Changing vtn requirements(again)

[mattchuu]

Sahdow made a poll in which vtns were voted in based on popularity. It passed and that is how it's been since.

Tonight i went on and everyone raged because i said a certain person was cool. But i needed a REASON other than the fact he was cool to do it. So now i say since people want to contradict the requirements, they should be changed.

The new vtn requirements simple are

-be active
-do something helpful towards the server
-be helpful to other
-be nice

That's it, all there is, how the vtn voting goes will remain the same, only the criteria is different.

[Jsblackout82]

People may not like you for some stupid reason but you are still a great guy for the server.
EDIT: I mean in general not you mattchu i vote yes

[UpGring]

Great Idea, but I think a veteran should also be a trusted player, not a resident that just reached 30 hours and is not helping and not writing anything in the chat.

It's just an example but I pay attention to the chat all the time, so if anyone needs help I'm there. If you just want to veteran for the title, it's useless.

I really enjoy helping people .

When are the votes btw?

[lyndseyddy]

I'm not a fan of subjectivity. Having the personality of a socially awkward penguin shouldn't prevent you from ever moving beyond resident. The new rules are not focused on popularity the same as before, but is there a measurement of helpfulness or activity that will now be used? Or is it now just a subjective decision based on a different set of criteria?

[SirDukem]

Unless we make it black & white, I'm afraid it will always be a popularity contest.

If you want to make it non-subjective, it would need to be something of this example:
-No bans within past X amount of time
-X number of hours played
-X number of blocks broken/placed
-X amount of votes on minestatus this month

so on and so forth.

Otherwise it is a voting contest, even with 'regulations' on helpful players, talkative, etc...there is no way to prove it. It is up to interpretation, which means voting...which means popularity contest.

I only vote for people if I would trust them enough to add their name on my diamond chest. If I don't trust you to leave my diamonds alone, then I'm not going to vote/suggest you for veteran status, and that's the main thing I use to make my judgements.

[UpGring]

I fully agree with you Dukem, a veteran should be a trusted player, like I said in my post.

[Snakejay]

I liked the old way, mod+ voted for veteran and then the person logged on randomly one day and saw that they were veteran XD yeah thats how it happened with me >.< im pretty sure i was trusted by staff to become veteran though, also there is alot of veterans now >.< blergh im just rambling, but personally i think its now to easy to get veteran. :p

[Irish_Ninja]

I'm not completely sure how this worked in the past, or how it works now, to be honest. But I do have to agree with some of the points made here.

I feel it's become more and more about popularity than genuine trustworthiness. Of course, we can't base it solely off statistics either. If we were to promote a player based off hours online, blocks placed, and their ban record, I can guarantee we'd be getting some less-than-satisfactory characters in the position. Not to say these qualities are bad; they just can't be used on their own to determine whether or not to promote a player.

I've seen the same situation time and time again, and not just within the server. I'm sure some of you know my occupation, but it deals with the same concept; someone meets the minimum requirements, and is awarded the same rank as someone who met and exceeded their goal. Not only do these people make the status look easy to attain, but they also jeopardize the credibility of that rank. If I were to relate this to the server directly, it's as if a player were promoted to moderator, but didn't have any idea what to do, and constantly had to be told not to abuse his or her powers. Meanwhile, that player is in the exact same category as a mod who thoroughly looks over his or her decisions before making them, is not biased by any outside factors, and is an all-around more responsible person.

The way I look at is, is that the vote, the requirements, all that which is 'needed' to become a trusted member of the community, is just a formality; a person should be, without a doubt, meant to uphold the duties of the rank. They should have already proven that they can be trusted, even when the status wasn't being dangled in front of them like a steak held before a dog.

[xD34THxW1SHx]

I Completely agree with this it give more of a chance first of all and second the list Should have other stuff added like they have to do a nice neat set of work for the community and have a speical amount of hours on and as well with not more then like 3 bands aswell as 6 or 8 auto bands

[FINNGGAL]

I totally agree with Dukem, but I get really annoyed with like these new people who come along and only accept help from mods or donors because they think the residents will screw them. I mean, I'm not the type of person who is completely antisocial, but I don't like whittering on for hours about how stupid newbs should trust everyone, , we should let the 'newbs' decide for who they want as vtn - this could show that they have helped them enough for them to realise who is good/bad.


btw Dukem , how many dias are in your 'Diamond Chest' or are you just talking about all those dias you have eaten up?