View Message

Oh dear. Please, no.

---

Even ochre might be better, but only slightly.

No offense, but it sounds like a sick person (flu or something which includes a throat infection) croaking for water. Awful.

Oaker? But what does that even mean? Is he more oak than the other oaks? But how is oakiness measured? One who oaks? But what does it mean to oak? It is in fact a completely meaningless tacking on of the popular suffix -er to the popular prefix Oak-. Pure trendiness, complete nothing. zero out of five stars

It's vaguely unpleasant, like 'croaker'. Oakley is better, or just Oak.

It's awful, like someone trying to spell ochre and botching it. Or a down-east pronunciation of okra.

I know what an oak is, but I'm having trouble with an Oaker. Looks like a mad spellcheck attempt at correcting Quaker.

Don't like it

Eh. It's like all modern US boy names. I think it's okay.