geisha wrote:~Phoenix~ wrote:Thats a tad stupd isnt it. Special color for a non-important usergroup.
it is absolutely stupid
I don't think so, and as far as I know, neither do the Respect group members. It is like a tag for an alliance, and for example, no more stupid than wearing an Omega or KGB tag.
The group has been around before November 2006. Is the issue that you just don't like seeing it?
iKon wrote:This is all very well and good, but this still doesn't negate the fact that a group, or even a group colour is justified; no decision making process happens within the group, nor is there any administrative power - so why the colour?
If this is the case, I would like to further propose a usergroup for those of us who play different games, or servers so we're able to identify each other. I know it wont happen though, because it just isn't essential.
Don't get me wrong, the idea of the group is admirable, but awarding a usergroup and colour is just going too far; especially when just reading the forum, you realise that the same people in the group make the phrase "leading by example" just a little reundant. I mean, just look around the forum - you know I'm not troublemaking, because it's true.
Do people who wish to let themselves be known as gay, bisexual or lesbian get a rainbow usergroup?
The colour is there to identify that these members are part of the respect group. It is for identification purposes only. This version of phpBB allows for a specific colour to be associated for a group, and so, after I polled the members a colour was selected, to be either temporary or permanent. If i am to understand you, you are suggesting that a group colour outside of modding is not justified? I would not agree with you as you have asked the question, but it can be debatable that no group outside of the modding community should get a colour and that colour in names is reserved for them. Looking at your second paragraph it seems that this is the point you are arguing.
What userbar a member chooses to wear is up to them. If members wish to wera a tag that says "Leading By Example" they are more than welcome to, as you are welcome to wear a tag that identifies whatever group you are affiliated to. Does anyone complain when we see alliance tags or sigs? Isn't it redundant to see those when just posting that you are in an alliance shows that you are a part of the alliance?
(DDE) zeon wrote:I have to agree with you Ikon. i dont mind the colors, but I think singling out certin people for the group, leaves those behind who wish not to be glorified. My second missunderstanding with this, is some of the select have been direspectful and some of the biggest flamers on forum. It has a feel more of a popularity contest where not all players had an opurtunity to have imput. Who is deserving is the soul perspective of a smaller group. No worry, not a big deal to me, but see where its not all good.
You assume that members wish to be glorified. Has any member stated that that is the case? It is a colour to identify people as part of a group on the forum, not to inflate heads. I don't understand how people are being left behind. Every member has an opportunity to join the group; so it's not exclusionary. How is it a "popularity contest where not all players had an opurtunity to have imput", when each member of this forum has the opportunity to apply to the group (and be accepted), and non members are giving their feedback now? I read through posts of applicants to determine if they post respectfully to begin with, and give then feedback (areas or posts that concern me) if they are not accepted. Who is deserving is not the soul perspective of a small group, but the perspective (currently) of a supermod and section leader, whereby the basis of my decisions have been outlined above.
What I used to do is read all of the members posts, in addition to modding. I had to stop because it wasn't practical to spend 5 hours reading through all members posts. If a member is being disrespectful everyone has the opportunity to report the post. It is then easier for me and, right now the only other leader currently a mod, to recognize that the poster is a member of the respect group. This wasn't possible before because I don't have the member list memorized, members leave and members are added all the time.
Mordack wrote:Uhm yeah, this is stupid. I'm all in favour of having special colors for moderators and administrators, but the day we start giving every usergroup their own color is the day the userlist starts to look less like a userlist and more like an explosion in a paint factory.
Just because you, or anyone else does not agree with something, does not mean it's stupid. You raise a valid point about a usergroup not getting a colour, and that decision falling across the board. If it already isn't being discussed, I will bring it up.
Balor wrote:The fact is you have a small select group of people whose public statement of "respect" and gaining a colour implies and denotes the belief that their posts are of a higher calibre and value than the rest of the community....Do i belive that they *deserve* to be noticed and acknowledged for their actions? No. It smells of nothing but elitism. Look at me, i have respect, my posts are better than yours....That respect is not something that you flaunt about. Rather it is earned and silently, not publicly praised by those who feel the need to do so. Your actions and posts should speak for themselves, not having yourself seperated from the rest of the community as the cream of the crop "elite" posters.
Every group that exists has the opportunity to have their own colour with this version of phpBB. I don't understand how having a colour in their name means that a persons post are better than another's. This is not the case. Has any member stated as such? Does any posts exist where that is stated by a member, or have they expressed that some other way? You have not explained how a colour in a name does what you propose or suggest. It seems like that is how it is perceived by the general public than anything else.
Every group that currently exists on the forum has the opportunity to have their own group colour. If a colour was not allowed to each and every group then your point about being elitist would be valid. Right now it isn't, and nothing to that statement has been made. If that is the case (which I will ask about), I will bring it up in the modding station and respect group for further discussion.
Why should a member not be able to identify that they are a member, like someone would for their alliance? What makes it wrong for respect members to do and alliance members ok to do? If one publically acknowledges they are a member does that not mean that they have to be more accountable for their actions and posts? For example, it is easier for me to see if a member of the group has been warned or one of their posts have been reported because their name stands out. It didn't before, and as I mentioned, I had to read to members posts. This is not an easy task to do when modding as well, and one that I had to stop because of time constraints. You argue the point of "elitism" but don;t really explain how it is elite. As far as I know, after offing the name colour change to members is that it would be something good to try to recognize each other. For the eventuality that someone will say userbars identify members, not all members has or wish to wear a userbar.
Here is a question for everyone: Why do certain people or groups have their own chat room? Isn't that elitist? Why can't every member on the forum have one? What makes a select get one where everyone else doesn't?
REK wrote:we should mass everyone in this group tree hugging hippies
If anyone wishes to mass over this, you see why people feel the need for a respect group, and if there are genuine thoughts of massing I would have those who wish to mass others mass me in place of all members of the respect group. I will take the massing on the members behalf.
I think you are joking REK but this brings up a good point. Are we at a point on the forum where one group should fear identifying as a member? Where a member would or should be afraid of in game reprisals because they identify with a group? To me that is elitist and what teh respect group tries to fight against.
I think I know you well enough to realize that you are a sarcastic fellow and was joking, but if the possibility exists for others to wish to mass then I accept all massings due to respect members to be upon myself.
)
