In the thread about Daxx Garman below, someone wondered why a parent would burden their son with the name "Daxx."
It got me thinking back to the naming rules my wife and I followed when our kids were born 13.5 and 11 years ago...
1. Must be the most common spelling of the name. In other words, Kelly is "Kelly," not "Kelleigh."
2. Must be able to discern the sex of the child from the name. Eliminated Jordan, Taylor, Dylan, Avery, etc.
3. Must be an actual name. So Keyden and all of these other newer names were eliminated. As was Marvcus and Plaxico.
4. Must look professional on a resume or a nameplate.
Not going to give the specific names that we ended up with, as it would make me too identifiable to anyone on here knows me, but our daughter's name has been in the top 20 for at least a few decades...and our son's name is less common and slightly Jewishly-ethnic, but still would be recognizable to everyone. There might even be a character on "Entourage" who has the same name.
So, my question to you, MGoParents, is why did you select an odd name or unusual spelling for your children? Did you have any naming rules? Years later, do you regret giving your child a less-common name?
I've wanted to ask people these questions in person, but obviously you would risk offending them...so I thought the anonymous nature of this forum would cause more people to provide explanations.
I do realize that the nature of this post creates a large opening for snark and smart-assery. Hoping it'll be kept to a minimum.
EDIT (five hours or so after OP): Just had my first opportunity to read thru some of the comments here. While the vast majority of you are participating in the discussion as I intended, it appears as though a few of you (MaizeJacket, BornSinner, DanWillhor) were offended by the post and/or thought it was elitist and/or racist. While I think you may be reading more in to the post than is there, I'd like to nonetheless sincerely apologize for upsetting anyone. It was not my intention to do so.
EDIT (six hours or so after OP): I just found this posting by MICHGOBLUE. He/she more eloquently summarizes the point of my OP.
"At first I saw the same thing, but if you read his message, he isn't singling out names that are traditionally "ethnic," but rather made-up names. For example, Esteban is a typically Hispanic name and Shaquille is a typically African-American name. Based upon the OP's post, I don't think that he would have a problem with either, as the names are traditional (in each of their respective cultures), discernible by gender and spelled in the traditional manner. What I took the OP as having a problem with was simply stringing together a slew of letters and calling it a name or taking an existing name and just mis-spelling it to be unique.
One other point: on the issue of being "professional" sounding, as much as people should be hired based purely upon merit, it is a reality that people end up being discriminated against for just about anything in the hiring process, and a name - being one of the first things that a prospective employer sees - could create a negative first impression. Note that this is not limited to "ethnic" or "racial" sounding names. How well do you think Spike, Bruiser, Mercury or Venus would do interviewing for a major investment bank or law firm? Not everything is about race."