Of course it's an international forum. It being US-based means nothing, it being open to (and quite prolifically so, let's not mince words) international visitors and participation immediately makes it so by the very definition of the word... a fact which should be especially obvious considering the vast amount of regional threads we had discussing deals for every major region and even country specific threads for each country's respective community (where people did indeed post in their native languages, not that that's in any way relevant). That this post is coming from an Australian national (I assume) makes it almost too bizarre to even take seriously. What are you on about?
You just quoted me saying as much, I'm well aware.
Absolutely not the case, I was completely unaware the thread was specifically and ONLY about taking up one's wife-to-be's family name if you happen to live in an english speaking country. Read the title and the OP and please do point it out for me where exactly was such a requirement stated or even implied? The phrasing didn't indicate any such limitation nor was the fact that such limitation was a thing immediately apparent or implied since, again, this forum is open to international visitors (like you, me and the OP himself) and we make up a big chunk of the population in here.
I don't think it's a very controversial statement to say that most non-english speaking natives aren't aware you're only allowed to have 1 family name in english language naming customs. I myself lived for over 5 years in the UK and was completely oblivious to this fact, despite being highly integrated with the locals and their culture while I lived there and actually presently working and socializing with Canadian, British, US and Irish nationals on a daily basis. Multiple family names is a common ocurrence many languages, it's not just a latin language thing (and even if it was, there's 800 million of us Vs. 515 million of germanic language native speakers), I don't think being unaware of such a specific custom is that unbelievable that you have to question whether or not I'm being genuine in my ignorance. Also, ignorant ≠ dumb, you seem to have a propensity for unnecessarily resorting to ad hominems despite them only weakening your position, you should work on that.
You just quoted me admitting it, not to mention that I have made it quite apparent to all (and directed at you specifically) that I obviously misunderstood it.
But that's exactly what I did... what do you think the whole double name thing was about? I didn't know what a double-barrelled name was until you pointed it out through example (at which point I immediately made sure to reply using latin naming conventions to get my point accross as to what I actually meant by bringing up the both names thing, despite you know claiming I didn't do it), the OP was the one who misunderstood my point because he, like me, was oblivious we were arguing about different naming conventions (again, because it hadn't been made aparent whatsoever at that point in time).
I fear all this may be pointless, though... you have no interest in discussing anything, you're here to antagonize and decontextualize rather than engage in any sort of constructive way.
