USERS: THREAT OR MENACE?

[ivorygates]

I'm looking for input on terminology here, because I'm running across more and more translation strings with the word "user" in them, and it's my understanding that Dreamwidth wants to avoid using that term. Now, frequently "user" can be replaced with "you", but just as frequently it can't, as in "Similar Users" or "No users are similar to [[user]]." (I could go on. And on.)

ETA: Judges' Ruling: "users" will be replaced with "accounts" throughout translation strings where "user" or "users" cannot reasonably and logically be replaced with "you".

What are we going to do in these situations? "Individual" is too cold-corporate; "People" is misleading (because sometimes the "USER" referenced in the translation string might also be a community or communities); "Persons" has the same problem as "People" (and is grammatically-hideous into the bargain).

I'm just about ready to replace "user" with "dude or dudes"....

Your thoughts?

Comments

[niqaeli]

Member has other more pressing issues than immature readings as it implies -- well, okay, certainly one of the beauties of this services is that users *are* going to have a lot of input. But member implies a direct vote in decisions: as in, member of the Board; member of an organisation. And that's a dangerous thing to imply to people when it's not -- I don't believe, anyway -- an accurate portrayal of how their input will be taken in.

Account, perhaps? Modified appropriately where need be: a person's account, a community account?