_4_person_relay -> 333bf_4p_relay
333bf_8_person_relay -> 333bf_8p_relay
miniguild_2_person -> miniguild_2p

As the creator and likely the only user of these icons, I would much prefer the simplified codes.

[jfly]

My desire to not change this is warring with my desire not to frustrate a contributor to this project.

likely the only user of these icons

Your probably right. That said, I still don't want to make a change here. I am open to making a change as part of us writing down a style guide.

[mintydev789]

@jfly where would we write such a style guide?

[jfly]

Let's put it in a CONTRIBUTING.md file.

[mintydev789]

@jfly would you like me to draft that style guide? If so, what are some of the points you'd want to see on there?

[jfly]

Sorry for the delayed response. I should be more responsive moving forward.

@jfly would you like me to draft that style guide?

Yes, please! Some ideas (just some ideas, don't feel like you have to hit all of these, or only these things)

• talk a bit about our "design language". specifically, naming conventions we like/dislike, and iconography we like/dislike
  • for example: no english, lima bean means blindfold, hand means OH, circle means "human head", etc
• rules for merging a PR that adds a new unofficial event (what makes an unoffcial event worth adding?)
• rules for changing an existing code
• what happens when an event graduates from unofficial to official?

[mintydev789]

@jfly opened up #132