Community Development Team - Rank?

[n4n0]

Voted no to minirank. Yes they donate time but I think a fun rank would be seen as trust in the community. A minirank would suffice think bond holders only have a fun rank and bond holders ranks are more important that cdt ranks in my opinion.

This also raises a valid point. I'd prefer to see bond holders given a fun rank before CDT ANY DAY. At least there's monetary trust involved with bond holders.

 

[Brendan]

As much as I agree with members contributing to the community and being recognized for their efforts, I have to side with n4n0 and his posse on this one. Being a part of the User Education for over a year and being a member of the Community Development Team earlier this year showed me that there are always members who will join the group with good intentions but in the end just want to hang on to the rank.

I agree with a Mini-Rank considering they're considered less valuable, etc. I promise everyone that with or without a fun rank, people can see your contributions.

 

[S]

I'm not saying that a fun-rank is necessary. If we're debating over a minirank and or fun-rank, the idea that a mini-rank holds any recognition value whatsoever is idiotic. To clarify, I'm not saying the CDT needs a rank for the work and effort put in, as some sort of reward, more so for people to recognise who we are, and if they need anything done/want to put fourth an idea, they can contact us and recognise us by so.

Anyway, I see nates and your point n4n0. I'm impartial, I personally don't care if there is, or isn't. It would play no part in how much effort I put fourth. I'd do my optimum best, regardless of a rank.

Just one more thing; I doubt people would use it as a trust symbol, as most in CDT at current are Staff/OMM's/already trusted by the community and market users.

 

I feel as if removing all the non-important miniranks that are useless would help greatly in exposing the important miniranks and I think that is definitely part of the issue. If they were to desaturate the community of miniranks they would actually mean something and the important ones would stand out and therefore a CDT or bond holder minirank would actually be seen instead of just passed off as another minirank.

 

[Syed]

I was around when User Educators had ranks, it wasn't so bad, a lot of good guides were posted(albeit, they were aiming for the rank, but so what?).

The Sythe community benefited, I don't even remember that drama around UE, it was just people saying "Wow they don't deserve the rank, how stupid is the idea that someone can contribute to Sythe.org and be recognized".

Also CDT isn't like OGV, and UE, in the fact that most of the work happens behind the scenes.

With UE, you had to publicly post guides.
With OGV, you had to publicly post verifications on threads.

I wasn't around for a lot of the OGV fiasco, but I was one of the first Guide verifiers as a market mod, and what the OGV Team/UE Team did is vastly different from what the CDT does.

Anyway, I voted yes on the poll, for the above reasons.. I don't see why the admins hate other people getting ranks when they create ranks willy-nilly all the time. It's silly.

 

[win4fun]

You guys are devoting your own time to help the community and receiving nothing tangible in return. I don't see anything wrong with gaining a small reward for your contributions.

 

[Delta Squad]

Quoted for truth. This is my opinion verbatim.

To CDT Members:

You joined CDT to try and improve the site because you wanted to. NOT to be a rank whore. You knew when you applied, what you were applying for. If the rank is implemented, there will be people trying to get in just for the rank. There will be people abusing this rank as a trust symbol, and ultimately we'll end right back where we were with UE/OGV, and the rank will be removed.

Avoid the drama and the bullshit, and save us as admins the hassle of implementing this then subsequently cleaning up the mess after it goes to shit.

AS an ex cdt/ogv i agree, however i myself have used the ex-ogv tag in some threads, being ogv requires some form of trust that you arn't going to steal the persons guide and start selling it on another site etc.


i voted yes on op however not for a fun rank, just make it a minirank or some crap.

 

[Sypherz]

Votes yes by mistake. Thought you meant minirank. The idea of a "team" rank has been discussed numerous times and when executed has never worked out well.

 

[n4n0]

Votes yes by mistake. Thought you meant minirank. The idea of a "team" rank has been discussed numerous times and when executed has never worked out well.

Changed your vote for you.

 

[Matresa]

I say no for a fun-rank and yes to a minirank. Why? Mainly because of this; http://www.sythe.org/12467177-post1.html

All the 'useless' miniranks that as some of you say have 'devalued' the system itself won't be showing outside of the SF/USF, so now at least, a minirank might not be a bad idea I guess.

 

[Game]

I appreciate as a user of this website, what you guy's do. However I agree with the point raised by Plznate. I think to prove your a member should just be as simple as a sticky by an admin that says who's in it within the Community forums.

 

I think to prove your a member should just be as simple as a sticky by an admin that says who's in it within the Community forums.

There is one. I rest my case, you probably didn't even know it existed.


The point's being missed a bit. The main reasoning behind this whole suggestion is less for oh I'm on CDT gimme credit and stroke my e-penis, it's more about showing people who we are. It's damn hard conjuring up ideas that'll work without any thoughts or suggestions from the community. If you asked 10 random people who the CDT were, would they be able to name 5 of us? Probably not.

There could always be conditions on top of it. Have to contribute a certain amount to a leader's discretion before being given the rank, can't advertise it like it's a trust thing.. anything. But having to put out everything we try to every month is, yes what we signed up for, but also takes a lot more time than you'd think. It's actually pretty stressful being in charge of it all sometimes. We don't let Joe Bloggs in to the CDT, it's well known, trusted members. I don't see why there's such a problem with them having one rank.

Oh, so some more people might apply because they get a rank. Doesn't mean they'll get in. And if they do fuck all, they get kicked off - simple.

Sythe needs something to bring activity up and that's exactly what we're trying to do. Countless threads have been posted and agreed with about how Sythe needs to change and how it's "not going to last" etc. but here's a prime example of why, everything just gets shot down instantly without a second thought because of what's happened with different things in the past.

 

[Swadq]

I don't think so - I thought the point of miniranks was just to have fun, not to denote responsibility (as proved in the LoL verified section).

EDIT: I misunderstood the question, but I vote no to both fun rank and minirank, on account of trust and fun respectively

 

[Delta Squad]

There is one. I rest my case, you probably didn't even know it existed.


The point's being missed a bit. The main reasoning behind this whole suggestion is less for oh I'm on CDT gimme credit and stroke my e-penis, it's more about showing people who we are. It's damn hard conjuring up ideas that'll work without any thoughts or suggestions from the community. If you asked 10 random people who the CDT were, would they be able to name 5 of us? Probably not.

There could always be conditions on top of it. Have to contribute a certain amount to a leader's discretion before being given the rank, can't advertise it like it's a trust thing.. anything. But having to put out everything we try to every month is, yes what we signed up for, but also takes a lot more time than you'd think. It's actually pretty stressful being in charge of it all sometimes. We don't let Joe Bloggs in to the CDT, it's well known, trusted members. I don't see why there's such a problem with them having one rank.

Oh, so some more people might apply because they get a rank. Doesn't mean they'll get in. And if they do fuck all, they get kicked off - simple.

Sythe needs something to bring activity up and that's exactly what we're trying to do. Countless threads have been posted and agreed with about how Sythe needs to change and how it's "not going to last" etc. but here's a prime example of why, everything just gets shot down instantly without a second thought because of what's happened with different things in the past.

Like i stated in the minirank thread grave made, it's more of a, i don't have it so neither can you type of thing.


Those screaming it will provide false trust, well hopefully the people allowed into the groups, are trusted to begin with, it's not like we are letting some newfag with 5 posts in, and allowing him to get a rank, so he can go on a scamming spree.



if a mofo wants to add cdt member as a tag on his/her selling thread let him, half the fucking tags used on this site arn't even correct like

top seller since 2007, trusted, best, cheapest. it's all lies.

Chill your tots if god damn pixels not like you are giving them ban powers, access to the porn lounge, or a new buggatti, this is why shit never gives done, and this is why i stoped taking part in this community and live under a rock in the spam forum.




/thread

also to lazy to fix my typoes.

 

[AmitZ]

Why does everyone act like anyone can join whenever they want? CDT members are picked with care and extreme observation and caution.

OT: I support this. I don't see how people can abuse this. Maybe it'll give a bit of trust, but take SVU for example. Just 5$ for a rank that has "verified" in it's name. Comparing these two, there's no doubt that CDT should receive a rank.

 

Why does everyone act like anyone can join whenever they want? CDT members are picked with care and extreme observation and caution.

OT: I support this. I don't see how people can abuse this. Maybe it'll give a bit of trust, but take SVU for example. Just 5$ for a rank that has "verified" in it's name. Comparing these two, there's no doubt that CDT should receive a rank.

I use the same logic but against them getting a rank. A bond holder which in my opinion is more of an indication of trust than a CDT member do not have a rank so why would CDT members. As for the rank situation I think with removal of the spam miniranks CDT members should get a minirank instead of a fun one.

 

I use the same logic but against them getting a rank. A bond holder which in my opinion is more of an indication of trust than a CDT member do not have a rank so why would CDT members. As for the rank situation I think with removal of the spam miniranks CDT members should get a minirank instead of a fun one.

It's not for "trust" - it doesn't symbolise "trust". It's saying "I AM IN THE CDT" which a mini-rank doesn't do because A. it isn't in your face available and B. would get overlooked.

 

It's not for "trust" - it doesn't symbolise "trust". It's saying "I AM IN THE CDT" which a mini-rank doesn't do because A. it isn't in your face available and B. would get overlooked.

Even so I'm sticking to my point. Trust may have been the wrong word but what do you think is truly more important to indicate. "I am a bond holder you can donate through me" or "I am a CDT member who helps better the community". I'm sorry I think a minirank would do the job. I just think if were willing to have bond holders risk being overlooked a CDT member shouldn't have more of an opportunity to be recognized. This isn't my way of saying I don't appreciate what you guys do but I think a readily in your face available rank isn't what is needed.

 

Because if someone wants to donate there's a donation centre with their name on it and a sticky where donations are bought. People don't go looking for a CDT thread/sticky.

 

Sure, give them a fun rank. People who say no are just jealous that they aren't in CDT and want a fun rank.