Since we achieve ranks we should also be able to go footman or archer or ghoul instead of grunt and peasant or wisp or acolyte instead of peon.
I'm not particularly a fan of the idea of having any higher levels after grunt, what's important to note that number of posts is -not- reflective of how much of a positive force you have been for the site. While -typically- those who've had the greater positive force have more posts than the others, there are exceptions where people have done much more than their post counts reflect.
Personally, I'm more for the notion of leave it where it is at 100 you become grunt and leave it at that, further endorsement to post more, while making the site potentially more active, would not necessarily increase the amount of people making useful posts, and we may get more "garbage" posts where people are posting for the sake of increasing their post count, and could cause political divide between people on who's posts are more "valid" based on their icon. Which is already done to an extent by the rep feature - but ofc only by those who care about rep, and I imagine further levels will add to that.
That's why my suggestion was to add rep as a requirement. Normally, you wouldn't get that much rep if your post has no actual value and if this person keeps posting posts that hint at it being spam, they'll get neg-repped.
MiniMage said:A more active community would stimulate the community, potentially increasing it, which in turn may create these useful posts that you speak of.
MiniMage said:The icons themselves do nothing more than satisfy the member. Which is a good thing, a happy member will boost the reputation of the whole site. I'm not talking about reputation points, but actual reputation. As Ralle pointed out, he wanted a friendly community and if it had to be small to be that, he would be okay with that. Personally, some things are still under lockdown, but I feel that the community is healing.
MiniMage said:Besides, if your sole focus has been submitting resources and not being in the forum, I doubt that you really care if your icon is a peon or a grunt.![]()
This seems more like a personal conflict on what you define to be reputation. I define reputation as something you grant another when you deem them worthy, positive repuation. A funny guy would have the positive repuation as a funny guy.I've noticed people with some to even considerable amounts of rep without being particularly helpful but primarily focusing on being funny, Also for the rep to be proportional enough to posts for the rep to be "sufficient" most people even now with 1,500 posts would not meet what I'd consider a minimum, but that's my opinion, I also think it's important to note the difference in distribution of rep on the site, depending on your subject of work, you have a tendency to get different amounts of rep for it, which could generate an unfairness in that particular resource makers have to work harder to get the same bonuses.
Define useful for me, please. The focus isn't simply to be used, it's to be a warm and welcoming community. I do believe that was the goal, we are however a modding site, but as we are all on differing places on the scale when it comes to modding, not all will find all comments that helpful and not all will look at a post the same.And is just as likely to create many more useless posts than useful ones, and we want the reverse.
I disagree that people judge others by rank, although that may just be me, correct me if I am wrong. I will agree with the one I find the most helpful, not the one who is higher up the ladder of command, that's kinda why most of the older moderators didn't like me, I think. People don't judge by their rank, they look at what they have done. If you get advice from an experienced modeler, which is useful, you'll accept the advice. If you see that this person has no submitted models, but has helped multiple people, you know that this is a person who is very interested in modeling, but haven't really gotten into it yet. Critiques however, is something I analyze very closely, mostly because most people haven't realized that critiques is about pointing out the good and the bad and how to improve it. On that matter, no rank or previous act will matter, only your communication skills will make me feel if your post has a value or not.I inclined to disagree, on the first section of this anyway, it's quite reasonable to assume a newer member will value the opinion of somebody with a "higher up" icon much more so than somebody with a lower-down one, naturally this already happens with moderators as such because in terms of resources, it's their opinion which "matters" the most, and are generally more respected, due to their position. I consider it possible for this effect to be also generated by icons, so I believe they would do more than just that.
That was just a figure of speech. What I meant was that if they truly feel that they need this specific icon to make their post worthwhile to read, they'll probably invest more time in the forum.We can't rely on doubts and what we expect people to behave like for a change to the site.
Take a deep breath and trust the members to make the right choices. To build and heal a new community, you need a warm welcome and trust. I think this little concept would work out pretty well.Personally if I had way this feature wouldn't have been implemented at all to the site, I don't think it was a good move or generally a smart idea. Though that's probably because I look for political agendas in practically everything, and feel it complicates things when there's really no reason to.
This seems more like a personal conflict on what you define to be reputation. I define reputation as something you grant another when you deem them worthy, positive repuation. A funny guy would have the positive repuation as a funny guy.
MiniMage said:Define useful for me, please. The focus isn't simply to be used, it's to be a warm and welcoming community. I do believe that was the goal, we are however a modding site, but as we are all on differing places on the scale when it comes to modding, not all will find all comments that helpful and not all will look at a post the same.
MiniMage said:I disagree that people judge others by rank, although that may just be me, correct me if I am wrong. I will agree with the one I find the most helpful, not the one who is higher up the ladder of command, that's kinda why most of the older moderators didn't like me, I think. People don't judge by their rank, they look at what they have done. If you get advice from an experienced modeler, which is useful, you'll accept the advice. If you see that this person has no submitted models, but has helped multiple people, you know that this is a person who is very interested in modeling, but haven't really gotten into it yet. Critiques however, is something I analyze very closely, mostly because most people haven't realized that critiques is about pointing out the good and the bad and how to improve it. On that matter, no rank or previous act will matter, only your communication skills will make me feel if your post has a value or not.
MiniMage said:That was just a figure of speech. What I meant was that if they truly feel that they need this specific icon to make their post worthwhile to read, they'll probably invest more time in the forum.
MiniMage said:Take a deep breath and trust the members to make the right choices. To build and heal a new community, you need a warm welcome and trust. I think this little concept would work out pretty well.
Not very helpful, true. But it makes you feel better when you submit something.Naturally we will always have posts on people simply saying "5/5 + rep" type posts, however I do not consider them useful in the slightest. Again, a personal value. And naturally they're not the only example of these "useless" posts.
Everyone wants to rise through the ranks, the question is if they are worthy and capable to do the job. Where someone "should" be is a matter of definition. If this person thinks he should be somewhere, then all he has to do is reach for it. A stronger positive force without any desire for compensation would actually increase my respect for that person, for being humble enough to just wanting to help. ;PI imagine more of an ideal of wanting to be "higher up" rather than making their posts worthwhile, in addition to actually putting themselves where they "should" be, considering a person with few posts can very easily be a stronger positive force than one with many.
Mistrust will always be faced with mistrust, it's better to be an objective observer on matters you can't do anything about.They'll have my trust when they earn it, I find mistrust more reliable for such matters.
Me said:1 Rep = 1 Point
1 Post = 1 Point
1 Pending Resource = 1 Point
1 Approved Resource = 3 Points
1 Pending Map = 1 Point
1 Approved Map = 5 Points
1 Rejected Map/Resource = -1 Point
1 Director's Cut Map/Resource = 25 Points
Suggestion:
In the user CP, under settings and options : Change User Icon
0 Points or more = Workers (Peasant, Peon, Wisp, Acolyte)
500 Points or more = Warriors (Footman, Grunt, Treant , Ghoul)
1500 Points or more = Magician ( Priest , Spirit Walker, Druid of the Talon, Necromancer )
3000 Points or more = Powerful Warriors ( Knight, Raider, Druid of the Claw, Abomination )
3001 Points or More = ?
--
-Da Fist-
Suggestion:
In the user CP, under settings and options : Change User Icon
0 Points or more = Workers (Peasant, Peon, Wisp, Acolyte)
500 Points or more = Warriors (Footman, Grunt, Treant , Ghoul)
1500 Points or more = Magician ( Priest , Spirit Walker, Druid of the Talon, Necromancer )
3000 Points or more = Powerful Warriors ( Knight, Raider, Druid of the Claw, Abomination )
3001 Points or More = ?
--
-Da Fist-
Suggestion:Me said:1 Rep = 1 Point
1 Post = 1 Point
1 Pending Resource = 1 Point
1 Approved Resource = 3 Points
1 Pending Map = 1 Point
1 Approved Map = 5 Points
1 Rejected Map/Resource = -1 Point
1 Director's Cut Map/Resource = 25 Points
In the user CP, under settings and options : Change User Icon
0 Points or more = Workers (Peasant, Peon, Wisp, Acolyte)
500 Points or more = Warriors (Footman, Grunt, Treant , Ghoul)
1500 Points or more = Magician ( Priest , Spirit Walker, Druid of the Talon, Necromancer )
3000 Points or more = Powerful Warriors ( Knight, Raider, Druid of the Claw, Abomination )
3001 Points or More = ?
--
-Da Fist-
look at DSG for example(I dont know anyone with more posts/rep then him with that amount of posts), he would have together with 2 approved resources 3766,8 points, what does he deserve for that?![]()
Hmm I don't think Contest should give extra points, the prizes are rep, rep would add to your points anyway on the basis of this system, and I'm concerned about the fact that a lot of resources recieve "no rating" from moderators, which would then sort-of invalidate the "points based on resource ratings" and it's impratical to keep track of it all.
Well, you could just say that resources with no rating automatically get 3/5?
That's an average number and the rank name for 3/5 is "Useful" which they are. That should simplify that?
MiniMage said:Actually, if anyone has the time, you could code a script that keeps track of that.
I'd say maybe, but that could still make the system inaccurate, since it's actual "deserved" rating (which naturally is subjective) could be higher or lower than that and thus be a little unfair still, though it'd work as a patching-up method to an extent.
Well if it were to be implemented, it'd be a hive 2.0 feature, so I imagine Ralle would be the one to script it. Since it's not like the rest of us can really make modifications directly to the site, we can just make third-party programs and sort of "hook" them onto the hive.
This is exactly what I have been discussing with some people, which is why 100 posts was a good fit.I'm not particularly a fan of the idea of having any higher levels after grunt, what's important to note that number of posts is -not- reflective of how much of a positive force you have been for the site. While -typically- those who've had the greater positive force have more posts than the others, there are exceptions where people have done much more than their post counts reflect.
Personally, I'm more for the notion of leave it where it is at 100 you become grunt and leave it at that, further endorsement to post more, while making the site potentially more active, would not necessarily increase the amount of people making useful posts, and we may get more "garbage" posts where people are posting for the sake of increasing their post count, and could cause political divide between people on who's posts are more "valid" based on their icon. Which is already done to an extent by the rep feature - but ofc only by those who care about rep, and I imagine further levels will add to that.
This is exactly what I have been discussing with some people, which is why 100 posts was a good fit.
When we find a better way to "level up" people, we will switch the rank icon system to that. In an ideal world reputation would be great for deciding which rank icons you unlock, but the more reasons people have to gain rep, the more it will be abused. Therefore, this subject needs more debating, both here, but also in the staff forums.
Winning contests could not only bestow a shiny emblem but also a new user icon with X times getting 1st 2nd or 3rd place. That would drive even more competition into the arena. They could also get credit towards it by judging contests. Just a thought.
Soooo, you really want people to get even more motivated to spam whenever they can and abuse reputation (which would make people "reach the goal" of a different rank) ? >_>But it's just, we need goals to accomplish, like achieving new rank icons, but we already reached the highest level D:
But really, it's no biggie, I can live with being a grunt :b
I second that. The themes Phar chose were extremely interesting and highly suited for a contest.We already have a people with the mentality of "win at all costs", i wouldn't like to create more of those.
It's not the reward people aren't interested in, for example the recent mini contests had quite a nice amount of people and quality work, because the ideas were quite fun and interesting.
I approve those icon thingies. But it would be EPIC if you let people with different icons to be able to give different amounts of rep points. For example, peon can give only 1 rep, grunts can give 2 rep points, etc. This will be pretty good!![]()
CB wants that rep-level to be influenced by ranks aswell.people with higher rep/posts already give higher amounts of rep?
One of the few people who understand me... Thank you god, for sending people like I3lackDeath!CB wants that rep-level to be influenced by ranks aswell.
Hm, do you know when i get rep power? I have more than 700 posts and i can still give only 1 rep...Well sounds a little, what's the word I'm looking for. . .redundant?
Since your rep levels increase by posts/rep we could easily just make it so that they're unlocked when your rep power increases, effectively the same thing, and still your rep amount given would be controlled by your posts/rep/anything that contributes to your rank rather than the rank itself, so kinda already what we have
I don't mean for this to be a trample over what you guys are discussing, but I understand it may be perceived as such.(...) what's important to note that number of posts is -not- reflective of how much of a positive force you have been for the site. (...)
You can't make difference between a grunt and a mountain giant? You don't know who is more powerfull? If it's is still going to be confusing, then the mods (or the web coder/designer, i don't know) can do this.Too much icons => confusion.
Keep it simple.
The goblin sapper will simply not be in the icons list.Fine, i have a goblin sapper icon.
What rank am i?
Edit:
I still don't see why is there so much hype about... icons.
The goblin sapper will simply not be in the icons list.In the icons list should be only units that are in synchron with the hierarchy of other races' units.