- aku
- |
- Exalted Legendary Member
Mourne not your comrades who must dwell / too strong to strive -
Within each steel-bound coffin of a cell, / Buried alive;
But rather mourne the apathetic throng / The cowed, and the meek -
Who see the world’s great anguish and its wrong / And dare not speak.
[group]167741|Diner|Where's the food?[/group]
Posted by: WhiffleBallTony
Posted by: prometheus25
Posted by: WhiffleBallTony
Yeah. I just found a Mythic who has posted twice in his history. He joined in '01. He had one post in '04 and one in May '07. I find it ridiculous that they would choose people who post that infrequently to have the highest rank available.
I don't see why it should matter. The new rankings have no concrete benefits; the only power they get are those that members give them, metaphoricly speaking.
A few people slipping between the cracks, the cracks of a newly tailored system mind you, is definately worth the risks, and rewards, of this system. That's just how I feel.
I agree, but I think that if this is based on a "Trust System", then they should only give members who have proved their trust a title like that, not people who have been members for 5+ years. It seems similar to ageism. If all of a sudden because someone is in their 30s they got promoted to Mythic, whereas someone like me who is 13 remained a member because of my age, I would be annoyed. Of course, that isn't really a good analogy, but what I mean is pretty much that older members shouldn't be trusted more than newer members. That's all that I mean.
Well, think about it. Who do you trust most of all your friends? For most people, the friends whom they have the most trust in are the ones they have known the longest. There are a few reasons for this which don't apply here, but one reason that does is this: As the amount of time increases where a person has not done anything to harm you (harm here can mean anything considered bad by you) increases, the likelyhood of them ever doing anything to harm you decreases. Sure, there are exceptions, but on average, a person who has been your friend for 5 years is not likely to just turn around one day and say forget it.
Bringing it back to B.net, consider this: what is the likelyhood of a 4 year member being a spam account? I think we can all agree that it is pretty low. Sure, that member may have done some bad things in their time here, but if they have gone 4 years without being permanently blacklisted, then it is probable that they are not the type of person who would do those things.
Another purpose for the system which has been confirmed is that it is meant to serve as "positive reinforcement". That is, it is supposed to give members something to look forward to as a reward for behaving well. Now, the system would stop to serve such a purpose as soon as members reached the maximum possible reward. In order to make sure that members do not reach the end too soon, the system has to be something that is very difficult to boost. Almost any achievements can be sped up in some way by "gaming" the system. One thing that can never be artificially boosted, however, is time. Time passes constantly for all people (relativity notwithstanding =P). Therefore, it would make sense for time to play a major factor in working towards the goal.
With that in mind, there are some technical aspects to consider. It is likely that there are other factors taken into account which would increase the speed with which "good points" are accumulated. This would help seperate users, and push the truly good and valuable members over the merely "not bad" users. However, it is likely that such an increase would be on top of the points credited for time. So why are some members who have never posted --at least since the system has been recording -- mythic members, even though they have not had any points from activity? The simple answer is that they have been here for so long that they have accumulated enough points based on time alone. The fact that they have never posted since recording began has helped this. A member who never posts cannot be blacklisted, and cannot receive a warning. So while they have not had the help of "activity points", they have also not had any penalties subtracted from thei score, allowing them to accrue points consistently.
Currently, this has created an odd predicament: users who have not helped this site in any way for half a decade have received the highest "reward" available. The important thing to remember is that time did not stop when the system became visible. Members are still moving forward. And as these new members move forward, the system is actively watching and modifying points as it sees fit. This means that as time goes on, the number of anomalies (and many current mythics are anomalies; unintended side effects of a global system) will decrease, and the system will begin to balance out.
An interesting point to note: with ever increasing population growth, the number of "promoted" accounts on all levels will begin to rise steadily as time passes. This will also mean that the number of active promoted accounts should be rising steadily as well.
Edit:
Posted by: kodemyster
Maybe it considers how many years you've been a member, not necessarily a member since 2002 or earlier. For example, maybe next year there will be
I actually addressed this in the main body of my post, but I wanted to make a more direct statement. That is certainly the case. And by certain, I don't mean "probably" or "almost certainly". No other system would make sense.
[Edited on 12.13.2007 11:24 PM PST]