[POLL] How accurate are member ranks?

Discussion in 'Community Discussion' started by AGamerCalledBen, Jul 28, 2016.

?

Know me\are they accurate?

Yes, I know you. 9 vote(s) 47.4%
No, I do not know you. 7 vote(s) 36.8%
Yes, they are accurate. 4 vote(s) 21.1%
No, they aren't accurate. 11 vote(s) 57.9%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Well, I have been wondering, since I (and many other people) are well known members, are we actually they well known? Do you know me? And do you think that the ranks are accurate? Answer once in each section of the poll. No voting on 3 or 4 of the answers!
  2. Maybe 'well known member' was a better option then 'unknown entity'. :D
  3. I think these ranks are accurate in a way of how people know you on EMC. Like if you are well-known, you are very known in EMC. And if you are a legendary member (but there isn't a legendary member as of yet), you would consider being a legend in EMC. So yeah they are pretty accurate in my opinion.
    But sadly, in retrospect, they're kind of not accurate
    AGamerCalledBen likes this.
  4. No, I think they aren't accurate because of the trophies for age. If one guy joined in November 2011, made one post and left, he'll be a well-known member or higher too, I think, because of the trophies for 1, 2, 3 and 4 years giving quite a lot of points.
    AGamerCalledBen, _cTJ_ and ShelLuser like this.
  5. I have to agree with 607 on that one.

    Also keep in mind that the Empire has 2 faces here: there's the game itself and these awesome forums. Being well known on one doesn't mean the same happens on the other. Besides; I'm an extinguished member even though I've just got started :p Oh wait, that's distinguished, my bad :D

    Problem with these trophies is that you can never get it right. For example: someone who spends a lot of time on the forums auctions would easily get a nice post count and with that trophies which give him a new title. Even though not too many people would have heard about him.
  6. This quote was for reference because it illustrates the issue and ShelLuser summed it up fairly well. It would seem to ba a way to designate how long on forum site, how many posts and in general how active a person is. un fortunatly trying to figure out popularity would be a tough script to write. It has to be called something soooo "well known" sounds good.

    Perhaps it could be done usin an animal taxonomy break down for our ranking. We all start at single cell level and develop in time. We change according to the circles we interact with. So, when you look at a players picture/discription you would see how long/much development has occurred as well as interaction/contact with others (posts). Posting in the same thread would count as contact, but only slight. When you post on multiple threads with people it adds up. Then you can see the who has been on a long time and who has been active with many people and who sticks to little groups.

    Just a crazy experiment I thought of while taking a break in the lab.
    AGamerCalledBen and Blondekid42 like this.
  7. i think those ranks are silly :confused: i also dont like it that u cant easily find good list of them :( i just want a link in menu saying "ranks".

    instead of trying 2 make u stand out in community it should show how much emc likes u.

    "well known member" when ppl dont know u? make it "valued member" b/c u do more on forums than others.
    Acemox2k and AGamerCalledBen like this.
  8. I think the rank titles are out of the order.

    It should be prominent -> well known -> esteemed -> elite -> legendary. It doesn't make any sense for prominent to be after well known and esteemed to be after elite. Elite sounds way cooler than esteemed and has a greater effect. Prominent doesn't have a huge connotation so it should be before well known.
    607 likes this.
  9. Yup, I agree. But to change them now would probably cause quite some confusion.
    ShelLuser likes this.