#406 shipped pronouns for the operator: one setting, rendered on /about, the /art character details, the /connect here-now block, and the con card. It deliberately left per-character pronouns undecided, and that issue is now closed, so the decision lives here.
The question: should a character row carry its own pronouns, so a featured character can be introduced with pronouns that are not the operator's?
Nothing built for #406 depends on the answer. The operator setting works as shipped either way.
What the answer costs
These notes come from the #406 surface map, checked against the code on 2026-08-24. Re-verify before building — the code has moved since.
Per-character pronouns are a strictly larger change than the operator setting was. It needs a real migration on characters (the operator's setting needed none, because site_settings is key/value), a new field on the admin character form, and rendering on the featured-character chips on the gallery image page. The VR avatar page may want it too.
Three things make it more than a schema addition:
**A featured character can belong to someone else. **characters.ownerName names a third party. Pronouns on that row would be either that person's or their character's, and the schema does not distinguish. The site currently collects nothing about non-operator people beyond a name and public links, so this would be the first field that records something personal about someone who is not the operator. That is a real product question, not a technical one.
The operator exists twice. They have a hidden characters row as well as the settings bundle. Per-character pronouns would create a second source for the operator's own pronouns that can contradict the first, unless owner rows are excluded from the field.
isOwner is not unique. Resolvers pick the alphabetically first owner row today. Per-character pronouns would inherit that ambiguity wherever an owner row is involved.
If the answer is no
Close this and note the decision. The operator setting stays the only source, which is the state that shipped.
#406 shipped pronouns for the operator: one setting, rendered on /about, the /art character details, the /connect here-now block, and the con card. It deliberately left per-character pronouns undecided, and that issue is now closed, so the decision lives here.
The question: should a character row carry its own pronouns, so a featured character can be introduced with pronouns that are not the operator's?
Nothing built for #406 depends on the answer. The operator setting works as shipped either way.
What the answer costs
These notes come from the #406 surface map, checked against the code on 2026-08-24. Re-verify before building — the code has moved since.
Per-character pronouns are a strictly larger change than the operator setting was. It needs a real migration on
characters(the operator's setting needed none, becausesite_settingsis key/value), a new field on the admin character form, and rendering on the featured-character chips on the gallery image page. The VR avatar page may want it too.Three things make it more than a schema addition:
**A featured character can belong to someone else. **
characters.ownerNamenames a third party. Pronouns on that row would be either that person's or their character's, and the schema does not distinguish. The site currently collects nothing about non-operator people beyond a name and public links, so this would be the first field that records something personal about someone who is not the operator. That is a real product question, not a technical one.The operator exists twice. They have a hidden
charactersrow as well as the settings bundle. Per-character pronouns would create a second source for the operator's own pronouns that can contradict the first, unless owner rows are excluded from the field.isOwneris not unique. Resolvers pick the alphabetically first owner row today. Per-character pronouns would inherit that ambiguity wherever an owner row is involved.If the answer is no
Close this and note the decision. The operator setting stays the only source, which is the state that shipped.