rank suggestion

[michaelavena]

I'll admit, this thread wasn't the best place for what I said. I honestly couldn't care less about ranks. The green name thing was sarcastic. I was trying to say that it doesn't make sense when the staff says ranks/colors don't matter when they themselves have ranks.

I know there was no "official" no one under 13 rule, but in order to play here you needed a land claim. To get a land claim, you needed to sign up on the forums. And to sign up on the forums you needed to be 13 or older.

The server has gone through such radical change that its hard to keep up. Although I suppose Minecraft as a whole has changed too. Again, I totally get that this was the wrong place to post this, and I apologize for that. I just needed a place to vent

 

[chdsbd]

In my opinion, promoting people to a sort of "veteran" rank would be quite arbitrary. How long would people have to be on? How active would they have to be? There would have to be some sort of guideline as to what constitutes a promotion. And because of that, I don't see it happening.

Well, it was done before with the architect and pioneer ranks, so why can't it be done the same way?

 

[alien12]

Well, it was done before with the architect and pioneer ranks, so why can't it be done the same way?

I still believe those ranks were handled poorly.



People that shouldn't have had ranks such as architect were given it which made the whole thing pointless. Whilst we could handle it better it still comes back to people presuming that strange colours in chat mean some sort of staff member.

When people see colours in game they automatically presume that the player is a staff member unless they have some sort of tag before which somewhat explains what they are, they clutter up chat and I hate this (yes I hate the current tags as well like [OP] [AD] etc.)

You say you aren't being noticed but in reality you would be noticed by people if you were doing something that would make you be noticed. The last thing we want is to give ranks to people who then get messaged by new players and reply with something like "stop messaging me or I'll report you" which believe it or not, did happen when we had those ranks...

 

[chdsbd]

The last thing we want is to give ranks to people who then get messaged by new players and reply with something like "stop messaging me or I'll report you" which believe it or not, did happen when we had those ranks...

The people who did that obviously should not have that rank, but that was only some people not all of the architects. Also I was pretty sure that architect was given out by time on the server and builds, while the pioneer was purely time. Couldn't it be done again that same way.

 

[Jeff1741]

Chd, seems like you just don't want to edit your signature

 

[alien12]

The people who did that obviously should not have that rank, but that was only some people not all of the architects. Also I was pretty sure that architect was given out by time on the server and builds, while the pioneer was purely time. Couldn't it be done again that same way.

It then comes back to the criteria that needs to be met for people to achieve the rank.
People that met the criteria for the ranks in the past were doing that so how would it make any difference. We could change stuff around but we could still end up with people that have no interest in helping others that may have issues and get frustrated with a bunch of messages coming through.

Architect was pretty much given out by builds only and it didn't matter how long they'd been around, pioneer was given to people from the old 'members' group and players that had been around and noticed from the start. We ditched the groups because there are times where those players go inactive and there isn't anyone else that can be added to the group which makes it completely redundant.

 

[chdsbd]

It then comes back to the criteria that needs to be met for people to achieve the rank.
People that met the criteria for the ranks in the past were doing that so how would it make any difference.

Those people that were rude could be talked to about that. Plus since there wouldn't be that many architects it could be done easily. They also would most likely be responsible enough to not do that since they have been on the server awhile. Also admins could always just give a warning because that shouldn't be allowed to happen, rank or not.

 

[chdsbd]

Chd, seems like you just don't want to edit your signature

Lol, that architect thing looks too snazzy to ever be removed. It will be there rank or not.

 

[DCL_]

I posted a thread like this a while back regarding the possibility of a veteran rank. Its quite similar to this thread. After a few days of debating on my thread, the addition of a color was escentially ruled out. So, putting my thinking cap on, i said "what if we take the veterans current rank builder/donator and simply put a "[V]" in front of it. Although there are still problems that can occur with this, it would be much more easier to use this idea. According to bird though, that idea isnt currently feasible with our system, but could very much so be in our future.

 

[chdsbd]

I posted a thread like this a while back regarding the possibility of a veteran rank. Its quite similar to this thread. After a few days of debating on my thread, the addition of a color was escentially ruled out. So, putting my thinking cap on, i said "what if we take the veterans current rank builder/donator and simply put a "[V]" in front of it. Although there are still problems that can occur with this, it would be much more easier to use this idea. According to bird though, that idea isnt currently feasible with our system, but could very much so be in our future.

It is possible to do both changes with the simple creation of a new group. They did retain the group for awhile after removing the official architect colors as we were able to use the architect commands while other builders and donators couldn't. I don't think it is a matter of if it is possible but if they are willing.

 

[Jeff1741]

Yeah, all I assume it is would be copy and pasting the builder and donor groups, and then just changing the name and prefix. However, this would still cause confusing. People would ask what the V meant, and it would just cause issues. Explaining to people what RM means is work enough.

 

[CommanderFluffy]

jeff heres a breakdown in the simplest form

rm = build world
mod = ban hammer
admin = website/banhammer
op= all knowing

[V] = virgin lol jk guys jk

 

[chdsbd]

Yeah, all I assume it is would be copy and pasting the builder and donor groups, and then just changing the name and prefix. However, this would still cause confusing. People would ask what the V meant, and it would just cause issues. Explaining to people what RM means is work enough.

We could refer them to /list and tell them architect is a veteran, since, as Commander said, veteran's abbreviation has many possiblities. Also since everyone seems to explain RM already, would it be that hard to explain what an architect is too.

 

[Jeff1741]

I know what my job is Fluffy , I was just saying that RM isn't a generic staff rank, so many people come on and have to ask what we do.

At this point it's up to the ops to see if they like the idea, if it can be implemented, and wether or not they even want this.

 

[DCL_]

It is possible to do both changes with the simple creation of a new group. They did retain the group for awhile after removing the official architect colors as we were able to use the architect commands while other builders and donators couldn't. I don't think it is a matter of if it is possible but if they are willing.

If they are willing? why would the staff not be willing to add an idea that would improve on our server?

 

[chdsbd]

If they are willing? why would the staff not be willing to add an idea that would improve on our server?

Sadly not everyone views it as an improvement...

 

[shadow9198]

well im here just to speak my mind on this whole thing a ma jig. may have been said but i got lazy after reading through 2.5 pages so shush up if i repeat things. i do agree that players of enough time (couple few months before build and all these new snazzy worlds.) but i do agree that color ranks would throw us off ass possible staff. also the problem is look at how many people are on ATM that have been on that long. we would be full of em. what i could recommend is maybe put an initial thing before our name (like the regional managers have [RM] , etc...) so maybe give us something along those lines like [OA] (official addicts) or [SA] (signified addict) but still keep our names the light or dark green (depending on whether we donated or not) so we could recognition but shouldn't be seen as part of the staff

 

[chdsbd]

well im here just to speak my mind on this whole thing a ma jig. may have been said but i got lazy after reading through 2.5 pages so shush up if i repeat things. i do agree that players of enough time (couple few months before build and all these new snazzy worlds.) but i do agree that color ranks would throw us off ass possible staff. also the problem is look at how many people are on ATM that have been on that long. we would be full of em. what i could recommend is maybe put an initial thing before our name (like the regional managers have [RM] , etc...) so maybe give us something along those lines like [OA] (official addicts) or [SA] (signified addict) but still keep our names the light or dark green (depending on whether we donated or not) so we could recognition but shouldn't be seen as part of the staff

Since the rank would have to not include the whole server then the requirement to become a senior member couldn't be as recent as you proposed although those are minor details. It really dependes on whether or not the staff want to add a senior rank.

On another note here is one of the architect posts. http://www.minecraftaddicts.com/showthread.php/5478-New-Architects!?highlight=architect