The Adept System (SB)

[The Rack]

Okay after reading through a lot of stuff, I've managed to find more reason to get rid of the adept status altogether, I mean honestly I think we should rid of the post count number and join date as well because the more even playing field we are on the more comfortable and less elitist it will be. Reading through also made me realize that posts are ignored unless an Adept or Mod post. I hoestly do not feel as recognized as another Adept. I think the whole Adept idea was good in theory, like having father figures kinda guide the misleaded however some of the Adepts themselves are misleaded too. I think that it gives too much power to those people. I really don't like the idea of forums that only the Adepts can post in, I don't think that's how true Forums operate. If we're going to talk about something, let everyone talk about it not just a certain group. I'm really just trying to give an honest opinion and I hope you can all respect that.

[frogboy]

mean honestly I think we should rid of the post count number and join date as well because the more even playing field we are on the more comfortable and less elitist it will be. Reading through also made me realize that posts are ignored unless an Adept or Mod post.

See, I think this is a good thing, because a lot of posts are pretty useless. We have all these fourteen page threads that are really unwieldy and have all the useful information buried under random questions or comments.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Okay after reading through a lot of stuff, I've managed to find more reason to get rid of the adept status altogether, I mean honestly I think we should rid of the post count number and join date as well because the more even playing field we are on the more comfortable and less elitist it will be.

Well, it didn't work for 4chan.

Reading through also made me realize that posts are ignored unless an Adept or Mod post. I hoestly do not feel as recognized as another Adept. I think the whole Adept idea was good in theory, like having father figures kinda guide the misleaded however some of the Adepts themselves are misleaded too. I think that it gives too much power to those people.

I don't think you've been tracking the convo. The entire point is that adepts don't do anything. If you consider a special MMM forum to be empowerment, I guess.

People ignoring non-Adept posts is voluntary. In theory, they could ignore all Adpet posts and only pay attention to the non-Adepts. But perhaps they realize something we don't.

Also, if we never paid attention to non-Adept posts, people wouldn't get promoted to Adept from non-Adept.

Another truth is that I'm more likely to respond to an Adept post than a non-Adept, aside from overall quality issues, because most of the Adepts I know I can tear into when they're wrong and not worry about them taking it personally. Random people are much more likely to perceive a criticism as an attack.

I really don't like the idea of forums that only the Adepts can post in, I don't think that's how true Forums operate. If we're going to talk about something, let everyone talk about it not just a certain group. I'm really just trying to give an honest opinion and I hope you can all respect that.

If you're talking about the Buzz forum, as I understand it, everyone would be able to post.

[Ewokslayer]

I really don't like the idea of forums that only the Adepts can post in, I don't think that's how true Forums operate. If we're going to talk about something, let everyone talk about it not just a certain group. I'm really just trying to give an honest opinion and I hope you can all respect that.

If you're talking about the Buzz forum, as I understand it, everyone would be able to post.

See, I read that as referring to the current Adept Lounge.
People seem to think that a lot goes on there.
They're wrong.
The most useful thing to happen in there recently is early planning of the Source Tournament in October that was then opened to anyone for suggestions.
Oh, and we talk about having sex with each other mom's.
It is very mature.

[Zach Tartell]

Oh, FYI she gets really excited by scat play. I mean REALLY excited.

[Nightmare]

So, I think that we should embrace this new idea, mostly because I've already coined the term BUZZard, and now I'm attached to it.

[Brehn]

I haven't read the entire thread and didn't read into Spatula's suggestions. I'll just show where I think the current system is unhealthy:

SECTION VI: DEMOTIONS OF LEGACY ADEPTS

Any MTS Legacy Adept, Moderator or Administrator may recommend that a Legacy Adept be demoted from Legacy Adept to "regular" forum user. Such a recommendation must be accompanied with grounds for this recommendation and shall be sent by Private Message (PM) to an Administrator or Moderator. Such grounds for demotion may include, but are not limited to: consistent violation of Forum Rules, including consistent or egregious inflammatory attacks of other forum users; extended account inactivity (45 or more days); misuse of Adept privileges; willful intellectual dishonesty or otherwise consistently contributing to these Forums in a hostile and/or unproductive manner.

Question: Have you ever demoted an adept because of inactivity?

As it is now, it looks like you just have to work to become an Adept, but once you are member of the club, you may do anything you want without being harmed (except for being a flaming troll, which should lead to a siteban anyway, adept or not). I think this is part of the reason why some members think of the adepts as an elitist friends-only club. Once you're in, you're good.

I'll give one example: quicksilver. (This is not a personal attack. Actually I have no idea who he is. He was just the first one to show up when I clicked on "Members List", I'm sure there are many other examples). Let's just check what he's done in the last year:

Search: Posts Made By: quicksilver ; Forum: Format Development and child forums
Showing results 1 to 25 of 47

47 relevant posts in one year? Why exactly is he still an adept?

[xsockmonkeyx]

Well, it didn't work for 4chan.

WUT Imageboard ≠ forum. Also trip**** make baby jesus cry.

[Nightmare]

Question: Have you ever demoted an adept because of inactivity?

Answer - Yes, we've demoted quite a few people due to inactivity.

As it is now, it looks like you just have to work to become an Adept, but once you are member of the club, you may do anything you want without being harmed (except for being a flaming troll, which should lead to a siteban anyway, adept or not). I think this is part of the reason why some members think of the adepts as an elitist friends-only club. Once you're in, you're good.

Should we be making it a chore to be rewarded for your contributions to the site? I'm not sure what you're looking for here.

I'll give one example: quicksilver. (This is not a personal attack. Actually I have no idea who he is. He was just the first one to show up when I clicked on "Members List", I'm sure there are many other examples). Let's just check what he's done in the last year:

47 relevant posts in one year? Why exactly is he still an adept?

What makes you think the only place for relevant posts is in the format development section?


Edit - Also, to put it in perspective, Peter_Rotten (First in the post-count list) has 111 posts in the development forums in the last year. I (second in post-count) have 140. With the smallish amount of overall posts by our members, 45 posts isn't really that few. This isn't mtgSalvation, where members have 10k+ postcounts. Rotten doesn't even have 7k, and he spams the shit out of this board.

[Peter_Rotten]

And for the record Jack, no one has been made an Adept with a low post count in almost two years. Ever since tournament success was removed from the guidelines. In fact, excepting maybe two, all of the Adepts from that time have had exactly the opposite. High count, with no discernable deck or tournament results. Outside of MWS that is.

It is like you just said, "Hey guys! My secret sligh list is awesome tier one goodness. It has a 110percent game against the current DTBs! Believe me, but I won't share it." Essentially you've made a ridiculous claim with no support. Name which Adepts you are talking about. Name the dates they where made into Adepts. When was tournament success removed from the guidelines? Which Adepts have a high post count, and what exactly is a high post count - 1000 posts? 500?

Once again, tournament success has nothing to do with discussion ability.

Okay after reading through a lot of stuff, I've managed to find more reason to get rid of the adept status altogether, I mean honestly I think we should rid of the post count number and join date as well because the more even playing field we are on the more comfortable and less elitist it will be. Reading through also made me realize that posts are ignored unless an Adept or Mod post. I hoestly do not feel as recognized as another Adept. I think the whole Adept idea was good in theory, like having father figures kinda guide the misleaded however some of the Adepts themselves are misleaded too. I think that it gives too much power to those people. I really don't like the idea of forums that only the Adepts can post in, I don't think that's how true Forums operate. If we're going to talk about something, let everyone talk about it not just a certain group. I'm really just trying to give an honest opinion and I hope you can all respect that.

This is your perception. I dare say that posts in this thread have been ignored for GOOD reasons.

There were some irrelevant posts; those should be ignored. Should I pay much attention to the Tartell quote? In fact, I even deleted some posts.

I'll only speak for myself here, and I'll try to do it as politely as possible. There are a few posts here that do not seem to be - um - carefully written. They are tough to read. If a member is not good at communicating, then guess what - he might be ignored. I'm getting a bit fired up about this, so I'm going to be THAT guy. When you type this:

I hoestly do not feel as recognized as another Adept.

you should recognize that there could be other reasons (besides your name color) that you could be ignored.

When complaining about forums that you can't see, please realize that there a TON of forums that you can't see. The Great Lounge, The Mod Forum, The Reported Post Forum, The seven Team Forums, The Douche Forum, and The Deleted WoW Thread Forum. This doesn't even scratch the surface of the forums we turn on and off like the CaNGD forum or the dormant forums like the Casual Deck Forum or Trading Forum. There will always be forums that members, Adepts, and Mods don't get to see. Only the three Admins can see all the forums and that won't be changing anytime soon.

Post count only means something if you let it. I'll go change your post count. Please tell me if your ideas are treated differently because of it. Seriously... who gives a shit about post count? Aren't we all looking for post quality?

I got a bunch of RL things to do right now. I'll be back later.

[xsockmonkeyx]

Seriously... who gives a shit about post count?

I actually don't bother reading most posts from people with low post counts. I'd just rather read people who are established as intelligent. It saves time and I believe someone with a post count of 2,000+ probably has a good idea of what they're talking about.

[Nightmare]

This site has over four thousand members - about one thousand active members, and you're going to focus on the opinion of ONE member? And BRYANT is that member? You've got bigger problems than your post count, killer.

[xsockmonkeyx]

Stop dismissing this as a non-issue. This isnt for you, its for new members.

[Brehn]

Answer - Yes, we've demoted quite a few people due to inactivity.

So why did you stop doing it? If you didn't, the measure should be a lot more strict in my opinion.

What makes you think the only place for relevant posts is in the format development section?

It is, with the exception of reports in the Tournament forum. Where else are relevant posts made?

Edit - Also, to put it in perspective, Peter_Rotten (First in the post-count list) has 111 posts in the development forums in the last year. I (second in post-count) have 140. With the smallish amount of overall posts by our members, 45 posts isn't really that few. This isn't mtgSalvation, where members have 10k+ postcounts. Rotten doesn't even have 7k, and he spams the shit out of this board.

Also, to put it in perspective and provide correct numbers:
Peter_Rotten - 243
Nightmare - 441
45 posts is really that few. Over the course of a year.

(did you mix up "Format Development" and "Format Discussion" somewhere?)

[Di]

Also, to put it in perspective and provide correct numbers:
Peter_Rotten - 243
Nightmare - 441
45 posts is really that few. Over the course of a year.

You also have to take into account that those two also happen to be the top two posters on the website. They post more than anyone on here, so take that with a little grain of salt when trying to justify your point.

[Nightmare]

So why did you stop doing it? If you didn't, the measure should be a lot more strict in my opinion.

Your definition of inactive is wrong. Quicksilver is still on the site. That means he is not inactive. We can debate about the rigidity of the term, but in the staff's eyes (the ones that matter, as it were), if you're contributing, you're active.

It is, with the exception of reports in the Tournament forum. Where else are relevant posts made?

Well, this one, for example.

Also, to put it in perspective and provide correct numbers:
Peter_Rotten - 243
Nightmare - 441
45 posts is really that few. Over the course of a year.

(did you mix up "Format Development" and "Format Discussion" somewhere?)

No, I didn't. I listed them as threads, which is where the 140 came from.

[Nightmare]

Stop dismissing this as a non-issue. This isnt for you, its for new members.

Why should it apply to one section of the membership and not another? I intend to continue dismissing it, because it IS a non-issue.

[Brehn]

You also have to take into account that those two also happen to be the top two posters on the website. They post more than anyone on here, so take that with a little grain of salt when trying to justify your point.

...wat?

I didn't start with any comparison. Nightmare brought himself and Rotten (whose postcount is only that high because he spams MishMash...) up and provided incorrect numbers.

Whatever. I'll do some of the work to put those postcounts in some context:
Nihil Credo > 500, too much to display
Tacosnape > 500, too much to display
Pinder 377
Bryant Cook 346
Der_imaginäre_Freund 262
Zach Tartell 252
SpatulaOfTheAges 249
freakish777 226
Eldariel 206
Deep6er 170
TheInfamousBearAssassin 159 (he wasn't here for how many months?)
Obfuscate Freely 117

(this is also the right context. Neither Nightmare nor Peter_Rotten are "adepts" per say)

Edit:

Quicksilver is still on the site. That means he is not inactive. We can debate about the rigidity of the term, but in the staff's eyes (the ones that matter, as it were), if you're contributing, you're active.

Yep. My opinion is much different here. "Contributing" is more than 40 posts.

[xsockmonkeyx]

Why should it apply to one section of the membership and not another? I intend to continue dismissing it, because it IS a non-issue.

A number of other members have expressed concerns over it as well, so apparently it IS an issue. Honestly you just don't get it.

Adam: consider the fact that YOU and your attitude are some of the biggest problems these forums face.

[Peter_Rotten]

Stop dismissing this as a non-issue. This isnt for you, its for new members.

And which new members are using post count to dismiss ideas?

and Rotten (whose postcount is only that high because he spams MishMash...)

Which further supports that conclusion that post count doesn't mean much and we probably shouldn't care much about it.

Anyway, I think that I can probably kill the "post count-boohoo" argument dead. I just scanned through the Admin page and there is no readily apparent way to stop the board from recording post counts. Post counts are here to stay.

Next, I hope that all members - new and old - are able to judge posts on their own merit. Why do I stop and read an IBA post? Is it because of the color of his name? Why did I take BreathWeapon off of ignore? Was it because he became an Adept or hit a magical number of post counts? Nope. I started to find some worth in his ideas.

Now to further complicate matters, the Admin board has a User Reputation option. I have NOT reasearched that enough to fully understand how it will work and what-not, but I'm at least curious as to what it actually is. Imagine that I can set it up that when a user hit a certain reputation level, he got a new color for his name? Sooooo cooool.... . However, it probably wouldn't mean that much since the Admins can change that too.