The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
With the impending notable elections almost upon us, and notable threads clogging up the forum, I have decided to clog them up even more. And this is not a 'vote me' thread.
In my opinion, there are only a few more people deserving to be a notable, and in a year or so's time, there will be so many notables the disparity between a notable and regular will have been reduced - basically, being a notable won't be as exclusive or prestigious of half the users are one.
My suggestion is this - as has been advocated in the past by quite a few users, why not employ a 'revolving door' policy? This policy works whereby we have a set number of notables - say 10, who are recognised as making a considerable contribution to the site. At each election, rather than have to add more and more notables, thus devaluing the title, why not add 2 and take away 2?
That way elections would become much more interesting, current notables would have to prove why they are notable to make sure they don't lose their status, and people can vote for who they think has made the best contribution for the last three months, and who they shoudl replace.As exemplified by Sonicrav indicating he was willing to give up his notability becuase he was going to spend considerably less time on the site, it would also mean we don't have notables who never come on or are unable to.
Just a suggestion, that's all.
In my opinion, there are only a few more people deserving to be a notable, and in a year or so's time, there will be so many notables the disparity between a notable and regular will have been reduced - basically, being a notable won't be as exclusive or prestigious of half the users are one.
My suggestion is this - as has been advocated in the past by quite a few users, why not employ a 'revolving door' policy? This policy works whereby we have a set number of notables - say 10, who are recognised as making a considerable contribution to the site. At each election, rather than have to add more and more notables, thus devaluing the title, why not add 2 and take away 2?
That way elections would become much more interesting, current notables would have to prove why they are notable to make sure they don't lose their status, and people can vote for who they think has made the best contribution for the last three months, and who they shoudl replace.As exemplified by Sonicrav indicating he was willing to give up his notability becuase he was going to spend considerably less time on the site, it would also mean we don't have notables who never come on or are unable to.
Just a suggestion, that's all.
Page:
With the impending notable elections almost upon us, and notable threads clogging up the forum, I have decided to clog them up even more. And this is not a 'vote me' thread.
In my opinion, there are only a few more people deserving to be a notable, and in a year or so's time, there will be so many notables the disparity between a notable and regular will have been reduced - basically, being a notable won't be as exclusive or prestigious of half the users are one.
My suggestion is this - as has been advocated in the past by quite a few users, why not employ a 'revolving door' policy? This policy works whereby we have a set number of notables - say 10, who are recognised as making a considerable contribution to the site. At each election, rather than have to add more and more notables, thus devaluing the title, why not add 2 and take away 2?
That way elections would become much more interesting, current notables would have to prove why they are notable to make sure they don't lose their status, and people can vote for who they think has made the best contribution for the last three months, and who they shoudl replace.As exemplified by Sonicrav indicating he was willing to give up his notability becuase he was going to spend considerably less time on the site, it would also mean we don't have notables who never come on or are unable to.
Just a suggestion, that's all.
In my opinion, there are only a few more people deserving to be a notable, and in a year or so's time, there will be so many notables the disparity between a notable and regular will have been reduced - basically, being a notable won't be as exclusive or prestigious of half the users are one.
My suggestion is this - as has been advocated in the past by quite a few users, why not employ a 'revolving door' policy? This policy works whereby we have a set number of notables - say 10, who are recognised as making a considerable contribution to the site. At each election, rather than have to add more and more notables, thus devaluing the title, why not add 2 and take away 2?
That way elections would become much more interesting, current notables would have to prove why they are notable to make sure they don't lose their status, and people can vote for who they think has made the best contribution for the last three months, and who they shoudl replace.As exemplified by Sonicrav indicating he was willing to give up his notability becuase he was going to spend considerably less time on the site, it would also mean we don't have notables who never come on or are unable to.
Just a suggestion, that's all.
Best. Suggestion. Ever.
Seconded.
Seconded.
This idea has been brought up a few times. To be honest though I wouldn't want to take away anyones right to remain a notable. All of them earned it and its always nice for everyone to have something to aim for.
Who cares if there ends up being loads of notables if they've earned it. Its not like they become some big leader of the forums or anything, the notable status is given to people who have been giving a big contribution to the forums. If we had to vote someone out of that status, I personally wouldn't take part in that vote cause I wouldn't see it as fair when all of them are good posters.
Anyway, good luck to everyone in the upcoming election. ;-)
Who cares if there ends up being loads of notables if they've earned it. Its not like they become some big leader of the forums or anything, the notable status is given to people who have been giving a big contribution to the forums. If we had to vote someone out of that status, I personally wouldn't take part in that vote cause I wouldn't see it as fair when all of them are good posters.
Anyway, good luck to everyone in the upcoming election. ;-)
RM18 wrote:
> My suggestion is this - as has been advocated in the past by quite a
> few users, why not employ a 'revolving door' policy? This policy works
> whereby we have a set number of notables - say 10, who are recognised
> as making a considerable contribution to the site. At each election,
> rather than have to add more and more notables, thus devaluing the
> title, why not add 2 and take away 2?
Damn right. In the 6 months i've been here i've barely even seen Sniper- and what i have seen is something which doesn't inspire that much admiration for the guy. Pro Evo as well- maybe he has been on holiday? But since he was elected he seems to have been away for a hell of a long time. I think 2 is a bit harsh though, but i think it would make more sense if we simply did this type of thing every other election.
> My suggestion is this - as has been advocated in the past by quite a
> few users, why not employ a 'revolving door' policy? This policy works
> whereby we have a set number of notables - say 10, who are recognised
> as making a considerable contribution to the site. At each election,
> rather than have to add more and more notables, thus devaluing the
> title, why not add 2 and take away 2?
Damn right. In the 6 months i've been here i've barely even seen Sniper- and what i have seen is something which doesn't inspire that much admiration for the guy. Pro Evo as well- maybe he has been on holiday? But since he was elected he seems to have been away for a hell of a long time. I think 2 is a bit harsh though, but i think it would make more sense if we simply did this type of thing every other election.
I suggested something like this a while ago, except this idea is slightly better than mine. My idea was to keep the notable elections as is, but have another one along with it,where one notable was voted for to go up one more level, then at the next vote they would lose that higher level and become a notable again, unless they were re-elected. But my idea doesn't include dropping a notable or two back to regular, which is why I think yours is better.
People are taking this notable business FAR too seriously...
It's no big deal, honestly. Just a little bit of fun.
It's no big deal, honestly. Just a little bit of fun.
I have suggested this on a number of occasions.
I think it was mentioned after like the second one
Although it would make things fun even if I got kicked oot
Although it would make things fun even if I got kicked oot
SHEEPY wrote:
> I think it was mentioned after like the second one
>
> Although it would make things fun even if I got kicked oot
Could be bronze coloured :D
> I think it was mentioned after like the second one
>
> Although it would make things fun even if I got kicked oot
Could be bronze coloured :D
Quinty wrote:
Pro Evo as well- maybe he has been on
> holiday? But since he was elected he seems to have been away for a
> hell of a long time.
Yeh he's been on hol and only got back recently, thats why he aint been on.
Pro Evo as well- maybe he has been on
> holiday? But since he was elected he seems to have been away for a
> hell of a long time.
Yeh he's been on hol and only got back recently, thats why he aint been on.
Page: