Rank changes, the baseline configuration and new plugins

[wyliewylie]

FOR GOODNESS SAKE! It's not a matter on wether or not there is a negative to having commoner. The fact is, is that the rank servers no purpose other than padding the egos of players who did the minimum to attain it. The rank is obsolete due to the permissions of the build server. Thrall and commoners can only build when they join a job, therefore, there is little to no distinction between them.

I dont really care about the "prestige" or whatever.
Commoners were always a little more trusted than a brand new thrall anyway. In most job enviroments, i constantly see foremen giving slightly harder tasks to commoners, like lets say building a tree in a certain area, and thralls always have the simplest of jobs.

Also, with the fact that we don't have a whitelist, we end up getting a lot of... well, for lack of better term, idiots.

Theres been plenty of times where it is just myself and one other commoner on the server, amongst 5-10 thralls, some of whom are spamming the chat.
Our blue names appear much easier in the chat amongst the spam, and allow us to hold some authority over the disorganized thralls, and if they have questions, we can easily respond.
If a thrall is spamming or breaking any other rules when no bounder is online, he will be much more likely to stop if asked by a commoner, rather than by someone with the same colour name as him.

Theres other positives too that others have stated in countless posts.
I feel like you're overlooking all of them.
There are no negatives to commoner.

 

[Artale]

http://www.mcmiddleearth.com/posts/16867/

 

[TheSpeedy_]

~snip~

Let me break your position apart, starting from the top.


-You were trusted for your name, not rank.
-Foremen give task players they know can do the job.
-Whitelist or no Whitelist, players are known for their names, not rank.
-All players are responsible for sharing the rules and upholding the community's social standards that you agreed to by joining the server.
-The Color can change for the adventurer rank.
-False, if a player is going to troll, they're going to troll.

I've read every post that's been made. The lack of logic and reason is the biggest issue.

 

[Indorilian]

FOR GOODNESS SAKE! It's not a matter on wether or not there is a negative to having commoner. The fact is, is that the rank servers no purpose other than padding the egos of players who did the minimum to attain it. The rank is obsolete due to the permissions of the build server. Thrall and commoners can only build when they join a job, therefore, there is little to no distinction between them.

The problem of your view, and many others views, is that you are only looking at the change from a mechanical side of the server, and not looking at the organic side. From a mechanical side, is it a good change? Yes. There is fewer ranks, which means less work for Q. But from an organic view, you have a VAST majority of players ( just look at @bobow95 's poll) who disagree with this change, and view it as an insult (not my personal view). Commoner used to be about being loyal to the server, and you were trusted to build bigger things. But the way commoner applications changed over the years, this is no longer the case. It went from being a well known member of the community to, well, a commoner once artist was implemented. It was only a redundant rank because it was MADE redundant by having no changes to its privileges and how it was given, while almost every other rank has changed in one way or another. At this point, it's not about whether adventurer is a good thing or a bad thing. The argument I make is that this was released without any input from 95% of the server population, and was not thought through well enough. In the end, even though Q owns everything, and cannot be told no, that does not mean every decision will be right or for the best, but we have to live with it anyway, so there's no point complaining.

 

[wyliewylie]

Let me break your position apart, starting from the top.


-You were trusted for your name, not rank.
-Foremen give task players they know can do the job.
-Whitelist or no Whitelist, players are known for their names, not rank.
-All players are responsible for sharing the rules and upholding the community's social standards that you agreed to by joining the server.
-The Color can change for the adventurer rank.
-False, if a player is going to troll, they're going to troll.

I've read every post that's been made. The lack of logic and reason is the biggest issue.

Indeed, there is truth behind both of our last posts, but once again you didn't give a NEGATIVE to the rank.

 

[Condor_HW]

I think, at this point, we should just look at what the community want the most. Even if this is a good decision in all aspects, if (almost) nobody likes it, does that mean it's still a good decision?
As a server where the community is so important and then changing something that upsets so many people, creates so much hate,... Well than, are we doing the right thing. Isn't the first thing we must do,
looking at what the community wants at this moment?

 

[TheSpeedy_]

Setting personal feelings aside, my argument is purely objective. I have stated my opinion many times. I think that the rank was good for only one reason, communication between new players and established ones. The fact remains that in the objective, subjective look at the changes, the lack of understanding has instead placed in crying like children. I've voiced both my support and distaste for the change. I qualified the position with an understanding for the position for and against.

However, with everything I've said, what is not acceptable is the sense of entitlement in the community. Everyone has a complaint, we all understand that, but the emotional appeals but the community do not have two legs to stand on. And while the illusion of the server being a democracy is there, it is not. And yes, the proper way to vent those concerns is the forums, but to assume that the community is correct in it's own end is a falsified claim. My argument was never from the side that I'm a three+ year member of this server, my argument is founded in the mechanics for what is best for the server side. The Social dynamics of commoner are needed, but its not acceptable for players to insist that they are somehow better because they have a different tag. You've all said "i don't think I'm prestigious," but your responses suggest otherwise. I'm not here to call any players out, but as a community a different approach should have been made. Many, many players have taken to the forums tout their sense of entitlement to the ranks. You are entitled to nothing. Some veteran players and well known players are upset yes, but they are known by name, not rank. Their work is known by their ranks, but not their reputation.

 

[Fireinferno13]

I dont really care about the "prestige" or whatever.
Commoners were always a little more trusted than a brand new thrall anyway. In most job enviroments, i constantly see foremen giving slightly harder tasks to commoners, like lets say building a tree in a certain area, and thralls always have the simplest of jobs.

As a now former staff member, I can say with confidence that I did not trust commoners more then thralls. I had so many commoners ask me stupid ass questions about basic stuff that a one day old thrall should know and it was extremely frustrating when I had to over explain something to a commoner who should have already been taught that before.

The way I judge players, and the way I would continue to judge players, is by their past actions. It does not matter to me if you are a thrall or a commoner. What matters to me is how much you have proven yourself in the past. For example I barely know you and would trust you about the same as I do a normal thrall. However I would trust someone like arde or cef or some other well known commoner over others because I have seen these players in action proving themselves through and through.

Therefore I think the merging of Thrall and Commoner will mean nothing in terms of how staff look at players. By introducing a strict system for the Honored rank, I think this will reward those players that really do deserve to be brought above the rest.[/QUOTE]

 

[nAugrim29]

You mean 4 TBs?

either 8tb or 4tb that all pass the scrutiny of the people who decides whether or not a person becomes an artist or not.

 

[Fireinferno13]

either 8tb or 4tb that all pass the scrutiny of the people who decides whether or not a person becomes an artist or not.

Also wrong

Just cus you make a shit load of TBs, does not mean you get artist because if they suck, we arent giving you artist. I would know being a Steward and having participated in these decisions. Artist decisions are a balance of how trust worthy the player is and how good they are at building.

[SIDE NOTE: Some of these posts are killing me on the inside]

 

[nAugrim29]

At least with the old ranks Thralls had something to shoot for(Flight and pvt warps) if they showed just a bit of dedication and behaved themselves for two weeks. That in itself was a good reason to keep the two ranks apart from one another. And I think Jord is right to say that Artist displays less dedication than Ranger does. The Artist rank is generally about showcasing a player's artistic ability, whereas the Ranger rank requires more knowledge, both about the lore and the server.

 

[Aule_]

Having read all the posts about the new rank changes. I can see why people are upset. but in all honesty commoner rank was not hard to gain at all in the first place. you could log on spend an hour doing a TB, wait 2 weeks then apply. and 9/10 if you had put a half arsed effort into the TB you were awarded commoner rank. I do believe though that new players should have a different rank to people that Have been on a while. just for the fact that a new player would trust the words of an older player more if he sees a different rank. which is what speeder45 has said. but instead of having to apply for a commoner rank, it should of been based on activity and time logged on the server. i.e the player has been logged 50 hours on the build server. Their experienced, in terms of warp names, locations. and will know a bit of lore even if they didn't know anything when they first logged on. just by the sheer hours they have spent on the server. a real world application of this can be given.

The british Network rail. (those in charge of the railway track maintenance) have a system that a new worker would have a different coloured helmet to someone who has been working on the railway for years. this allows the more experienced members to see that they are new, and so can help them etc, after 6 months they are then given the same coloured helmet as everyone else. obviously a minecraft server isnt as dangerous as a working on the railway. but it's a nice idea and one that works. and if nothing is going to chnage with the ranks now. at least change the
colour. At the moment it is a sea of white and can be hard to make out names and such.

 

[q220]

Discussion will take further place in this thread.

First off I must say that I'm utterly disappointed with how some of you put forward demands for a community that one:
- Has its goal as creating middle earth, not catering to your needs to gratify your ego.
- Is fully free, and as such, you should expect nothing in return, and not even pretend as if you have the right to make demands.
- Decisions are made within the Staff, meetings, and Valar sessions. Decisions are made there, and we stick to them. This isn't a democracy, but a benign dictatorship, just like everything else in the world. You will just have to live with it if a change happens that you don't like, and if you can't do that, you can leave. That is how things work in life.

Now a few quotes I couldn't resist commenting on:

The point still stands. The emotional plea to have commoner back, is that the community acts like a child that had a toy taken away and is crying about it. There are more ways to show dedication than a title. Those players who know that, are known. Your argument suggests that being the same rank as a new player meals you less of a player. However, I believe players who have shown their dedication will be known by their name. The logic and perspective is in the wrong place. The issue isn't whether a player is dedicated or trusted. It is about a rank that no longer servers a purpose with the current build server's permissions.

Not the entire community, but a handful of vocal firestarters. But you are right in the fact that there are more ways to show your dedication than getting commoner, a rank where you could build a landfill of abstract dirt, claim it was Minas Tirith, and get commoner anyway regardless if it even looked like it. This community is run by an amount of very talented individuals, and even if they didn't had the prefix or color or whatever cosmetic difference, they would have been known for their action, behaviour, and their past contributions.

Alright speedy. I can agree with that. Rank, like MaD said, isn't about having a reputation. If you're ACTUALLY respected, then people will know you. However I'd still like to see a minimum time limit before one can apply for artist, and this is out of caring for the server so Bounders don't constantly have to roll things back because a new Artist got on and griefed the whole place because he/she didn't care at all about it. It's like a relationship. The more time and energy you put into it, the more you will love and care about it. I could personally care less about being respected, but I would like it if the hard work of others was respected by not letting potential griefers get creative mode on the build server.

Well there is such a thing. It's called Themed Builds, and they even have to be good. And that argument is like totally invented on the spot, such thing never happened in the past. Artists are selected because of their building skill, maturity, and capability to work in a team within the predefined rulesets.

FOR GOODNESS SAKE! It's not a matter on wether or not there is a negative to having commoner. The fact is, is that the rank servers no purpose other than padding the egos of players who did the minimum to attain it. The rank is obsolete due to the permissions of the build server. Thrall and commoners can only build when they join a job, therefore, there is little to no distinction between them.

As with everything else, things evolve, and so did this rank. It became bloated and became an inhomogeneous collection of past decision "errors" (different people who revised the commoner rank, each time higher or lesser requirements, inevitably ). When Artist was introduced, that became the "trusted" rank that were (proven) reliable, competent people, and not commoner.

The problem of your view, and many others views, is that you are only looking at the change from a mechanical side of the server, and not looking at the organic side. From a mechanical side, is it a good change? Yes. There is fewer ranks, which means less work for Q. But from an organic view, you have a VAST majority of players ( just look at @bobow95 's poll) who disagree with this change, and view it as an insult (not my personal view). Commoner used to be about being loyal to the server, and you were trusted to build bigger things. But the way commoner applications changed over the years, this is no longer the case. It went from being a well known member of the community to, well, a commoner once artist was implemented. It was only a redundant rank because it was MADE redundant by having no changes to its privileges and how it was given, while almost every other rank has changed in one way or another. At this point, it's not about whether adventurer is a good thing or a bad thing. The argument I make is that this was released without any input from 95% of the server population, and was not thought through well enough. In the end, even though Q owns everything, and cannot be told no, that does not mean every decision will be right or for the best, but we have to live with it anyway, so there's no point complaining.

Mechanical can be made and defined, but the organic 'social system' you talk of, is grown and defined by players and social interaction, it cannot be defined, only steered towards a direction. About the 95% part: this community is not a democracy, and I'm not a impulsive power-crazy tyrant who doesn't consult people. Truth is, and that also applies to life, is that you just can't do good for everyone at the same time. This change was postponed numerous times, even though there was a consensus that something had to change during various Staff meetings.

Setting personal feelings aside, my argument is purely objective. I have stated my opinion many times. I think that the rank was good for only one reason, communication between new players and established ones. The fact remains that in the objective, subjective look at the changes, the lack of understanding has instead placed in crying like children. I've voiced both my support and distaste for the change. I qualified the position with an understanding for the position for and against.

However, with everything I've said, what is not acceptable is the sense of entitlement in the community. Everyone has a complaint, we all understand that, but the emotional appeals but the community do not have two legs to stand on. And while the illusion of the server being a democracy is there, it is not. And yes, the proper way to vent those concerns is the forums, but to assume that the community is correct in it's own end is a falsified claim. My argument was never from the side that I'm a three+ year member of this server, my argument is founded in the mechanics for what is best for the server side. The Social dynamics of commoner are needed, but its not acceptable for players to insist that they are somehow better because they have a different tag. You've all said "i don't think I'm prestigious," but your responses suggest otherwise. I'm not here to call any players out, but as a community a different approach should have been made. Many, many players have taken to the forums tout their sense of entitlement to the ranks. You are entitled to nothing. Some veteran players and well known players are upset yes, but they are known by name, not rank. Their work is known by their ranks, but not their reputation.

That exact sense of entitlement, and the 'Social ladder' that gave people the perception of "Person X is better than Y because of the prefix and color", is exactly what made the decision to rename commoner to adventurer, and buff the oathbreakers easier. There was/is going to be a new rank, thanks to this thread I'm now less sure of that, which would have been 'the next Commoner rank' which would have been much harder to obtain.

I could also just have worked in the reverse order, instead of grandfathering commoner 'rights and benefits', I could have removed them, created a new rank, and call it 'the new Commoner' (along with its new requirements). But I didn't. So basically nothing changed for the Commoners, and Thralls gained flight.

What I hear here in this thread is not really what was "lost" or "gained" when it comes to functionality. But what was "lost" due to prestige, and your personal feeling of being unique and recognized. Keep in mind that ranks are not for your ego, but they are there to contribute to the server's goal: building a world.

This thread will be locked, discussion can take continue at this thread.