Quantcast

Jump to content


Photo

Expiration date on ranks


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
72 replies to this topic

Poll: Expiration date on ranks (48 member(s) have cast votes)

Should this idea be implemented?

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Vote

#26 Frizzle

Frizzle
  • M'lord

  • 16889 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 March 2008 - 02:57 PM

Just a note, Stella is Belgian.

#27 Grizzy

Grizzy
  • 477 posts

Posted 12 March 2008 - 03:54 PM

Iono, I just don't like some people who just do what they have to do get what they want. After that happens, they turn ghost.

#28 redlion

redlion
  • I don't exist!

  • 12072 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 March 2008 - 04:00 PM

QUOTE (Frizzle @ Mar 12 2008, 04:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Just a note, Stella is Belgian.

I know, but when I was in England, it seemed like more English were drinking Stella than the house beer. It may as well be English, as its made there, and its advertising campaigns are made for England.

#29 Frizzle

Frizzle
  • M'lord

  • 16889 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 March 2008 - 04:28 PM

Same goes for Fosters.

#30 A Silent Soliloquy

A Silent Soliloquy
  • 448 posts

Posted 14 March 2008 - 04:26 PM

QUOTE ('Princeton WordNet')
S: (adj) retired (no longer active in your work or profession)


It's ironic that you're contemplating removing the privelages of retired members due to inactivity which s what the term retired impies.

#31 Ives

Ives
  • 4320 posts


Users Awards

Posted 14 March 2008 - 04:52 PM

I think it would be better to just deal with it individually. There are a good load of members. What I would rather like to see is the use of a modification where after x amount of time a list of users will be listed for consideration to be removed of their rank, but not automatically removed. There are quite a number of people who can only be active certain times, and some who may right now be inactive but will become active later. What will become of these people?

#32 Frizzle

Frizzle
  • M'lord

  • 16889 posts


Users Awards

Posted 14 March 2008 - 07:23 PM

QUOTE (The Golden Cheesepuff @ Mar 15 2008, 12:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
It's ironic that you're contemplating removing the privelages of retired members due to inactivity which s what the term retired impies.


Been brought up years before. We thought about changing the name, but nothing really came from it.

#33 A Silent Soliloquy

A Silent Soliloquy
  • 448 posts

Posted 14 March 2008 - 08:31 PM

QUOTE (Frizzle @ Mar 14 2008, 10:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Been brought up years before. We thought about changing the name, but nothing really came from it.


Well then untill you do I think we should conform to the english dictionary.

#34 Cory

Cory
  • Dinnerbone'd

  • 7487 posts


Users Awards

Posted 14 March 2008 - 08:35 PM

Considering members wouldn't be accepted to Retired / Private if they where no longer active I don't think we can really go by the dictionary to define what our "retired" rank is.

#35 Frizzle

Frizzle
  • M'lord

  • 16889 posts


Users Awards

Posted 14 March 2008 - 09:33 PM

QUOTE (The Golden Cheesepuff @ Mar 15 2008, 04:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well then untill you do I think we should conform to the english dictionary.


I haven't got much of a say since I was retired leader a while ago. Ask Brandon.


#36 A Silent Soliloquy

A Silent Soliloquy
  • 448 posts

Posted 15 March 2008 - 08:01 AM

QUOTE (Cory @ Mar 15 2008, 12:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Considering members wouldn't be accepted to Retired / Private if they where no longer active I don't think we can really go by the dictionary to define what our "retired" rank is.


Retired referes to a general loss of activity after being classified as 'retired' not before.

#37 Cory

Cory
  • Dinnerbone'd

  • 7487 posts


Users Awards

Posted 15 March 2008 - 10:02 AM

QUOTE (The Golden Cheesepuff @ Mar 15 2008, 11:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Retired referes to a general loss of activity after being classified as 'retired' not before.


When you retire from something, you simply stop doing it all together. Again, that's not the case with our rank so the definition does not fit our position.


#38 Will

Will
  • 2229 posts

Posted 15 March 2008 - 09:02 PM

I could be wrong but I thought this had already been implemented (albeit not with the solid system you described) for certain ranks. When I went inactive (upwards of a year) and came back I was no longer in Private (I'm pretty sure that's what happened). I think a system like that would make sense, particularly for the higher ranks.

#39 Jakerz

Jakerz
  • 1764 posts

Posted 15 March 2008 - 09:10 PM

I agree, good idea biggrin.gif

#40 Stephen

Stephen
  • 3527 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 March 2008 - 04:36 AM

QUOTE (Black Flame @ Mar 12 2008, 08:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
So what do you all think? Yay or nay?

Vote or die! tongue.gif

if i was ever demoted because of my random spikes of inactivity i assure you i would never return. thumbsup.gif

#41 Frizzle

Frizzle
  • M'lord

  • 16889 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 March 2008 - 04:44 AM

Oh what ever would we do?

#42 Stephen

Stephen
  • 3527 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 March 2008 - 04:49 AM

QUOTE (Frizzle @ Mar 16 2008, 11:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Oh what ever would we do?

cry for me.

#43 Germ

Germ
  • 501 posts

Posted 30 March 2008 - 10:07 AM

I don't think taking a rank away from a member who has earned is a good idea. The only way you'd really know if they are a security threat is if they actually commit the crime. Until that happens, no one should be assumed of a security threat and taken their rank.

Pretty good idea, however. smile.gif

I am not sure of the word to be used here, but if I am right, I think this is a biased poll. I think this question should be asked to the ones who are inactive and ones who tend to go inactive constantly. If I put myself in their position, it would be rather disappointing coming onto Neocodex and finding out that a rank I worked hard for was taken away due to my inactivity. It's like if you want your rank, come to Neocodex or you loose it.

Like xBullet said, anyone who has a high rank such as moderator, retired member, even private member would probably not bother coming in the future because they worked so hard to get that rank and do not have the time or dedication anymore to get it again.

#44 Oaken

Oaken
  • 7298 posts


Users Awards

Posted 30 March 2008 - 10:12 AM

I think "Codex Elder" would be a better name than 'Retired'.

Retired is usually given to people who have been at Codex for a while and no the site very well. In my opinion they should be considered people you could go to if you ever had a problem on the site or at least someone you would expect to set the standards for the site. Becoming completely inactive would not be one of them tongue.gif.

What is the shortest time in which someone has been promoted to Retired?



QUOTE (Muse @ Mar 30 2008, 06:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I think this question should be asked to the ones who are inactive and ones who tend to go inactive constantly.


Problem is they can't answer if they are not here tongue.gif

#45 Cory

Cory
  • Dinnerbone'd

  • 7487 posts


Users Awards

Posted 30 March 2008 - 10:13 AM

QUOTE (Muse @ Mar 30 2008, 12:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Like xBullet said, anyone who has a high rank such as moderator, retired member, even private member would probably not bother coming in the future because they worked so hard to get that rank and do not have the time or dedication anymore to get it again.


This poll is for teams and private / retired member status. Moderator / Super Moderator and Admin are not under the same policies , if you become inactive as one of these you WILL be demoted.

#46 Germ

Germ
  • 501 posts

Posted 30 March 2008 - 10:25 AM

QUOTE (Oaken @ Mar 30 2008, 11:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Problem is they can't answer if they are not here tongue.gif


Exactly! Which is why we can't make a decision for the ones who are supposed to make it for themselves. tongue.gif

QUOTE (Cory @ Mar 30 2008, 11:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This poll is for teams and private / retired member status. Moderator / Super Moderator and Admin are not under the same policies , if you become inactive as one of these you WILL be demoted.


Okay, makes sense. tongue.gif Though, both private and retired are hard to get anyways and the dedication needed to achieve either of the ranks is hard.

#47 Cory

Cory
  • Dinnerbone'd

  • 7487 posts


Users Awards

Posted 30 March 2008 - 10:26 AM

QUOTE (Muse @ Mar 30 2008, 12:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Okay, makes sense. tongue.gif Though, both private and retired are hard to get anyways and the dedication needed to achieve either of the ranks is hard.


I agree that they are hard to get, but staff is a position that requires activity while private and retired are not.

#48 Black Flame

Black Flame
  • 6063 posts


Users Awards

Posted 30 March 2008 - 11:11 AM

QUOTE (Oaken @ Mar 30 2008, 01:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
What is the shortest time in which someone has been promoted to Retired?

I think that honor might belong to Tet. She wasn't even a year old when she got it. tongue.gif

#49 Oaken

Oaken
  • 7298 posts


Users Awards

Posted 30 March 2008 - 02:12 PM

QUOTE (Black Flame @ Mar 30 2008, 07:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I think that honor might belong to Tet. She wasn't even a year old when she got it. tongue.gif


Wow, impressive tongue.gif

I thought it was a case of you needed to be here for a couple of years or something.

#50 Black Flame

Black Flame
  • 6063 posts


Users Awards

Posted 30 March 2008 - 02:13 PM

QUOTE (Oaken @ Mar 30 2008, 06:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Wow, impressive tongue.gif

I thought it was a case of you needed to be here for a couple of years or something.

Mmm I think the standard now really is at least a year and a half. How she did it...who knows. That's the amazingness of Tet for ya. tongue.gif


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users