Legendary Status

F

FoundationOfRancor

Guest
Is there gonna be one?
at 1000 posts?
and i think Member should be at 50 posts.
 
F

Fire Slinger

Guest
I was wondering that myself. Ever since Ed closed the thread, nobody has commented on it.

Ed-sorry about the "god" thing. I guess I'm to blame cause I started it.
 
S

smurfturd

Guest
Legendary?, what about veteran status, i thought you got it at 100 posts, im still a lowley member :(
 
Z

Zadok001

Guest
Tut, tut. Smurfturd, I thought I told you about that. When you have a nickname, you have to _tell_ me when you get to 100 posts! :) Otherwise, no veteranship for you! You've got it now, though, so I guess publicly complaining works too... J/K

As for the Legendary thing... We've decided against that. Ed believes it would encourage spamming, and I am forced to agree. HOWEVER! We have discussed another method of giving people Legendary status. That method isn't in effect yet, but it may be eventually. When and if it is, we'll be sure to tell you.
 

Ed Sullivan

CPA Founder, Web Guy
Staff member
Otherwise, no veteranship for you!
AHH! Run, it's the user title nazi! :)

So anyway, yep - we decided against it for spamming reasons. But there will be something eventually...
 
F

Fire Slinger

Guest
Sounds good to me. I try not to spam. Does the battle arena count?
 
T

TheGuyFromTheOtherPost

Guest
...wait until I get a 100 posts until I'm considered a member? That's not fair, I want to be a member now. Oh well, rules are rules, I'm not going to break them, I don't have that power, I'm only the Guy from the other post :)
 
F

Fire Slinger

Guest
You're consider a member after 30 posts.

You're a veteran after a 100 posts.
 
T

TheGuyFromTheOtherPost

Guest
...That's much better. Thanks Fire Slinger.
 
T

TheGuyFromTheOtherPost

Guest
...the legendary status, why would that create spamms? I don't see the problem. The only problem is that I will never reach post 1000, since I'm only the Guy from the other post.
 
N

nodnarb24

Guest
Tag Guard

It will create spammers because people would want to become legends. Also people that are currently in the 800's and other high numbers like that would post like crazy to be the first legend.
 
T

TheGuyFromTheOtherPost

Guest
...people here really feel the need to be called a "legend"? Why? It's just regular board, I don't see what's so special about being called a "legend"? I want to be called a Master, but you don't have to agree with me, I'm only the Guy from the other post.
 

Spiderman

Administrator
Staff member
There's ALWAYS people who want to be the first or be the highest rank on boards. Just like there's people who ask about the rankings in the first place (after all, if it didn't matter, they wouldn't care to ask).
 
T

TheGuyFromTheOtherPost

Guest
...don't really matter, because if you post crap, and have be the first to be a legend, you'd be a crappy legend, so good luck. However, you if you post intelligent posts, posts that make sense, and posts that mean something, even if you be the last to be a legend, you still going to be a legend, atleast you got to the legendary status with normal posts, not some crap.

I can tell when someone is posting crap, trust me, and if I can't, nobody can blame me because I'm only the Guy from the other post.
 
C

Cateran Overlord

Guest
I'd love to be a legend, but then I have a big ego :D

Hey, I'm the one and only Overlord after all (I shoulda been a merc legend in MM :mad: )!

But that doesn't matter, because I'm only the Guy from the other... oh wait, no I'm not :D
 
T

TheGuyFromTheOtherPost

Guest
...kind of agree now for not having a Legendary status. It would suck to see people running around and bragging about themselves being 'legends', that would suck, and then, I would have to flame the people who does that, and that would start a fight, and it would lead into many fights, so I'm just going to vote against it if I can, or if I'm important enough. I'm only the Guy from the other post.
 
P

Purple_jester

Guest
Well, in my opinion, no status can EVER be better than: CPA Founder. You guys are responsible for this great site being here today. Take bow. I'm applauding here. :) I'll worship you later.

Now, instead of status being based on the number of posts, why not status based on CONTENT? That's what counts in forums, it's not how much you say, it's how well you say it. When people read forums, they look for something comprehensive and meaningful.

Keep the veteran status at 100 posts. Veteran just means you've been around for some time. Later, when someone has proven, in the opinion of the Great and Powerful Founders and Administrators, that his/her posts have a lot of meaning and content in them, you might bestow other status titles: like CPA Scribe, High Bard, Eloquent Critic or something like that. Because it's not based on quantity, it won't induce spamming. In fact, because it's based on content, it will actually REDUCE the number of spammers and inspire better posting!

So, is it a good idea? Or will I end up getting the title of "CPA Dunce" because I dared suggest it?

Please don't smack me...
 
T

TheGuyFromTheOtherPost

Guest
...that's a great suggestion Purple_Jester. I agree, the posters should be judged about quality not quantity. Anyone could post randomly and just fill this place with filthy posts and crap. The question is, how many of us can post with meaning? I don't think there's much.

Yes, there should be something special for the highest poster(s), but there should be something special for the poster(s) with the greatest quality. Someone might write 3 or 4 article a day, but they are the best, and they have quality and startegy. They might be the best thing in life; or, in the other hand, someone might write 30 or something articles daily, but only 1 or 2 of them count as real posts: now, who which is better, quality or quantity?
I leave this question to all of you who are interested, and if you guys are not interested, don't blame me because I'm only the Guy from the other post.
 
Top