- Do not have a misleading names. (Eg. "An unidentified body", "That guy", "No one", etc. are not allowed)
From what I can tell this rule was recently added and seems to overstep its boundaries in trying to prevent griefers and has now moved onto disrupting harmless fun. Since the dawn of TTT people have used names like "not me" or "unidentified body", because it's a laugh to hear people call them out. Hearing someone call out 'the health station' for having a knife sounds stupid as hell, but unless you're lacking two brain cells to rub together it's pretty obvious that it's just someone's name.
The main issue with names in the past has been when a group of griefers decide to join with either blank names, unpronounceable names, or nearly identical names. When they do this it makes it difficult as fuck to figure out who is doing what, and when that happens a prompt warning should suffice, with a kick/ban following if they refuse to co-operate. Names like "the guy wearing shoes" or "the guy in the water" have nowhere near the same type of impact, since 99% of the time people with any sort of cognitive faculties mention that it's just the person's name. That type of thing cannot be done anywhere near as easily if a group if actively seeking to grief (e.g. 3 guys using the names "bobbbbbyyyy", "bobbbyy" and "bobbbbyyy").
Now I'm not saying "this guy" or "that guy" names are completely incapable of causing issues, but in order for them to do so then things have to reach a certain point. I've used the name "this guy" before, with Lonewolf using the name "that guy", and at that stage there were little to no issues since people clocked on pretty quick. After that the names were only kept because they were funny as hell to hear people yell out. The problems began when more than half the server decided to do the exact same thing, with almost everyone playing having some variation of "guy" names. That shit got stale pretty fast because it just turned the game into a huge clusterfuck of people shooting each other out of sheer confusion, and that's why I think compromising with a different ruling would be more effective than simply allowing misleading names outright.
Something to the effect of "Names of a similar nature are generally allowed, but it is ultimately dependent on admin discretion" should be effective at combating the issues these types of jokes cause. If no harm is being done then I see no reason to disallow these types of names, and having admin discretion applicable is a particularly useful fallback for these types of situations when they get out of hand (which is rare in my experience, but it certainly happens).