[Question] ..hmm...maybe another rank?

Ranks aren't really that important, but they're just another fun thing to have on a forum. They won't start a civil war or anything.

The ranks and so forth that we have now, are already difficult to attain. Celebrating that by getting a custom tag and joining a user group should be enough recognition for your time of service at the forums. At the same time, its only a length of time, and number of posts being recognized. Showing appreciation for quality of membership, through insightful posts and support for other members would possibly warrant another "rank". But adding ranks and showing appreciation and attention to members just because "everyone is joining the member group and we have a lot of posts," well, thats intervention and celebration when its not really necessary.

quote:

Originally posted by StevieV019 The ranks and so forth that we have now, are already difficult to attain. Celebrating that by getting a custom tag and joining a user group should be enough recognition for your time of service at the forums. At the same time, its only a length of time, and number of posts being recognized. Showing appreciation for quality of membership, through insightful posts and support for other members would possibly warrant another "rank". But adding ranks and showing appreciation and attention to members just because "everyone is joining the member group and we have a lot of posts," well, thats intervention and celebration when its not really necessary.

The point of making the "Legends" category harder to attain is because lots of people are joining that really aren't legends. Now that it's fixed, anyone who's been around for five months and has 1,500 posts is going to be known. Like anyone on these boards can mention a username of someone who has upwards of 1500 and they'll know them. You can't say that about some of the 1,000s.

quote:

Originally posted by Seraphim Ranks aren't really that important, but they're just another fun thing to have on a forum. They won't start a civil war or anything.

well...sadly some people take them too seriously. There's a difference between concerned about them (like me suggesting another member rank) and too seriously. Someone who takes them too seriously postsonly to increase their rank without having any other real purpose for posting. Though most people spam a little bit (some more than others), most people have a reason to post, like: replying to an RPG, or answering someones question, or posting some information, etc.

That's a sad reality that there are some who care more about having a high rank than being a part of the Forum Magic...

(Now I'm just rambling o.o;; sorry ^^;; )

quote:

The point of making the "Legends" category harder to attain is because lots of people are joining that really aren't legends

(playing devil's advocate here)

Who says they're not legends?? If they've been here for the requirements of the group and attained the level of posts and shown some sort of quality in membership, Id say they are eligible and are legitimate "legends."

quote:

Originally posted by evanASF27 quote: Originally posted by Seraphim Ranks aren't really that important, but they're just another fun thing to have on a forum. They won't start a civil war or anything. well...sadly some people take them too seriously. There's a difference between concerned about them (like me suggesting another member rank) and too seriously. Someone who takes them too seriously postsonly to increase their rank without having any other real purpose for posting. Though most people spam a little bit (some more than others), most people have a reason to post, like: replying to an RPG, or answering someones question, or posting some information, etc. That's a sad reality that there are some who care more about having a high rank than being a part of the Forum Magic... (Now I'm just rambling o.o;; sorry ^^;; )

That was a really strange ramble. O.o

Anyway, the point isn't whether people will spam to increase their count, but that Legends should be people who are really well known. Like Evan for example. Love him or hate him, you know him. I mean, no offense to Stevie, but I haven't seen much of him at all. I recall the screen name vaguely, but nothing really on that. So there's a quite obvious difference here.

ALot of the well known members don't have alot of posts. Maybe we should base the groups on time spent here. But there is alot of members that are old and havent posted crap. Or make it all the ranks time and post count based.
It would be really cool if we could log how much time a member spends on the forum per day and make that the basis for groups. That would be hard and time consuming.

quote:

Originally posted by PaladinAlexanderAnderson ALot of the well known members don't have alot of posts. Maybe we should base the groups on time spent here. But there is alot of members that are old and havent posted crap. Or make it all the ranks time and post count based. It would be really cool if we could log how much time a member spends on the forum per day and make that the basis for groups. That would be hard and time consuming.

I think the best way is to what it's been increased to. Note that the people who have been here a long time with a few amount of posts are only really well known to some people, who took the time to speak to them on AIM or whatever. If you've been here 5 months and you have 1,500 posts, everyone is going to know you, even if they never talked to you off the boards.

quote:

Originally posted by Seraphim That was a really strange ramble. O.o Anyway, the point isn't whether people will spam to increase their count, but that Legends should be people who are really well known. Like Evan for example. Love him or hate him, you know him. I mean, no offense to Stevie, but I haven't seen much of him at all. I recall the screen name vaguely, but nothing really on that. So there's a quite obvious difference here.

Seraphim, I think you do need to take into account the fact that you are a relatively recent member as opposed to Stevie. Those who have been here for a while (like myself) does know all of the Legends, whereas someone who might have joined later might not. Granted, some of the current Legends haven't posted as much as they once did, but I don't think that makes them any underserving of the title.

quote:

Originally posted by Xineohp Nellaf Eht quote: Originally posted by Seraphim That was a really strange ramble. O.o Anyway, the point isn't whether people will spam to increase their count, but that Legends should be people who are really well known. Like Evan for example. Love him or hate him, you know him. I mean, no offense to Stevie, but I haven't seen much of him at all. I recall the screen name vaguely, but nothing really on that. So there's a quite obvious difference here. Seraphim, I think you do need to take into account the fact that you are a relatively recent member as opposed to Stevie. Those who have been here for a while (like myself) does know all of the Legends, whereas someone who might have joined later might not. Granted, some of the current Legends haven't posted as much as they once did, but I don't think that makes them any underserving of the title.

I never said they were undeserving, I meant that the increase was good, since anyone who has that many posts and were here for that long would have instant recognition - thus, truly legends.

Not exactly they'd be "well-known" members. To be a "legend" you have to do something legendary. It's common sense.

quote:

Originally posted by Seraphim I never said they were undeserving, I meant that the increase was good, since anyone who has that many posts and were here for that long would have instant recognition - thus, truly legends.

Well, it looks like the additional ranks are a go... did anyone have any other name suggestions? I came up with several for both the 750 and 5k marks, on the previous page.

quote:

Originally posted by PaladinAlexanderAnderson Not exactly they'd be "well-known" members. To be a "legend" you have to do something legendary. It's common sense.

After five months and 1,500 posts, you're bound to (statistically) post SOMETHING legendary... right?

quote:

Originally posted by Seraphim quote: Originally posted by PaladinAlexanderAnderson Not exactly they'd be "well-known" members. To be a "legend" you have to do something legendary. It's common sense. After five months and 1,500 posts, you're bound to (statistically) post SOMETHING legendary... right?

No. I never posted anything legendary and I'm a legend and I have like 2,080 posts.

Well, no offense to you, Seraphim, but Ive been here longer than you. Just because my post count is less than yours, doesnt warrant me not attaining "legends" status. A "legend" is someone who doesnt care about his/her status or rank within the forums. They are confident within their place in the forums due to their continued service. As such, yeah, I havent been here for awhile, but the amount of mature, and worthwhile topics have gone by the wayside due to original Big O content ending (for season 2). I like to keep my posts worthwhile and only when necessary. Im not one to jump into conversations just for heck of it. If I feel that my comment or post will provide insight or another perspective on a topic, then Ill post it. Of course, if my post will only incite negativity, Ive learned, over time and experience, to hold back and let the thread work it out. That, in itself, is a sign of legend, exercising restraint when necessary. Humility, a great thing once its learned and developed.

The point is, at this point, recognition of username isnt a requirement, and unless we're gonna make the "legend" group a secret society with handshakes, secret knocks, etc. etc. there's no point to changing it. Besides, if we got into that whole secret society group, Krang and Shredder would be caught in the middle of making decisions as to who was worthy or unworthy of membership, and that brings personal opinion into play. At this point, the legend group is based upon set requirements, and ones that are hard to achieve.

Stevie - Like I said, I didn't mean any offense. I just think the higher requirements would be best for a Legends category.

DoD - I think you're pretty legendary. It's not like you did one thing that was amazing, but you build up your legend through your insightful and amusing posts.

quote:

Originally posted by StevieV019 Well, no offense to you, Seraphim, but Ive been here longer than you. Just because my post count is less than yours, doesnt warrant me not attaining "legends" status.

And it looks like we're all going to achieve Godhood membership status arguing about it!

Seriously, let's look at the ideas for names.

quote:

Originally posted by Seraphim I never said they were undeserving, I meant that the increase was good, since anyone who has that many posts and were here for that long would have instant recognition - thus, truly legends.

I'm not saying I don't agree with the increase, because I do, but your logic is starting to confuse me. You claim that the Forum Legends should be those just about everyone knows, yes? You then say that increasing the requirement to five months would do that. But, even then, people like Stevie (who you claimed do not stick out to you as Legends) would still qualify...

I think my point is that although you might not know all of the Legends, for people who have been members of Paradigm for a while, they are very well renowned and deserving of the title "Forum Legend."

---

quote:

Originally posted by Zola quote: Originally posted by Seraphim I never said they were undeserving, I meant that the increase was good, since anyone who has that many posts and were here for that long would have instant recognition - thus, truly legends. Well, it looks like the additional ranks are a go... did anyone have any other name suggestions? I came up with several for both the 750 and 5k marks, on the previous page.

As did I. I suppose I'll post the names I came up with again to keep it fresh: Mythic, Mystic, Divine, Preeminant, Supreme, Quintessencial.

These are names Ms. Zola came up with:

quote:

Phenomenal for 750? Superb, amazing, astonishing? Incredible, awesome, excellent? How about Mythical for 5000? Deified? Dominus? Megadeus? Director?

I particularly like "Dominus of Megadeus". I think if any one rank should be added, it should be that one. I like all of FP's except for "Preeminant". It just doesn't seem to fit.

Well maybe we should have the members vote on who becomes a legendary member. So that people dont SPAM to get to 1,500 or whatever but instead have to DO something WORTHY of being called a forum legend.
But that would mean also that if someone does something SO incredibly stupid that everyone remembers it. Thus being a "legend". So thats why I say that we have either mods or members vote on who gets in.
Yeah it's democratic and yes I'm communist. I'd rather actually VOTE for people to be called "Forum Legends" than let a bunch of spammers in(I think I am one of those spammers)