SEARCH The Web  GameSpy   GameSpy Forums  

GameSpy Forums » Legacy GameSpy Forums » [GSF] Clan Business Proposed adjustments to GSF membership
1   2   3   4   5  
Author Topic: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership
[GSF]Tech_Paradox  248 posts
Board Guest
Posts: 248
Join Date: Feb '02
Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/27/05 2:32pm
Note - this is a direct copy & paste from my post in the Initiate Approval thread.

.

I was discussing something similar with someone else... Many clans require you to actually BE active to maintain your membership. We seem to let people wander in and out and never remove them from the rolls.

Proposals:

1. Reaper the members list. Instead of people clamoring for a re-vote every N months, we institute an activity count. You must vote to remain active in the clan and you must regularly post to remain active in the clan. Miss X votes in a row (6 seems like a good number, as that's about how many initiates we have in any given month) and you're inactive. Don't post on the main board in six months and you're inactive. Spend six months on inactive status and you're out. Send an e-mail to their address registered on the clan site and PM out to all members notifying them of this - if you get no reply or it bounces, they automatically get put on inactive. For e-mail bounces, they must immediately contact Parena to get it fixed to be moved back to active. Voting in any initiation round gets you put back on active status and/or wipes your missed vote count. Inactivity due to lack of posting can only be rectified by posting - voting will not remove that strike.

2. Revamp the voting. Remove the Neutral option - you either want them in or you don't. If you want to remain neutral on someone, you don't vote (but it counts against your "Missed Vote" count). Up the required percentage to 75% so as to not have people skating in.

3. Bump the membership requirements up. Jack the required posts up to 500 and require a minimum of six months of activity on the main board, so as to keep the spammers at bay.

Any thoughts?

 

-----signature-----
If we don't know how to fix the technology of the past, how can we create the technology of the future?
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
tacoprophet  1879 posts
5027_hat
Guest
Posts: 1,879
Join Date: Mar '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/27/05 2:52pm
In Reply To #1

One of the problems I see with the clan is that indifference allows the ranks to grow unchecked. The roster winds up clogged with inactive people, unwanted members, etc.

I think the suggestions above would help this somewhat.

Additionally, I'd suggest that rather than passively accepting or rejecting applicants, the clan should actively recruit those members it's interested in having.

No more willy nilly applying to the clan. Initiates must be sponsored in by an active member in good standing. Initiates may not be sponsored by the same person twice within a certain period of time (what would be reasonable? A few months at least, I think). Thus, if you apply and are rejected, someone else must sponsor you before you may reapply, or you must wait until your original sponsor can re-submit you.

 

-----signature-----
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I beat the internet; the end guy's hard.
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
[GSF]Tech_Paradox  248 posts
Board Guest
Posts: 248
Join Date: Feb '02
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/27/05 3:11pm
I will agree that the sponsorship thing sounds like a good idea and would weed out some undesirables - If someone runs down the active roster and can't get anyone to sponsor them, they're SOL. Something like this would be good for implementation after we clean house a bit.

Maybe we should set it up in transition that they can apply in the Initiate Approval thread and then if someone will sponsor them, it is the responsibility of that person to add them to the voting on the clan site? Or maybe just make that the norm?

Did that make sense?

 

-----signature-----
If we don't know how to fix the technology of the past, how can we create the technology of the future?
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
parena  1051 posts
Flood Spore
Posts: 1,051
Join Date: May '02
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/27/05 3:23pm
<orange>FYI: a quick script teaches us that of 80(!) members, only 33 have voted on at least 1 of the last 6 initiates where voting has ended. This does not include decoy, Ted Kennedy, Jyril and Zee Deveel who's voting is still going on at the time I'm running this script.

This script isn't perfect, but it'll be good enough for now (just to keep an eye on things). It doesn't keep in mind that if there are 8 initiates and they all finish right after another, it's perhaps hard or impossible for them to have voted on any the last 6, 'coz they WERE the last 8. But this is highly improbable anyway.

Anyway, I like the winds of change and agree so far, especially on the needed activity (both members and initiates), the out-with-neutral-votes and the 75%. We CAN take out the Neutral, 'coz people will be more willing to vote. The Neutral was only there so initiates wouldn't be the victim of people not willing to really vote. And with more people 'forced' to vote, there will be a better reflection of 'what the clan wants'. So 75% is good in that case.

The sponsor adding the initiate sounds like a good plan. Then it's easy to check how often a person was sponser/if that sponsor hasn't sponsored that ininitiate last time, that sort of thing</orange>

 

-----signature-----
------------------------------
"You don't appreciate a lot of stuff in school until you get older.
Little things like being spanked every day by a middle aged woman:
Stuff you pay good money for later in life." - Emo Philips
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
Benny_Big_Hair  2126 posts
11102_1007485-icon
Private
Posts: 2,126
Join Date: Oct '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/27/05 3:37pm
In Reply To #1

I say keep the post minimum as it is, but add the required activity.

I mean, let's put it this way: In the last 6 months, I don't think I've made more then 300 posts, at most, at /gamespy or elsewhere.

Just making someone have to be sponsered would be good enough, and weed out the people who come out with less than 15%.

 

-----signature-----
\o\o\o\o
\o\o\o\o
\o\o\o\o
\o\o\o\o
BTFzor
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
[GSF]JohnDoe  1939 posts
5021_scream
Private
Posts: 1,939
Join Date: Apr '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/27/05 3:48pm
IRT topic

the sponsorship is a nice idea.

6 months and 500 posts is too harsh, or at least the 6 months. Voting already keeps the spammers out.

I like the idea of encouraging voting (or at least, discouraging non voting)

the 66% req seems fine atm. people arent skating in. but yes, do away with the neutral vote.

If you feel that this initiat should be in the clan, vote yes, if not (you dont want him in the clan, you dont care, you dont know him) vote no. (this should be put above the voting imo, to remind people)

 

-----signature-----
=======
He zooms, fires and BANG!... you can start from scratch.
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
Haaaardflip  8197 posts
10570_510997-icon
Internet Professional
Posts: 8,197
Join Date: Dec '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/27/05 3:48pm
In Reply To #1

1. I think it should be 2 or 3 months to be put on the inactive list, and another 2 to be booted from the clan. Waiting a whole year for someone who barely ever/never posts is a bit too long.

2. 75% sounds good with the lack of neutral votes.

3. Agreed on the membership requirements.

I think we should have a clan members page with all the active people, then a link at the bottom of that list to a page with all the inactive people. The member count on the left-hand menu should only be for active members.

I'd like to add that all members should not judge a person on their personality or activity in IRC, BenTest or other forums, but rather their post quality and activity on the forum. This is the GameSpy Forums clan, not GameSpy Forums IRC channel clan.

In Reply To #2

Sponsoring would work well.

In Reply To #4

You do realize if you made these changes you'd have to actually start posting on GSF? We can't just let you off because you're the site admin. You made <red>two</red> posts, in total, in 2004. sad

 

-----signature-----
The Earth is made of Chemistry
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
parena  1051 posts
Flood Spore
Posts: 1,051
Join Date: May '02
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/27/05 4:06pm
In Reply To #7
<orange>Posts at /gsf (here) don't count? This is the GSF Forum. Also, initiate posts should include the ones at both /gamespy (like it is now) AND /gsf. I mean, I am pretty active around here, our own forums. happy </orange>

 

-----signature-----
------------------------------
"You don't appreciate a lot of stuff in school until you get older.
Little things like being spanked every day by a middle aged woman:
Stuff you pay good money for later in life." - Emo Philips
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
tacoprophet  1879 posts
5027_hat
Guest
Posts: 1,879
Join Date: Mar '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/27/05 4:14pm
Also, after sponsoring an initiate, there should be a period during which that member cannot sponsor another. Bringing someone in needs to be an active thing, and a thing that people think about. You shouldn't ever see 5 initiates on the list with the same sponsor.

 

-----signature-----
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I beat the internet; the end guy's hard.
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
Haaaardflip  8197 posts
10570_510997-icon
Internet Professional
Posts: 8,197
Join Date: Dec '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/27/05 4:35pm
In Reply To #8

Bad excuse :P. The clan is the GameSpy Forums clan. This is the GameSpy Forums Clan Forums. We aren't the GameSpy Forums Clan Forums Clan. You see?

 

-----signature-----
The Earth is made of Chemistry
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
phatbat  1843 posts
5417_hat
Sergeant
Posts: 1,843
Join Date: Apr '02
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/27/05 4:40pm
In Reply To #7
I agree, 2-3 months for inactive status. 6 months is kind of long. I like the elimination of the neutral vote and the members must vote thing.

Sponsors are cool too.

 

-----signature-----
...the one constant in the universe is change...
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
ChefWilburto  129 posts
11240_1154255-icon
Unregistered User
Posts: 129
Join Date: May '03
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/27/05 4:43pm
In Reply To #1

Anyone could get sponsored by a single member. But if the requirement is say 5 [GSF] members to actively sponsor the innitiate it would cull the flock significantly.

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
fishbaugh  623 posts
28841_1066081-icon
Out Smoking
Posts: 623
Join Date: Feb '03
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/27/05 4:44pm
In Reply To #10

Exactly. Also, not posting on the main forums in over a year sort of invalidates your opinion of initiates. How will you know if Jyril is worthy of a plus if you have never participated in discussions with him?

In Reply To #1

75% is a little to high, as long as the neutral option is still around. Take away neutral, then bump it up to 75%.

Besides that, anything short of a re-vote sounds fine. A re-vote would bring a bunch of inactive members out of hiding who would only vote for people who were around 3 years ago. Sorry, but time spent on the forums in total is a lame way to vote. If anyone should get kicked out, it's people who haven't been around in forever and a day.

In Reply To Hardflip

I really hope people don't vote based soley on spam forums and IRC. I know I don't. I've voted minus for people I really like on many occasions because they don't offer anything of any substance on the main forums.

 

-----signature-----
"My Milkshake Brings All The Boys To The Yard!"
Are you Caribbean Cool?
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
Haaaardflip  8197 posts
10570_510997-icon
Internet Professional
Posts: 8,197
Join Date: Dec '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/27/05 4:55pm
In Reply To #12

5 sounds like a good idea, since if they already have that much support it's more likely that they'll get accepted. But if we had 1, we'd still be able to make people choose wisely, since they wouldn't be able to sponsor more than 1 person every few weeks/months or so.

In Reply To #13

Well, I had a discussion with someone on IRC a few months ago and he was arguing why he votes based on activity in IRC too, so I guessed the same could go for other forums.

 

-----signature-----
The Earth is made of Chemistry
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
tacoprophet  1879 posts
5027_hat
Guest
Posts: 1,879
Join Date: Mar '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/27/05 5:00pm
I like the attention to member activity. One thing that the current setup fails to adequately address is that people come AND go. It's easy to get in, and it's hard to get people out when they've moved on. Both continued posting and continued voting need to be monitored.

 

-----signature-----
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I beat the internet; the end guy's hard.
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
[GSF]Tech_Paradox  248 posts
Board Guest
Posts: 248
Join Date: Feb '02
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/27/05 7:09pm
In Reply To #7
Hardflip posted:

In Reply To #1

1. I think it should be 2 or 3 months to be put on the inactive list, and another 2 to be booted from the clan. Waiting a whole year for someone who barely ever/never posts is a bit too long.


I was just pulling numbers out of my ass for that one... I figured six months inactive before the boot was more than fair. I could definitely agree with 3 months until inactive and 3 months after that for the boot...

2. 75% sounds good with the lack of neutral votes.


The more I think about it, with less people on the rolls to make possible votes, 75% is a bit high... using Parena's numbers as a jumping-off, 75% of the 33 people who actually bothered to vote = ~25 people... but then again, with the "vote or boot" statute in effect, getting everyone to vote might not be that hard...

3. Agreed on the membership requirements.


As JD mentioned, this might be a tad high... I could see keping the post count at 200, so long as we do use the six month requirement.

I think we should have a clan members page with all the active people, then a link at the bottom of that list to a page with all the inactive people. The member count on the left-hand menu should only be for active members.


I'll agree with that, too - only keep the active ones on the members list and have the inactive list as sort of a warning for those who are skating on thin ice.

 

-----signature-----
If we don't know how to fix the technology of the past, how can we create the technology of the future?
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
1   2   3   4   5  
GameSpy Forums » Legacy GameSpy Forums » [GSF] Clan Business Proposed adjustments to GSF membership
© 2012 IGN Entertainment, Inc (9.02.17.2300, MEDIAPRDBOARD03) 0.062

IGN Entertainment
About Us | Advertise | Contact Us | Press | Careers
IGN | GameSpy | Comrade | Arena | FilePlanet | Direct2Drive | GameSpy Technology
TeamXbox | Game Sites | VE3D | CheatsCodesGuides | GameStats | GamerMetrics
AskMen | GIGA.DE | What They Play | Battlefield Heroes
By continuing past this page, and by your continued use of this site, you agree to be bound by and abide by the User Agreement.
Copyright 1996-2010, IGN Entertainment, Inc. | Support | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | RSS Feeds
IGN’s enterprise databases running Oracle, SQL and MySQL are professionally monitored and managed by Pythian Remote DBA.