[QUOTE=Gynx;7903112]
That doesn't sound any better at all. I guess you know that alot of clans have set members to "inactive" until they come back, right? Because than you don't need to edit all info-threads again. Most of the clans have a bunch of members set to this state
What?
Why would you judge a clan like that? Why do they need to show anything into the public? Only other members have to judge on the responsibility, in my opinion. People sometimes find their way into a clan-subforum, mostly by searching for a new clan, to look into it and optionally post there, thats right. But even at this point it is rather interesting if the clan, the members and their postings show a decent level or not.
Where is the sustainability at this
I don't know what I'm talking about & I don't have any idea of the specifics of the test...
You pointed this out quite often. Again, I can only say, it's not my part to beg for informations about it. Still I have the right to talk about this. You might explain this in detail when you ask for activity than, instead of telling the people about their incompetence when they want to talk about it. This way it ain't fair
Let's refer this to GerU. What will make them fail than? That there is a big part of the member list who are marked as inactive?
In the first post, I didn't say anything further. It was more of a post of frustration after seeing that, even though member posted, you call out an activity check. But your responce ....
.... was a big wave, telling me that I have no clue of anything, without telling me the details subsequent. Well
Who asked for prerogative? You just don't care if people contribute since many years at this point and that's the part that is unfair in my opinion. This years are about benefits in both ways; Members had fun with the community and Hampa shurely appriciated if videos and postings attracted new people who optionally invested in game related stuff.
Still you see them as all the other people?
Beside that, I shurely do understand that you see them equal in this activity checks. But the activity-definition is another thing
No, my argument was not focused on the friendship.
Instead I talked about the people as grown members
I can only most widely disagree.
Yes and refering to your counting you seem to be proud of it.
After all I don't think that this discussion makes any more sence.
You don't want to understand the other point of view, right?
You actually have no experience with this. You are referring to the old-style activity checks that we used to do - this is something that we no longer do; out of all the activity checks we've done Addicted hasn't failed and as such you haven't had a warning from me. You make a good point about fluctuating activity, but the ways these tests work is that you have a considerable portion of your clan to be inactive for months at a time if you are to be removed. Clans that aren't obviously dying have nothing to worry about.
That doesn't sound any better at all. I guess you know that alot of clans have set members to "inactive" until they come back, right? Because than you don't need to edit all info-threads again. Most of the clans have a bunch of members set to this state
The idea that clans have to be totally active for half a year to be eligible for removal is ridiculous.
What?
How is it fair that clans that do nothing for months at a time sit at the same table as ones who actually, you know, play the game or contribute to the community? It isn't. We expect official clans to set an example and hold them to a standard for this reason.
Why would you judge a clan like that? Why do they need to show anything into the public? Only other members have to judge on the responsibility, in my opinion. People sometimes find their way into a clan-subforum, mostly by searching for a new clan, to look into it and optionally post there, thats right. But even at this point it is rather interesting if the clan, the members and their postings show a decent level or not.
Where is the sustainability at this
I don't mind discussing it here, but I don't generally browse GerU's subforum so I offered you a more immediate response. There's nothing wrong with that. I also suggested that you don't really know what you're talking about because you have no idea of the specifics of the test
I don't know what I'm talking about & I don't have any idea of the specifics of the test...
You pointed this out quite often. Again, I can only say, it's not my part to beg for informations about it. Still I have the right to talk about this. You might explain this in detail when you ask for activity than, instead of telling the people about their incompetence when they want to talk about it. This way it ain't fair
- all I can tell you is that the majority of the people who know about it think that it's too lenient and want it to be more punishing. Looking at when the last post was (you reference posts were made a week or so prior to my post) is not comparable to how the test is made. I'm not saying we don't look at posts (that would be ridiculous) but you seem to assume that we go "hey they haven't posted in a week, lets warn them". That assumption is false.
Let's refer this to GerU. What will make them fail than? That there is a big part of the member list who are marked as inactive?
.. you criticised a system that was rightfully punishing an inactive clan without knowing anything about how it works. I called you out on that and explained why you were wrong to do so, that's not me getting "personal", that's me letting you know you're wrong.
In the first post, I didn't say anything further. It was more of a post of frustration after seeing that, even though member posted, you call out an activity check. But your responce ....
You have no idea how the system works [...] making wild assumptions without reason [...] if you're going to make baseless criticism on a system you know nothing about at least try to contact me and make sure you at least have a shred of information [...]
.... was a big wave, telling me that I have no clue of anything, without telling me the details subsequent. Well
That's nice and all but we don't deal in opinions, we look at hard statistics and make judgements based on those. Just because you're biased towards your friends does not mean that we're going to put them on a pedestal over other clans - it's our job to remain impartial and keep the system fair. We would be wrong to favour some clans over others so we don't.
Who asked for prerogative? You just don't care if people contribute since many years at this point and that's the part that is unfair in my opinion. This years are about benefits in both ways; Members had fun with the community and Hampa shurely appriciated if videos and postings attracted new people who optionally invested in game related stuff.
Still you see them as all the other people?
Beside that, I shurely do understand that you see them equal in this activity checks. But the activity-definition is another thing
You're speaking from a position of so much bias that I'm hardily surprised you see this as "oppressive" simply because it puts your friends in a tough place. It's a system that doesn't side with anyone except for active clans and that's how it should be/always should have been.
No, my argument was not focused on the friendship.
Instead I talked about the people as grown members
All you said was "yeah we're inactive but we don't want to be removed"
I can only most widely disagree.
I don't get on board with that kind of logic, especially considering the fact that I've just explained to Aikanaro that the test doesn't deal in anything but statistics & even clans that are considered legendary (bncy, RAWR, Torigod) have also been warned/deleted.
Yes and refering to your counting you seem to be proud of it.
After all I don't think that this discussion makes any more sence.
You don't want to understand the other point of view, right?
ก้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
That doesn't sound any better at all. I guess you know that alot of clans have set members to "inactive" until they come back, right? Because than you don't need to edit all info-threads again. Most of the clans have a bunch of members set to this state
We are aware and judge clans accordingly to accommodate that.
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
What?
Typo, meant inactive*.
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
Why would you judge a clan like that? Why do they need to show anything into the public? Only other members have to judge on the responsibility, in my opinion. People sometimes find their way into a clan-subforum, mostly by searching for a new clan, to look into it and optionally post there, thats right. But even at this point it is rather interesting if the clan, the members and their postings show a decent level or not.
Where is the sustainability at this
You literally made no sense, I don't know what you're saying here.
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
I don't know what I'm talking about & I don't have any idea of the specifics of the test...
You pointed this out quite often. Again, I can only say, it's not my part to beg for informations about it. Still I have the right to talk about this. You might explain this in detail when you ask for activity than, instead of telling the people about their incompetence when they want to talk about it. This way it ain't fair
I'm not asking you to beg for information, you're just criticising aspects of a system that you don't know anything about. You raise points about the way we do things only to figure out that we do them the way you want us to half the time, and the other half is you wanting to shape the system to suit your bias. It wont happen - we will not change the test to favour some clans over others and we wont divulge specifics of the test so they wont be abused like the previous ones were. Truthfully, this test is so easy that no clan should truly fail it. If any clan does then they deserved it.
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
Let's refer this to GerU. What will make them fail than? That there is a big part of the member list who are marked as inactive?
I'm not here to discuss the specific processes of activity checks, but rest assured they're far more thorough than "oh lets see how long they havent posted for" or "lets check their inactive rank". You seem to think there's nothing to it, you're sorely wrong.
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
In the first post, I didn't say anything further. It was more of a post of frustration after seeing that, even though member posted, you call out an activity check. But your responce ....
.... was a big wave, telling me that I have no clue of anything, without telling me the details subsequent.
It was a criticism of a system you know nothing about. I was stating fact while you were getting mad about something you clearly don't understand. If you feel offended over that then that's your problem, not mine.
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
Who asked for prerogative? You just don't care if people contribute since many years at this point and that's the part that is unfair in my opinion. This years are about benefits in both ways; Members had fun with the community and Hampa shurely appriciated if videos and postings attracted new people who optionally invested in game related stuff.
Still you see them as all the other people?
Beside that, I shurely do understand that you see them equal in this activity checks. But the activity-definition is another thing
Activity is judged equally, making a clan video or some sort of event years ago doesn't mean your clan is active now. Your point has no logical sense at all.
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
No, my argument was not focused on the friendship.
Instead I talked about the people as grown members
Sure.
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
I can only most widely disagree.
Because you're biased and ignorant, to be truthful.
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
Yes and refering to your counting you seem to be proud of it.
If you take any part of my forum set seriously you really need to lighten up.
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
After all I don't think that this discussion makes any more sence.
You don't want to understand the other point of view, right?
Yes, it's me that doesn't understand anything here. Riiight.
collect snots from the nose
Now this gets really deconstructiv
No, you just don't try to understand.
Easy for you now; You said >> We expect official clans to set an example and hold them to a standard for this reason. << and I told you that the clan-forums have no big influence on whats happening in the whole community. That's why, in my opinion, only member themselfs have to watch for the 'level' of the clan.
They have to set an example? Who judges about this? A clan is set up to have nice time with friends, making some clan-events etc not for show off.
No, that's like totally misguided.
I do now make this clear for the last time, because it beginns to annoy me how you paraphrase this.
1. I criticize the repeating activity checks, even though, refered to the basic meaning of checking activity, people still post in their subforum.
2. I don't want to suit the system in any other way. Do what you want.
I pointed out that I didn't asked for this. Are you even reading what I write?
The note that we contributed over years and now have some apathy was just for you as an information to see another point of view, the one of members who are here since many years and have other priorities, like job training or semester. The clans still have a future and I refered this with Addicted, which had a long time without much posting. What you do with this information is simply your thing.
.......
I'm not offended. Clearly don't understand? Your activity check, considering "board, in-game and IRC activity"?
I asked for the sustainability. There's a difference between not understanding and not feel sympathetic.
I do have an example for this nonsense. The Addicted clan video was made in february 2010, which is quite long ago. A new video followed in dezember 2014. That was after a long time of beeing semi active.
You seem to see a clan, where you postet an 'Failed Activity Check & Warnung' thread, as allmost dead, whilest I just said that there is a chance for stuff like this in the future.
No logical sense at all? That you don't understand my argument doesn't make it nowhere logical
I'm not ignorant, in fact my mind changes with information. That's why I asked for the substainability.
And I'm really annoyed of that biased talking. Biased about what? Like I said above, I talked about 'grown members', who are in the case of Addicted and even a bit in GerU like friends to me too. I really don't have a clue what you read beyond the lines.
Well, atleast you are ignoring my points, because you have your informations which are not to be discussed, Riiight
[/QUOTE]
You literally made no sense, I don't know what you're saying here.
No, you just don't try to understand.
Easy for you now; You said >> We expect official clans to set an example and hold them to a standard for this reason. << and I told you that the clan-forums have no big influence on whats happening in the whole community. That's why, in my opinion, only member themselfs have to watch for the 'level' of the clan.
They have to set an example? Who judges about this? A clan is set up to have nice time with friends, making some clan-events etc not for show off.
you're just criticising aspects of a system that you don't know anything about. You raise points about the way we do things only to figure out that we do them the way you want us to half the time, and the other half is you wanting to shape the system to suit your bias.
No, that's like totally misguided.
I do now make this clear for the last time, because it beginns to annoy me how you paraphrase this.
1. I criticize the repeating activity checks, even though, refered to the basic meaning of checking activity, people still post in their subforum.
2. I don't want to suit the system in any other way. Do what you want.
It wont happen - we will not change the test to favour some clans over others and we wont divulge specifics of the test so they wont be abused like the previous ones were. Truthfully, this test is so easy that no clan should truly fail it. If any clan does then they deserved it.
I pointed out that I didn't asked for this. Are you even reading what I write?
The note that we contributed over years and now have some apathy was just for you as an information to see another point of view, the one of members who are here since many years and have other priorities, like job training or semester. The clans still have a future and I refered this with Addicted, which had a long time without much posting. What you do with this information is simply your thing.
It was a criticism of a system you know nothing about. I was stating fact while you were getting mad about something you clearly don't understand. If you feel offended over that then that's your problem, not mine.
.......
I'm not offended. Clearly don't understand? Your activity check, considering "board, in-game and IRC activity"?
I asked for the sustainability. There's a difference between not understanding and not feel sympathetic.
Activity is judged equally, making a clan video or some sort of event years ago doesn't mean your clan is active now. Your point has no logical sense at all.
I do have an example for this nonsense. The Addicted clan video was made in february 2010, which is quite long ago. A new video followed in dezember 2014. That was after a long time of beeing semi active.
You seem to see a clan, where you postet an 'Failed Activity Check & Warnung' thread, as allmost dead, whilest I just said that there is a chance for stuff like this in the future.
No logical sense at all? That you don't understand my argument doesn't make it nowhere logical
Because you're biased and ignorant, to be truthful.
I'm not ignorant, in fact my mind changes with information. That's why I asked for the substainability.
And I'm really annoyed of that biased talking. Biased about what? Like I said above, I talked about 'grown members', who are in the case of Addicted and even a bit in GerU like friends to me too. I really don't have a clue what you read beyond the lines.
Yes, it's me that doesn't understand anything here. Riiight.
Well, atleast you are ignoring my points, because you have your informations which are not to be discussed, Riiight
[/QUOTE]
Last edited by Aikanaro; Mar 5, 2015 at 10:53 PM.
ก้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
No, you just don't try to understand.
No offence but your English isn't the best, your statement made no sense and I couldn't decipher what you were trying to say - I legitimately had no idea what you were saying.
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
Easy for you now; You said >> We expect official clans to set an example and hold them to a standard for this reason. << and I told you that the clan-forums have no big influence on whats happening in the whole community. That's why, in my opinion, only member themselfs have to watch for the 'level' of the clan.
We're measuring activity, not influence. Influence can come through being active but they're not mutually exclusive. Perhaps my example was bad but I didn't expect you to nit-pick my point completely. It's an activity check, we measure activity of your clan - what don't you understand?
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
They have to set an example? Who judges about this? A clan is set up to have nice time with friends, making some clan-events etc not for show off.
We judge it. We judge their activity. They need to set an example by being active. Are you listening?
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
No, that's like totally misguided.
I do now make this clear for the last time, because it beginns to annoy me how you paraphrase this.
1. I criticize the repeating activity checks, even though, refered to the basic meaning of checking activity, people still post in their subforum.
2. I don't want to suit the system in any other way. Do what you want.
You criticize the activity check for catching out inactive clans because you seem to think GerU is active and it's not. That's literally what you're doing.
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
I pointed out that I didn't asked for this. Are you even reading what I write?
The note that we contributed over years and now have some apathy was just for you as an information to see another point of view, the one of members who are here since many years and have other priorities, like job training or semester. The clans still have a future and I refered this with Addicted, which had a long time without much posting. What you do with this information is simply your thing.
Are you associating not agreeing with not understanding? I totally understand your point of view, the reason I don't give it any weight is because it comes from a position of obvious bias and ignorance.
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
I'm not offended. Clearly don't understand? Your activity check, considering "board, in-game and IRC activity"?
I asked for the sustainability. There's a difference between not understanding and not feel sympathetic.
The "sustainability" stuff you're referring to was part of the illegible point that you made. If you want me to understand what you mean you're going to have to phrase your point better because it doesn't read correctly in English. What do you mean by "sustainability" and what precisely are you asking for?
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
I do have an example for this nonsense. The Addicted clan video was made in february 2010, which is quite long ago. A new video followed in dezember 2014. That was after a long time of beeing semi active.
You seem to see a clan, where you postet an 'Failed Activity Check & Warnung' thread, as allmost dead, whilest I just said that there is a chance for stuff like this in the future.
No logical sense at all? That you don't understand my argument doesn't make it nowhere logical
Nope, I understand completely - it's just nonsensical. If [Addicted] had 0 activity between Feb 2010 and Dec 2014 I would kill them, too. That's 4 years of inactivity and making a clan video once every 4 years is not acceptable. You fail to acknowledge that [Addicted] was activity checked under the old system during this time and it was literally impossible to fail those.
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
I'm not ignorant, in fact my mind changes with information. That's why I asked for the substainability.
And I'm really annoyed of that biased talking. Biased about what? Like I said above, I talked about 'grown members', who are in the case of Addicted and even a bit in GerU like friends to me too. I really don't have a clue what you read beyond the lines.
Your "sustainability" comment made no sense, if you revise it and actually make a point that I can read and comprehend then I will gladly respond. Right now you're literally complaining about me not understanding something because you wrote gibberish.
Originally Posted by Aikanaro
Well, atleast you are ignoring my points, because you have your informations which are not to be discussed, Riiight
I'm not ignoring anything you say but if you feel better about your bias/more justified in your criticism by pretending that I am then I will leave you to it. Clearly we're at an impasse and I'm not prepared to accommodate bias/entitled attitudes of clans that think they deserve to be treated differently.
collect snots from the nose
No offence but your English isn't the best, your statement made no sense and I couldn't decipher what you were trying to say - I legitimately had no idea what you were saying.
Shure, my english is not the best. It's not my native language.
But what I wrote was quite easy to understand (by any other person). I copy this together so you can't fail it this time. Tell me if it's still to complicated please
──► Gynx: We expect official clans to set an example and hold them to a standard for this reason.
└──► Aikanaro: Why would you judge a clan like that? Why do they need to show anything into the public?
We judge it. We judge their activity. They need to set an example by being active. Are you listening?
Nice, you just said nothing by this. The basic version of this is; > It is because I say so <
I asked in detail why they have to show anything off referred to the sentence 'They need to set an example' and your answer is "They need to set an example by being active." THAT makes no sense
You criticize the activity check for catching out inactive clans because you seem to think GerU is active and it's not. That's literally what you're doing.
I would prefer "semi-active", because it's nothing close to the average of all clans, but also not close to a "dead" state.
And I don't understand the need of so many activity-checks, taken as a whole.
Are you associating not agreeing with not understanding?
Why do you twist every word?
I totally understand your point of view, the reason I don't give it any weight is because it comes from a position of obvious bias and ignorance.
Theres still no bias and even less ignorance.
To assume a biased mind and calling people ingnorance beacuse they think for themself and scrutinize doesn't take any weight of an argument.
Nope, I understand completely - it's just nonsensical. If [Addicted] had 0 activity between Feb 2010 and Dec 2014 I would kill them, too. That's 4 years of inactivity and making a clan video once every 4 years is not acceptable. You fail to acknowledge that [Addicted] was activity checked under the old system during this time and it was literally impossible to fail those.
Sorry, you don't understand. That's another example of how you cut things out of context. The video is not the scale of our activity and we've not been inactive for 4 years. I have listed this information for you to see that those phases are sometimes temporary.
I don't fail it Gynx :). Even after telling you that we are quite active now, you don't want to omit telling me that we might have failed the "new system". That shows how you don't care about it if you have the possibility to terminate the clan
Your "sustainability" comment made no sense, if you revise it and actually make a point that I can read and comprehend then I will gladly respond. Right now you're literally complaining about me not understanding something because you wrote gibberish.
The definition of the word itself explaines the sense yet.
Terminating clans is sustainable if there are crucial reasons for it. You listed
- We expect official clans to set an example
- and hold them to a standard for this reason.
If you now would have terminated Addicted even though we made the activity checks, just assuming that we didn't managed to get 5 together in one week, if would be the opposite of "sustainability" due to the fact that we now contribute again in the Toribash community after this temporary apathy. Although you are right, that a clan shall allways be terminated when he actually IS inactive, which was not the case at those moments (where the defenition was based on the old system...).
I'm not prepared to accommodate bias/entitled attitudes of clans that think they deserve to be treated differently.
It's about the treatment itself and the reasoning, not about a missing privileg.
_______________________________________
Edit:
Since you mentioned RAWR, I lurked into the forum and saw the thread. The people want to have their subforum, because they never left. Why do you feel that this is necessary? That says it all about the new system
Last edited by Aikanaro; Mar 6, 2015 at 07:49 PM.
ก้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้
