128 replies to this topic

[Waser Lave]

Completely and utterly. But not to you. Or not because of that at any rate.

 

It's ok, I already know you're completely mental and tolerate you regardless. I consider it as part of my community service.

[Ali]

I consider it as part of my community service.

What did you do to deserve it? Something abominable no doubt.

[Waser Lave]

What did you do to deserve it? Something abominable no doubt.

 

I stole Bob Monkhouse's joke book.

[Dan]

Thankfully it looks as though the voting process is staying, so I think we'll all still be able to vote based on the factors we individually think are important - IMO that's good post content with a good attitude, maybe some contributions, and a post count around 500. 

[Sweeney]

Thankfully it looks as though the voting process is staying, so I think we'll all still be able to vote based on the factors we individually think are important - IMO that's good post content with a good attitude, maybe some contributions, and a post count around 500.

You do know that that was never in contention, right?

[Yung]

My understanding has been that we implemented the entire nomination and voting system and set forth the criteria for Advanced+ that we currently have to prevent people from spamming their way to 500 posts. It's as simple as that. The nomination and voting system is to buffer spammy members from automatically gaining the rather extensive list of perks involved with earning the rank. It is also my understanding that the reason this system was implemented was because prior to the voting people were spamming to 500 to earn the rank. Anyone deserving of the rank does get Advanced+ it may not happen as quickly as you'd like but you will get voted in provided you remain even slightly active.

[Kat]

I have a question about Private.

Is the criteria only 1000 posts, a year of membership, and contributions? Do they have to be "well-liked" or just known by staff?

[Emily]

I have a question about Private.

Is the criteria only 1000 posts, a year of membership, and contributions? Do they have to be "well-liked" or just known by staff?

 

I already answered you in TC kinda but I'll answer so everyone else can see. It's all of it. You don't necessarily have to be well-liked by everyone, but if you have a reputation then it will follow you. 

 

I vote on whether or not the person deserves it based on the main criteria paired with whether or not they get along with/are helpful towards other members. If they don't get along with people, but I can see that they're really, really trying then I don't want to deny them it.

[Keil]

The only real requirements are:

• 12 months of forum membership
• 1000 posts on the forum
• Consistent activity, friendliness, and/or helpfulness
• Contributions of some sort including but not limited to programming, graphics or contests participation

For the above, we sometimes go indepth with circumstantial considerations like for for the third bulletpoint. ex were they continuous vs. gap active as well as their history of attitudes. I even research the person in depth, marking any pro's and con's not even mentioned in their applications to make my decision. 

 

As for the well-liked, I know I'm not particularly close or am affiliated to really consider any of the past candidates to deem them "well-liked" to me and even if they were, I wouldn't have qualms voting no for them if they didn't fully embody all 4 points. One of my own personal reasons for voting people into private are to pick people who will represent NeoCodex well and inspire other community members to stop lurking and truly become a part of the community since this is a rank of prestige and loyalty. 

 

On the chance that I harbor negative feelings or bias against a person, their application and their personal conduct will always outweigh my pitiful feelings. I can't really prove this point without showing evidence from the discussion topics, but I will say that past applicants who has a strong, specific, and professional application will always perform better than someone with a weak application who rides on their popularity (good or bad) to pull them through.

[Kat]

Thanks for the reply you two I think that will help some that wish to apply.

[Applepi]

Thanks for the reply you two I think that will help some that wish to apply.

 

nope, still too scared  

 

But seriously, thanks guys for clearing things up

[NapisaurusRex]

nope, still too scared  
 
But seriously, thanks guys for clearing things up

waaat? DO IT DO IT

[Emily]

Or else.

[Rocket]

nope, still too scared

 

But seriously, thanks guys for clearing things up

P

PEER PRESSURE!! DO IT!

 

@Staff - will voting be open to private members anytime soon or just to staff? I think it would be beneficial (possibly) to create a subforum in private for voting (similar to Adv+), and after applications close, redlion could post the apps and we could all vote.

[Emily]

 

P

PEER PRESSURE!! DO IT!

 

@Staff - will voting be open to private members anytime soon or just to staff? I think it would be beneficial (possibly) to create a subforum in private for voting (similar to Adv+), and after applications close, redlion could post the apps and we could all vote.

 

 

We already have a subforum for voting And staff will discuss it. 

[Elindoril]

After we get more members it'll be open to voting. There's only 7 of us right now so that's not much for voting and discussing.

[Rocket]

We already have a subforum for voting And staff will discuss it. 

 

oh well , the more you know I thought you guys just discussed stuff in staff chat.

After we get more members it'll be open to voting. There's only 7 of us right now so that's not much for voting and discussing.

 

that's about the same amount  as staff

[Strategist]

We definitely want to look into opening voting up to the private members for sure but we need to look at increasing the private userbase before we do this I think. But you never know, as @Emily said, that will be up for staff discussion shortly.

[Elindoril]

that's about the same amount  as staff

Although that's true, they probably pay more attention to the applicants than say Turnip and myself might.

That takes away from the quality of the vote.

[Rocket]

Although that's true, they probably pay more attention to the applicants than say Turnip and myself might.

That takes away from the quality of the vote.

 

makes sense, I guess that and what Strat said clears it up.

[Waser Lave]

Although that's true, they probably pay more attention to the applicants than say Turnip and myself might.

That takes away from the quality of the vote.

 

A blind otter would pay more attention to the applicants than you and Turnip might.

[Elindoril]

A blind otter would pay more attention to the applicants than you and Turnip might.

I wouldn't doubt it.

[Dan]

After we get more members it'll be open to voting. There's only 7 of us right now so that's not much for voting and discussing.

 

Don't forget the retired members...

[Elindoril]

Don't forget the retired members...

You should be busy voting people into your own rank. :nono: