- Delta 15t
- |
- Exalted Mythic Member
Known by some, but not by all.
Soffish: Do not eat!
TWP Assistant Director.
As I go through this progression, I see the original intent of the thread changing, therefore lacking in integrity. Also there is a high degree of bias here, treading on rank bating. If not, then rank baiting with polite words. Basically saying that, if you have not been here as long as me, you shouldn't be able have it. You don't deserve it.
Then I asked a question:
Since I didn't join in 2004, you are saying I should not be able to become an Exalted Mythic Member? If this is what you are saying where do you come up with this reasoning?
This question was not answered.
Instead, the OP came up with this:
Maybe this will help explain my view on the titles.
Offended that [it seems like] you think they aren't worthy of being a trusted member.No. This is where I probably look at titles differently. I don't look at them trust-wise, I look at them like "Hey, this guy has stuck around for X amount of time."
I respect dedication and time invested, which is what the titles mean to me. I base my trust on the individual.Isn't this similar to the direction that Bungie has taken with Halo: Reach 'ranks'?[
Well that is not the way it works and fails to answer the question. These forums do not equal the game we play (Halo3, Halo:Reach) on our Xbox 360's. I think this has been stated many times before.
Then there is the singling out of people from 2008. (see quotes below) Why people from 2008?
Basically, this whole thing states that if you were not here by a certain time, you should not be able to be like us. It's a "You people" statement.
The current system is based on trust and longevity. If it takes four years (example number) to make Mythic with a low ban count, so be it. Members should not be penalized for not joining by a certain date. Titles will come in due time according to your behavior and the longevity of that said behavior. That is fair and just.
Of course all titles could be removed and this sort of thing would not be an issue. I say again though:
Members should not be penalized for not joining by a certain date.
Delta
Posted by: Skibur
With the ageing Bungie.net population and the already high number of Mythic Members, I think that we need to implement a number of new titles which are (see edit) than Mythic Member.
It's not as special being Mythic when pretty soon members who registered in 2008 will be given the title.
Suggestions for new titles and general discussion is welcome.
EDIT: These new titles would need to be added between Member and Heroic, Heroic and Legendary and Legendary and Mythic.
We shouldn't have anything higher than Mythic. (There is nothing higher than Mythic)
Posted by: Skibur
Posted by: a rascal cat
Wait so do you mean that they should just keep it at a Mythic Member instead of maybe a Fabled Mythic Member or Exalted Mythic Member? No. The prefixes are fine and should remain, but the base titles should be increased to say, seven (from four).
Posted by: cRaZyT101
what's wrong with us '08 members? :(Nothing, it's just that the title should be reserved for those who have been around for much longer.
See, join date aside, we have had more experience on here through the highs and lows. We know more about the community, we know more people, we are part of an elite club, the Mythic club.
2008 members (an all other members) are part of an elite club in their own right, but not part of ours, in my opinion.
Posted by: Skibur
Posted by: Delta 15t
You do your time here as a good member, you get your appropriate title. That is the way it works.Yes, but won't those who were at Sargent when the new guys joined have moved up to an even higher rank by the time they reach Sargent?
Unfortunately we don't have anything higher, so it's unbalanced, IMO.
Anyway, I didn't mean anything by the war analogy, I was just trying to say that you can't become something that you never were.
Let me post a different analogy: The winner of the 'fun run 2009' can't also have the title for 'fun run 2008' if they didn't participate. That would be unfair to everyone who did participate in '08'.
Posted by: Delta 15t
I'm not worried about the war thing.
So, I joined in 2006...again.(I had an account back in 2001 didn't use it. Signed up in 2004 but got deployed several times...bla bla bla) Since I didn't join in 2004, you are saying I should not be able to become an Exalted Mythic Member? If this is what you are saying where do you come up with this reasoning?
Delta
Posted by: Skibur
Posted by: Delta 15t
You do your time here as a good member, you get your appropriate title. That is the way it works.Yes, but won't those who were at Sargent when the new guys joined have moved up to an even higher rank by the time they reach Sargent?
Unfortunately we don't have anything higher, so it's unbalanced, IMO.
Anyway, I didn't mean anything by the war analogy, I was just trying to say that you can't become something that you never were.
Let me post a different analogy: The winner of the 'fun run 2009' can't also have the title for 'fun run 2008' if they didn't participate. That would be unfair to everyone who did participate in '08'.
Posted by: Skibur
Maybe this will help explain my view on the titles.
Offended that [it seems like] you think they aren't worthy of being a trusted member.No. This is where I probably look at titles differently. I don't look at them trust-wise, I look at them like "Hey, this guy has stuck around for X amount of time."
I respect dedication and time invested, which is what the titles mean to me. I base my trust on the individual.Isn't this similar to the direction that Bungie has taken with Halo: Reach 'ranks'?