Well, part of me agrees, but for argument purposes I'd say that some people will be annoyed because someone uses made up names of people who doesn't even exist.

Well, part of me agrees, but for argument purposes I'd say that some people will be annoyed because someone uses made up names of people who doesn't even exist. Also, I'm not sure if 50% people would be annoyed if OP would use "Justin Bieber" instead of Jordan P. Also, taking this example further, even if we take an ideally altruistic scenario, where a person would walk on the sidewalk, and throw money away for free, so everyone could just come and pick it up, then there still would be some people that would be annoyed: 1) they didn't know about this fact at the same time as some other people, so they weren't able to come and pick up the money, 2) other people got more money than them, 3) they worked hard through the entire life and now people get money for free, 4) etc, etc. So, everything can be argued like this, there will be people who will like something, and there will be people who will dislike the same thing. I think Bjarne Stroustrup has summed it up pretty accurately: > There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses. That's why I've specifically asked about kirbysayshi's thought process (although I secretly suspect there wasn't any process at all).