abraker wrote:

NOTICE

As time marches on we find ourselves questioning what it means to become denizen. The OT Royal Society has first defined it in terms of activity. When that was then found insufficient by the OT!Government it was changed to time spent in this place. While this has worked for the previous generation, it has become increasingly apparent as of late the problems of justifying someone as denizen despite time spent here. This is why the OT!Governement has passed a vote: Denizen candidates chosen by the OT!Government shall now submit their own reasoning for why they should be considered for denizenship. Candidates shall be DM'd when they qualify, and only if approved, shall their denizenship be announced.

Patatitta wrote:

what are you seeking in the answers tho?

abraker wrote:

Patatitta wrote:

what are you seeking in the answers tho?

a list of contributions to OT will suffice

abraker wrote:

Patatitta wrote:

what are you seeking in the answers tho?

a list of contributions to OT will suffice

Patatitta wrote:

abraker wrote:

Patatitta wrote:

what are you seeking in the answers tho?

a list of contributions to OT will suffice

what would you define as a contributiont ho?, if you're going to just ask for that and anything suffices, then this is exactly like the old system

abraker wrote:

Patatitta wrote:

abraker wrote:

Patatitta wrote:

what are you seeking in the answers tho?

a list of contributions to OT will suffice

what would you define as a contributiont ho?, if you're going to just ask for that and anything suffices, then this is exactly like the old system

if that "anything" you list is insufficient, then denizenship would be denied. So list your best contributions

Kaaruumii wrote:

gen 9 gonna only have like 3 or 4 people lol

octowave wrote:

am i allowed to be excluded from denizenship as a whole? if it's going to be like this? it does nothing but make me want to post in ot less. knowing nothing i do would contribute to it would be a fucking relief. i just want to post things, not stress over whether or not i'm "good enough" by some arbitrary standards

octowave wrote:

am i allowed to be excluded from denizenship as a whole? if it's going to be like this? it does nothing but make me want to post in ot less. knowing nothing i do would contribute to it would be a fucking relief. i just want to post things, not stress over whether or not i'm "good enough" by some arbitrary standards

ShinRun wrote:

Seems like the new amendment is receiving massive backlash so I have a different proposal.

Instead of making denizenship harder to require, parliament change the only requirement needed to obtain denizenship to be active for 8 months. This might seem similar to the old one we had but the difference is you literally need to make 0 contribution to be included. Denizen becomes a symbol of "hey I was here for 8+ months" and this would also increase the amount of people in a generation.

On the other hand, I can create a different entity similar to the hall of fame which is only dedicated to denizen who actually contributed massive deeds to OT. If someone wish to be inducted into the hall of fame, they must submit a list of achievement they contributed to the community. The requirement will naturally be much harsher, and instead of having only parliament decide, it will be left to a poll where any denizen can vote. Also, unlike most hall of fame, you don't need to be inactive to get inducted into it but you must be active for a much longer period of time compared to denizenship.

Changes will still be made to this but if this is much more preferred, I'll talk to parliament and the president about it.

ShinRun wrote:

Seems like the new amendment is receiving massive backlash so I have a different proposal.

Instead of making denizenship harder to require, parliament change the only requirement needed to obtain denizenship to be active for 8 months. This might seem similar to the old one we had but the difference is you literally need to make 0 contribution to be included. Denizen becomes a symbol of "hey I was here for 8+ months" and this would also increase the amount of people in a generation.

On the other hand, I can create a different entity similar to the hall of fame which is only dedicated to denizen who actually contributed massive deeds to OT. If someone wish to be inducted into the hall of fame, they must submit a list of achievement they contributed to the community. The requirement will naturally be much harsher, and instead of having only parliament decide, it will be left to a poll where any denizen can vote. Also, unlike most hall of fame, you don't need to be inactive to get inducted into it but you must be active for a much longer period of time compared to denizenship.

Changes will still be made to this but if this is much more preferred, I'll talk to parliament and the president about it.

[ Sebastian ] wrote:

I don't know if denizenship is either for big contributors to OT, or just a marker to show that you've been in OT for a while.

ClevelandsMyBro wrote:

[ Sebastian ] wrote:

I don't know if denizenship is either for big contributors to OT, or just a marker to show that you've been in OT for a while.

the latter

ClevelandsMyBro wrote:

[ Sebastian ] wrote:

I don't know if denizenship is either for big contributors to OT, or just a marker to show that you've been in OT for a while.

the latter

Kaaruumii wrote:

ClevelandsMyBro wrote:

[ Sebastian ] wrote:

I don't know if denizenship is either for big contributors to OT, or just a marker to show that you've been in OT for a while.

the latter

starting to feel like the first one now

ClevelandsMyBro wrote:

Kaaruumii wrote:

ClevelandsMyBro wrote:

[ Sebastian ] wrote:

I don't know if denizenship is either for big contributors to OT, or just a marker to show that you've been in OT for a while.

the latter

starting to feel like the first one now

the current rules says otherwise

Patatitta wrote:

IMO the problem is that this new change fixes literally nothing, it's just obscuring the process that goes into becoming denizen instead of actually taking and solving the problem from the root of it, meaning, actually give a proper definition to what denizen really means, currently contribution is just a buzz word, since no one really knows what classifies as one,

is making a low effort post enough? no?, is high effort enough? what is even high effort? does it need to contribute to the lore? the thread must be active?, is time still a factor? none of this questions have really been answered

igorsprite wrote:

you guys should reduce the requirement to 2 months again

ShinRun wrote:

Seems like the new amendment is receiving massive backlash so I have a different proposal.

Instead of making denizenship harder to require, parliament change the only requirement needed to obtain denizenship to be active for 8 months. This might seem similar to the old one we had but the difference is you literally need to make 0 contribution to be included. Denizen becomes a symbol of "hey I was here for 8+ months" and this would also increase the amount of people in a generation.

On the other hand, I can create a different entity similar to the hall of fame which is only dedicated to denizen who actually contributed massive deeds to OT. If someone wish to be inducted into the hall of fame, they must submit a list of achievement they contributed to the community. The requirement will naturally be much harsher, and instead of having only parliament decide, it will be left to a poll where any denizen can vote. Also, unlike most hall of fame, you don't need to be inactive to get inducted into it but you must be active for a much longer period of time compared to denizenship.

Changes will still be made to this but if this is much more preferred, I'll talk to parliament and the president about it.

Karmine wrote:

ShinRun wrote:

Seems like the new amendment is receiving massive backlash so I have a different proposal.

Instead of making denizenship harder to require, parliament change the only requirement needed to obtain denizenship to be active for 8 months. This might seem similar to the old one we had but the difference is you literally need to make 0 contribution to be included. Denizen becomes a symbol of "hey I was here for 8+ months" and this would also increase the amount of people in a generation.

On the other hand, I can create a different entity similar to the hall of fame which is only dedicated to denizen who actually contributed massive deeds to OT. If someone wish to be inducted into the hall of fame, they must submit a list of achievement they contributed to the community. The requirement will naturally be much harsher, and instead of having only parliament decide, it will be left to a poll where any denizen can vote. Also, unlike most hall of fame, you don't need to be inactive to get inducted into it but you must be active for a much longer period of time compared to denizenship.

Changes will still be made to this but if this is much more preferred, I'll talk to parliament and the president about it.

Why not make the second part what's required for denizenship (without making it too hard) instead of just giving denizenship to basically everyone?

Say denizenship requires actually doing something that will get you recognized and appreciated by denizens, and let people apply with a list of what they consider good contributions they made. Denizens would then vote whether they think these contributions are actually good or not.
That would let us see what everyone considers a good contribution and weed out those who apply without doing anything. People who don't want to be denizen would simply not apply.
It would help keep denizens more or less coherent in what they think OT should be like and avoid big conflicts and disagreements like we have here.
Meta would still shift with time thanks to old denizens leaving and new ones always being at least slightly different from their elders.

[ Sebastian ] wrote:

Karmine wrote:

ShinRun wrote:

Seems like the new amendment is receiving massive backlash so I have a different proposal.

Instead of making denizenship harder to require, parliament change the only requirement needed to obtain denizenship to be active for 8 months. This might seem similar to the old one we had but the difference is you literally need to make 0 contribution to be included. Denizen becomes a symbol of "hey I was here for 8+ months" and this would also increase the amount of people in a generation.

On the other hand, I can create a different entity similar to the hall of fame which is only dedicated to denizen who actually contributed massive deeds to OT. If someone wish to be inducted into the hall of fame, they must submit a list of achievement they contributed to the community. The requirement will naturally be much harsher, and instead of having only parliament decide, it will be left to a poll where any denizen can vote. Also, unlike most hall of fame, you don't need to be inactive to get inducted into it but you must be active for a much longer period of time compared to denizenship.

Changes will still be made to this but if this is much more preferred, I'll talk to parliament and the president about it.

Why not make the second part what's required for denizenship (without making it too hard) instead of just giving denizenship to basically everyone?

Say denizenship requires actually doing something that will get you recognized and appreciated by denizens, and let people apply with a list of what they consider good contributions they made. Denizens would then vote whether they think these contributions are actually good or not.
That would let us see what everyone considers a good contribution and weed out those who apply without doing anything. People who don't want to be denizen would simply not apply.
It would help keep denizens more or less coherent in what they think OT should be like and avoid big conflicts and disagreements like we have here.
Meta would still shift with time thanks to old denizens leaving and new ones always being at least slightly different from their elders.

This is by far the best solution I heard. I know that you plan on not having people wait 8 months to apply, but will there be a shorter wait time like 2 months?

eblf2013 wrote:

ShinRun wrote:

Seems like the new amendment is receiving massive backlash so I have a different proposal.

Instead of making denizenship harder to require, parliament change the only requirement needed to obtain denizenship to be active for 8 months. This might seem similar to the old one we had but the difference is you literally need to make 0 contribution to be included. Denizen becomes a symbol of "hey I was here for 8+ months" and this would also increase the amount of people in a generation.

On the other hand, I can create a different entity similar to the hall of fame which is only dedicated to denizen who actually contributed massive deeds to OT. If someone wish to be inducted into the hall of fame, they must submit a list of achievement they contributed to the community. The requirement will naturally be much harsher, and instead of having only parliament decide, it will be left to a poll where any denizen can vote. Also, unlike most hall of fame, you don't need to be inactive to get inducted into it but you must be active for a much longer period of time compared to denizenship.

Changes will still be made to this but if this is much more preferred, I'll talk to parliament and the president about it.

I think that going back to the certain number of posts whithin a certain amount of time, but instead to a fixed number, there must be like an average of how much a person has posted in that time and thus has been known by the community. As for the current requirements, I think it's now absurdly difficult and if I entered OT at this time I wouldn't have even been bothered being active.

ShinRun wrote:

Shortening the wait time to become denizen is not a smart idea

ShinRun wrote:

Shortening the wait time to become denizen is not a smart idea

igorsprite wrote:

patatitta will lead the resistance and create a new society called "outsiders" to compete with the denizens, and all this discussion will start the great OT war o:

abraker wrote:

NOTICE

For the first time in OT history the OT! Parliament has passed a vote to revoke denizenship. It is well deserved and serves as a warning against behavior many find inappropriate for this subforum and its health. I am not going to announce who it is since they deserve no spotlight, but I'm sure most of you can figure it out.

abraker wrote:

NOTICE

For the first time in OT history the OT! Parliament has passed a vote to revoke denizenship. It is well deserved and serves as a warning against behavior many find inappropriate for this subforum and its health. I am not going to announce who it is since they deserve no spotlight, but I'm sure most of you can figure it out.

Zelzatter Zero wrote:

to think the only notable active 7th gen denizen is Corne, Cleveland and Wither.

time flies.

Zelzatter Zero wrote:

to think the only notable active 7th gen denizen is Corne, Cleveland and Wither.

time flies.

Zelzatter Zero wrote:

to think the only notable active 7th gen denizen is Corne, Cleveland and Wither.

time flies.

Patatitta wrote:

I dont like this direction



/out

Rigbyuis wrote:

Patatitta wrote:

I dont like this direction



/out

out of what?

abraker wrote:

NOTICE

For the first time in OT history the OT! Parliament has passed a vote to revoke denizenship. It is well deserved and serves as a warning against behavior many find inappropriate for this subforum and its health. I am not going to announce who it is since they deserve no spotlight, but I'm sure most of you can figure it out.

ShinRun wrote:

I believe that being active on OT for 8 months is already enough of a contribution and denizen should and not based off total contribution.
Like what Pataitta said, we really gotta ask what being a denizen mean.

I think a denizen should be more of a badge of dedication for people that have stayed on the forum for a certain period of time like 8 months but also while being semi active. This is the least bias way to give denizenship out to people.

eblf2013 wrote:

abraker wrote:

NOTICE

For the first time in OT history the OT! Parliament has passed a vote to revoke denizenship. It is well deserved and serves as a warning against behavior many find inappropriate for this subforum and its health. I am not going to announce who it is since they deserve no spotlight, but I'm sure most of you can figure it out.

At least three should be quitted.

abraker wrote:

NOTICE

For the first time in OT history the OT! Parliament has passed a vote to revoke denizenship. It is well deserved and serves as a warning against behavior many find inappropriate for this subforum and its health. I am not going to announce who it is since they deserve no spotlight, but I'm sure most of you can figure it out.

ShinRun wrote:

I believe that being active on OT for 8 months is already enough of a contribution and denizen should and not based off total contribution.
Like what Pataitta said, we really gotta ask what being a denizen mean.

I think a denizen should be more of a badge of dedication for people that have stayed on the forum for a certain period of time like 8 months but also while being semi active. This is the least bias way to give denizenship out to people.

Corne2Plum3 wrote:

eblf2013 wrote:

abraker wrote:

NOTICE

For the first time in OT history the OT! Parliament has passed a vote to revoke denizenship. It is well deserved and serves as a warning against behavior many find inappropriate for this subforum and its health. I am not going to announce who it is since they deserve no spotlight, but I'm sure most of you can figure it out.

At least three should be quitted.

who?

eblf2013 wrote:

Corne2Plum3 wrote:

eblf2013 wrote:

abraker wrote:

NOTICE

For the first time in OT history the OT! Parliament has passed a vote to revoke denizenship. It is well deserved and serves as a warning against behavior many find inappropriate for this subforum and its health. I am not going to announce who it is since they deserve no spotlight, but I'm sure most of you can figure it out.

At least three should be quitted.

who?

Flanster, Ashton and most likely ppl that earned denizenship then went poof.

Polyspora wrote:

thats not cool, whatever.

I know Igor is not the best human being in the world and abraker is done with his shit, but I still think a restriction is more reasonable than taking away things he contributed to this community and his history here.

why cant he have the same fate as IppE?

1. Some mildly hee-hee-inducing necros from a couple years ago
2. Countless posts where he admits to being a (post immediately gets nuked, but both you and I know what word that goes here)

ghoulybits wrote:

Polyspora wrote:

thats not cool, whatever.

I know Igor is not the best human being in the world and abraker is done with his shit, but I still think a restriction is more reasonable than taking away things he contributed to this community and his history here.

why cant he have the same fate as IppE?

I would personally love for igorsprite's account to be restricted, but that is not something in my power.

Quite frankly, igorsprite's contributions to OT are as follows

1. Some mildly hee-hee-inducing necros from a couple years ago
2. Countless posts where he admits to being a (post immediately gets nuked, but both you and I know what word that goes here)

Denizenship has to do with contributions, yes, but more specifically positive contributions. Do we want to celebrate someone who physically can't stop posting about (sentence redacted but you also get the picture)? It is of my opinion, and the opinion of the vast majority of the OT!Government that any positive contributions that igorsprite has made on this subforum have been heavily outweighed by the sheer amount of times he has been given (quite frankly, undeserved) second chances and immediately disregarded them. He has been given numerous opportunities, and he has chosen every single time to not take them.

ShinRun wrote:

Ashton should also be removed

WitherMite wrote:

ShinRun wrote:

Ashton should also be removed

idk, ashton wasnt nearly as bad as igorsprite (just annoying vs being open about that), and from what I remember did have some actual good contributions.

ShinRun wrote:

WitherMite wrote:

ShinRun wrote:

Ashton should also be removed

idk, ashton wasnt nearly as bad as igorsprite (just annoying vs being open about that), and from what I remember did have some actual good contributions.

Well he opening doxxed ColdTooth tho

ShinRun wrote:

WitherMite wrote:

ShinRun wrote:

Ashton should also be removed

idk, ashton wasnt nearly as bad as igorsprite (just annoying vs being open about that), and from what I remember did have some actual good contributions.

Well he opening doxxed ColdTooth tho

ShinRun wrote:

WitherMite wrote:

ShinRun wrote:

Ashton should also be removed

idk, ashton wasnt nearly as bad as igorsprite (just annoying vs being open about that), and from what I remember did have some actual good contributions.

Well he opening doxxed ColdTooth tho

[ Sebastian ] wrote:

Wait, so is igor a Cosmodore?

Scyla wrote:

Good or bad, I don't really like removing pieces of history. OT about to become North Korea

JustABeginner wrote:

Yikes.

Anyways, I don't get obsessed with being denizen as much as I used to last time. But losing a title because of a serious bad behaviour is considered to be a wake up call to help improvise yourself.

idk

---

I miss my 7th Gen friends.

z0z wrote:

JustABeginner wrote:

Yikes.

Anyways, I don't get obsessed with being denizen as much as I used to last time. But losing a title because of a serious bad behaviour is considered to be a wake up call to help improvise yourself.

idk

---

I miss my 7th Gen friends.

not many of us are here but we're here

Patatitta wrote:

...problems start to surge if other people start revoking or get revoked due to not meeting the current criteria or being unhappy with the system, and we're basically 1 step away from that scenario

WitherMite wrote:

going from revoking denizen from someone openly being into illegal shit, bringing that into their threads/posts and making it their identity, even after being exiled to retroactively revoking denizenship or kicking out people who speak out is quite a bit more than "one step away"

Its not our fault osu doesnt see what igor's been doing as a bannable offense.