people already complain about not being denizens so wouldnt change muchghoulybits wrote:
The issue with a contribution-based system is that it
is hard to really qualify in a way that would satisfy everyone
and
will probably lead to people whining and complaining about not being denizen
the thing I'm trying to say is that it doesnt needs to be 1 or 0, we dont need a checkmark list to be a denizen, we're not robots and we sure are not doing missions on a videogame. If the majority of the current denizens have a positive memory of an user he should be good enough to be considered a denizen. we can also award the denizen title only to users that have already been gone, this would fix the "waiting to be a denizen" problem and it would be much easier to decide if such person "did enough" to become part of OT history, because his/her path here has already ended.ghoulybits wrote:
It's not easy to decide what exactly merits being called a significant contribution to OT. Is organizing a pfp collab enough? Is drawing a pfp collab enough? Should shitposts made about an event going on in OT be considered significant because they contribute to the overall lore, even if they're poorly made with little effort? Should someone who arguably contributes to OT by having a friendly demeanor and posting a lot but otherwise doesn't add much still be a denizen? Everyone's going to have a different answer
I think everyone who posted here have contributed to OT in some way (even the shitposts or dumb questions), being a denizen shouldnt be a goal but a consequence, contributing to OT doesn't resume itself on good threads or how much effort such player has put on his posts, but how much he integrated himself in this community. Someone who just come here and posts the best thread we've ever seen in our lifes shouldnt be considered a denizen because we dont even know him, he's just a "talented" dude. Now the guy who stick around and is friendly to everyone should 100% be part of us, because that guy added more history and spirit to OT than the first one.ghoulybits wrote:
In addition, it's inevitable that if there are quality standards, there will be people naturally excluded because of them. I personally don't really think this is an issue, but like, people are going to get pissed if it's eight months and they're not denizen yet. No one wants to be told "hey your posts honestly suck and OT would be a happier place if you stopped posting so you aren't let into [what you think is] the Cool Kids Club yet", and no one really wants to be the person to say that either. No one wants to be an asshole, and no one wants to face the inevitable backlash that comes from telling someone they just... don't contribute to OT at all.
the system I'm proposing basically eliminates this pressure, since no one will have the rights to claim their denizenship, only the worthy will become denizens after their "death".ghoulybits wrote:
Trust me, I have no personal objections for a strict contribution-based denizenship system. However, I just... don't really think that there's a way it works, especially in this current system where parliament members kind of feel pressured to let people become denizen once they reach 8 months, even if they don't really deserve it.
edit: I said we because accordingly to this bullshit system you guys have right now I will inevitably become a denizen in 3 months with the rights to claim this title even if some of you dont even know who I am