{"id":783,"date":"2010-03-11T09:00:30","date_gmt":"2010-03-11T14:00:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/cmubuggy.org\/news\/?p=783"},"modified":"2010-03-11T09:00:30","modified_gmt":"2010-03-11T14:00:30","slug":"thursday-poll-buggy-names-good-enough-to-use-twice","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cmubuggy.org\/news\/2010\/03\/thursday-poll-buggy-names-good-enough-to-use-twice\/","title":{"rendered":"Thursday Poll: Buggy names good enough to use twice"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"DTD<\/p>\n

The kids are on spring break this week, and it’s been breaking 60 degrees here in Pittsburgh all of a sudden. With warm weather finally on the scene, we’re close to rolls, and with rolls, we’re close to new buggies. Back in my day as a head mechanic, building buggies was challenging, but finding a good name for them was next to impossible. It’s tough to sum up all those efforts and all those ambitions. It’s easy to end up with something that is so random that it doesn’t mean anything to anyone. Maybe even worse though are names that are so obvious that they’ve already been used. Are there some names that are good enough to use more than once?
\nClick through to vote and see the results

\n

\n\t\t

Which of these reused names was good enough to justify the reuse?<\/strong><\/p>