Over at the  page, I saw the synonym &quot;tag-merge --&gt; retag-request&quot;:  which was created by a deleted user - if their account wasn't deleted, it would have provided a hyperlink to their profile.  But instead of showing their user ID under the &quot;Creator&quot; list, which is normally shown in place of their username for a deleted account, it just shows &quot;anon&quot;.  Why is this? My request:  Can we show the user's ID number in place of &quot;anon&quot; under the &quot;Creator&quot; list, as is done everywhere else for a deleted account?
122100
While browsing the  I came across the synonym [vote-to-close] -&gt; [closing] in which the creator is listed as &quot;anon&quot; — the username is not hyperlinked, just like how the user IDs of deleted users are listed in other places like in the list of close voters of a question, etc.  If this really were a deleted user, then I would have expected their user ID to be shown, and not &quot;anon&quot;. So, I checked using  for data on the tag synonym. And sure enough, it shows that the deleted user with the ID 147263 created the synonym. To double-check, I looked up the  and came across a bunch of synonyms created by &quot;anon&quot;. Checking with , these were all created by the now deleted user with the ID 80. Similarly, in the  there are several created by &quot;anon&quot;, but  says that these were created by the now deleted user with the ID 54262.  Feature request: Show the user ID of the tag creator under the &quot;Creator&quot; column in the list of tag synonyms if the user is deleted, to be consistent with how posts and actions by deleted users are attributed everywhere else.
42990
I recently changed my username to Undo. I was amazed when I pressed Submit and saw that it actually went through - surely someone somewhere was using this same username.  Out of curiosity, I then search the SO user list for Undo - and found  with Undo as thier name. They have 50 rep. I have around 1,500.   Is there some kind of pecking order, I.e. a high-rep user can 'steal' a low-rep user's name? Or is this a bug?  Or can two users have the same username without causing the SO servers to go down in a burning ring of fire?
39854
When a user signs up , their username is something along the lines of "user########"  Granted, in the welcome email it does say something along the lines of "Head over to your user account page to chose a display name!", however only a few people actually read that email.  I'm not saying we should restrict people from changing their display name again in the future - Everyone would still be able to do so. It's just that when you sign up you choose an initial display name that will be what your first display name is instead of "user########".
57168
On a whim the other day, I changed my meta name from Lord Torgamus to Popular Demand.  I just noticed that the old name has "stuck" to the author tag of ; everywhere else on meta, my new name displays as expected.  Is this a feature?  Is it a bug?  Mostly I'm just curious, as I can't think of a strong reason in favor of keeping this behavior or a strong reason for changing it.  A question somewhat like this has been raised before as , but the previous poster implied that the issue had something to do with migration, which my situation shows is not the case.
84265
Same gravatar is displayed for different users in the stackexchange.com , under the Top Network Askers in the right side bar.   The red circled image's source (&lt;img src=) are from   https://www.gravatar.com/avatar/?s=18&amp;d=identicon&amp;r=PG&amp;s=30                                ^   Seems the gravatar id is missing here in the image source.  For an example from the list, the user  gravatar id should be    https://www.gravatar.com/avatar/66c66c4d97a7bc3859a85253f003e1fb?s=18&amp;d=identicon&amp;r=PG&amp;s=30   but it is mapped with   https://www.gravatar.com/avatar/?s=18&amp;d=identicon&amp;r=PG&amp;s=30   which caused the display issue.
83686
We can do searches for content by user with the syntax user:xxx where xxx equals the user number. However, this does not work with deleted users.  This could be useful for the same reasons the user-based search is useful in general, of course. In the case of deleted users, this can sometimes be especially useful, though; for 10k and diamond users doing moderation duties, in particular.  In fact, this would also be a great thing to simply link directly to on the moderator's page for deleted users (perhaps in conjunction with showing deleted posts)
114730
On every use profile page the search bar on the top of the page already contains user:&lt;id&gt; text to simplify search for post of the currently visible user. But this doesn’t work correctly for the  user:        Instead of searching for posts owned by Community user I’ve got Jeff Atwood posts:        In this case minus sign was just ignored and instead of (-1, i.e. Community user), the (+1, i.e. Jeff Atwood) is used. Same happened for any other negative id for the “user:” option in the search box.
66619
Most actions are reversible: delete/undelete, edit/rollback, close/open, protect/unprotect, vote, etc. But tag synonymization isn't. There are cases where the community thought an idea  just to discover years later that . This can only be addressed by a moderator, which can take time and effort from the team. Since moderators are supposed to do as little as possible, community shouldn't bother them if they can clean up their own mess.
80785
I realise that there is other questions out there about the  (First open one I found is ), but this is marked .  I often get the below issue where it will notify me about comments on my  (in this case what appears to be the user re-writing after deleting their comment) that no longer exist.  Also, occasionally, I see comment snippets with text that doesn't match what is on the page when I view it.  Let me know if I should be trying to edit that one to remove the tag indicating that it has been fixed, and add the above as another answer.
45371
It'd be nice if each user's profile page showed what previous names that user had recently used.
26868
and        ()   I just noticed that change. I didn't find new reports under .  Note the names and badge count in the first screenshot, and the badge count in the second one.  PS I can't link to the responses tab as it shows only to the profile owner.
101799
I recently  and someone edited my message, but all they did was reorder the tags I had already used.   (Edit: they did actually correct one, I just noticed)  Is there any benefits to the order in which you add tags? personally I thought there wasn't any weighting?
69290
I noticed today that I can add a tag to my "favorite tag" list that does not yet exist.  I then went to ask a question using that tag and was told I do not yet have enough rep to create new tags.    So my question is this:    If someone else creates that same tag, do I get any credit for coming up with it first (as shown by the fact that I listed it in my favorite tag list), or is the fact that it appears in my favorite list, even though it doesn't yet exist, just a placeholder for when it does.
80315
Occasionally I will see a post with the author displayed like this:    The username is not clickable, but I don't know of any way to make a profile "private."  So is this just an anonymous user who only entered a name when asking the question (can you do that)?
13954
The fact that a user can change their name at will can lead to some confusion in the comments.  For instance, suppose a user named "foo" changes his name to "bar", all those comments signed by "foo" are now signed by "bar", but responses to "bar"'s comments still start with "@foo".  Could those "@foo" references in comments be changed to "@bar"?    A brief discussion on this has set me straight.  I didn't think it through.  Request withdrawn.
111921
Maybe I'm just missing something obvious, but what's up with this syntax? Is it because people sign up with e-mail addresses and use those for logging in, but don't bother giving themselves custom names (or completing their profile in any way)?
54948
I often see users who appear as user12345 or something similar. I personally dislike this for a few reasons:    I'd prefer to know who I'm dealing with I think the quality of questioning is generally better from users who have an identity Somehow it seems like cheating... disrespectful in some intangible way.. here we all are helping each other for free, and what? You can't even be bothered to show your face?   I've read the question   and there the conclusion seems to be that we don't mind whether the identity is real or adopted.   Fair enough. My problem is with people who can't even be bothered to have an identity at all. (I understand that in some cultures, it might be seen as problematic to make community contributions on your boss's time, even if there's a net gain. Lots of the user12345 folks seem to be asking for work-related answers: even full-blown solutions.)  Coming back to my first point about wanting to know who I'm dealing with; I actually can't tell the numbered users apart. Those numbers just don't stick in the brain, so it becomes like trying to interact with the Borg. Even if people have reasons to conceal their 'passport' identity, why can't they at least be encouraged to put some minimal imagination into making up a fake?   Stack overflow has successfully gamified all sorts of things, so isn't there a way to lean on people (ever so gently) to put a little bit of effort into dumping the auto-generated name. Nag them every 5 logins? Whatever.