Do you think I could just leave this part blank and it'd be okay? We're just going to replace the whole thing with a header image anyway, right?
You are not logged in.
kk
Now. What would be some guidelines on being "reputable"?
If there aren't any, let's set some, shall we?
How about no requirements, no limits, and the moderators and administrators come together and use their wonderful skills of judgement to pick the users.
I hate tall signatures.
Offline
I support the idea and I think the same as Jad, that there will be no limits. Mods and Admins decide if they deserve it.
Or another way is by getting the opinion of the community and let us decide. Sticky a topic. This topic is a poll topic. You can signup, and you're name will be on the list for a week. If you get *Insert nuber here* votes you become a reputable member. But if you didn't do it, your name is taken off the list and you cant re-sign up until a month has passed.
Or another way is by getting the opinion of the community and let us decide.
No. One popular person, because he plays lots of forum games, and is funny. But no help whatsoever. But has lots of friends. Bam, he's now a "reputable member ".
3. I think you should get 100+ reps to receive the title.
Chewy would have a horrible time if he wasn't a mod if that was the case.
Last edited by Kaosslasher (Aug 12 2012 1:26:58 am)
Or another way is by getting the opinion of the community and let us decide. Sticky a topic. This topic is a poll topic. You can sign up, and your name will be on the list for a week. If you get *Insert number here* votes you become a reputable member. But if you didn't do it, your name is taken off the list and you cant re-sign up until a month has passed.
FTFY.
That's probably not a good idea, as I know at least ten people on here that would organize some sort of "Don't Vote For ____" campaign. Just like Hillary in '07.
Offline
Ok, I thi nk we all should agree that the mods and admins shall choose the worth ones. Am I right? Hopefully they won't FAVOR some others over the majority.
Offline
Well, I meant things a person could do to become reputable. Like guidelines, not restrictions.
well i could be a good person to introduce people to stuff (not the rules of course, ive broken every one of them). ive been playing since august 2010 and foruming since december 2010 (back when ee was at its peak). im someone that may or may not be reputable enough for the job. btw, if rep matters, how would you judge me?
Offline
Offline
So would you, 32.
Offline
Voting is a good idea, just inbetween reliable members of our community through PM.
Patience is Key wrote:Or another way is by getting the opinion of the community and let us decide. Sticky a topic. This topic is a poll topic. You can sign up, and your name will be on the list for a week. If you get *Insert number here* votes you become a reputable member. But if you didn't do it, your name is taken off the list and you cant re-sign up until a month has passed.
FTFY.
That's probably not a good idea, as I know at least ten people on here that would organize some sort of "Don't Vote For ____" campaign. Just like Hillary in '07.
And just like Zoey for everyone before Alex became a mod.
Good times.
Don't vote for anyone except me, or else I'll kill you.
Anyway, I think it would be best to just trust the mod's judgement. After all, if you don't, they could secretly add warnings to you, and you wouldn't want that, would you?
proc's discorb stylish themes for forums/the game
꧁꧂L O V E & C O R N꧁꧂ ᘛ⁐̤ᕐᐷ
danke bluecloud thank u raphe [this section of my sig is dedicated to everything i've loved that's ever died]
?
Offline
Muffy as one.
Even if this doesn't happen, can i still have a cool color for my name?
Jk, but. When something is decided, can someone tell me? kthx.
I'll agree if I'm included!!!
I'll agree if I'm included!!!
gonna teach people how to be a scrubnub?
Offline
Voting is a good idea, just inbetween reliable members of our community through PM.
You do realize the circular argument in this suggestion, right? If reliable people vote on reputable people, then who decides who's reliable? For simplicity's sake, reputable=reliable, and only moderators would be able to vote on reputable people.
Arceus64 wrote:Voting is a good idea, just inbetween reliable members of our community through PM.
You do realize the circular argument in this suggestion, right? If reliable people vote on reputable people, then who decides who's reliable? For simplicity's sake, reputable=reliable, and only moderators would be able to vote on reputable people.
Then let's just have the mods and admins vote on who to make reputable.
I do think we should not let <snip> decide on who to pick as well, <snip> is an unreliable moderator.
Last edited by <snip> (Today 15:26:43)
>:D
Last edited by Different55 (Today 15:29:36)
I shall prevail.
Last edited by Arceus64 (Today 16:07:11)
LULNUP
Last edited by JadElClemens (Today 20:51:57)
I think I took a wrong turn somewhere...
Last edited by BEE (2012-08-13 21:34:40)
This will not look good in the memo...
Last edited by Arceus64 (Aug 18 2012 3:21:52 pm)
Bump?
Thank you for the bump, but the others are either thinking it over or have abandoned it.
I'll revive this once I hear anything.
I hate tall signatures.
Offline
Adding to my idea.
To make the voting un-trollable then maybe make the person state a reason why they think the person should upgrade to reputable, and the mods decide weather it is a worthy reason. But they cannot copy the same thing someone else said about the person.
Well it could eb only the admins and mods, but 2/3 of the mods aren't on the forums, or they're secretly helping us. 2 admins don't like the idea, so this won't work out well, but yeah it's a good idea to say reason, which could be a total lie.
[ Started around 1738597037.1604 - Generated in 0.193 seconds, 12 queries executed - Memory usage: 1.63 MiB (Peak: 1.85 MiB) ]