HOF?

[FactionHeir]

Well, yes and no.
Its up to everyone to decide for themselves whether someone merits the nomination/vote.
You certainly can bring up examples of someone's contributions to highlight it for others, but in the end, its up to you to decide who you support in a given category, not just the contribution total of each member/nominee.

[Bijo]

Damn, you sure are fast with your reply.

Well, what you are saying -- if it is true -- does not appear fair or just. It seems as if -- and you can correct this statement if wrong -- that when people make contributions it hardly matters as ultimately it's about what people prefer or support REGARDLESS of what has been contributed?

Speaking of having the decision whether someone merits a vote or nomination (as I read from your reply)... it sounds like this system -- if existent as such -- could easily invite rigging, dirty politics, and so on.

[FactionHeir]

Very true. It is in a way a popularity contest, but you would like to think/hope that people will vote according to merit rather than popularity.

And yes, you can go campaigning like in Victonia for votes

[Bijo]

Then if it is true as you say it is, why is this system existing? If we would hope people would vote or nominate fairly, is it enough? It would leave too much possibility for error, dirtiness, etc. To totally exclude this possibility and to operate using justice would be the just thing to do.

And no, I ain't joining that Victonia thread :P It's not like I'm looking for popularity or votes... I just want justice, a thing that is to exist regardless of other things.

[Warmaster Horus]

How would you define a "good" contribution, exactly? For some people, just pointing out how to become a member to junior members is a good contribution, for others it can just be spam. For some, writing a long guide on the use of Horse-Archers is a good contribution, whilst for others it can be a waste of time. It would be difficult to be just.

If I can put it like this, this system lets people decide what a good contribution is for themselves. It's called Democracy, I believe.

[Csargo]

Then if it is true as you say it is, why is this system existing? If we would hope people would vote or nominate fairly, is it enough? It would leave too much possibility for error, dirtiness, etc. To totally exclude this possibility and to operate using justice would be the just thing to do.

And no, I ain't joining that Victonia thread :P It's not like I'm looking for popularity or votes... I just want justice, a thing that is to exist regardless of other things.

Why do you care so much? It's an internet forum it doesn't seem like it's that big of a deal.

[Motep]

Why do you care so much? It's an internet forum it doesn't seem like it's that big of a deal.

You steal my thoughts...

But, seriously, It isn't a big deal. If you ask me, they are just like the dinky awards you may have gotten in elementary school. Yeah, they're nice, but they aren't good for anything, and they eventually wind up at the bottom of a drawer somewhere, forgotten. But, on the other hand, it is a fun thing to vote in, you know? Good for a stroll down memory lane, to see who all gave you the best laugh and such like that.

[Motep]

sorry for the double post here, but it saves time. Anyway, i am here to nag about getting a chapter house slot in the HoF. We need an award too! Maybe one for best interactive...

(or maybe one for best WWI themed multiplayer interactive for the latter half of 07, eh? )

[Ludens]

Then if it is true as you say it is, why is this system existing? If we would hope people would vote or nominate fairly, is it enough? It would leave too much possibility for error, dirtiness, etc. To totally exclude this possibility and to operate using justice would be the just thing to do.

I am flattered that you think the forum capable of achieving such a thing were countless philosophers, idealists, prophets and revolutionaries have failed. Unfortunately, we are mere mortals and are therefore incapable of reaching perfect justice. The HOF was created in order to have some form of public recognition, however flawed and subjective it may be.

[Bijo]

I am flattered that you think the forum capable of achieving such a thing were countless philosophers, idealists, prophets and revolutionaries have failed. Unfortunately, we are mere mortals and are therefore incapable of reaching perfect justice. The HOF was created in order to have some form of public recognition, however flawed and subjective it may be.

Ahhh! I finally understand that first phrase: 'were' misses an 'h' I thought "What the hell....?" when I read it.

Yes, I see what you mean. Still it is usually good when it 's one or the other, yes or no, 1 and 0, on and off. The positive value would be objectivity, justice, and so on, while the negative value would be nothing at all... What we have now, what it looks like, is something somewhere vaguely in the middle: a bad system that "tries". This public recognition you spoke of that is achieved through flawedness: is that even worth it?

If you ask me: no. I say we either do or we don't: no trying to start with. If we do and fail, then afterwards we don't and can then justifiably say we tried.

Ah, forget it anyway.

[Cheetah]

Bijo, feel free to post your suggestions.

[Ludens]

Ahhh! I finally understand that first phrase: 'were' misses an 'h' I thought "What the hell....?" when I read it.

I guess that'll teach me not to rely on the spell checker .

What we have now, what it looks like, is something somewhere vaguely in the middle: a bad system that "tries". This public recognition you spoke of that is achieved through flawedness: is that even worth it?

If you ask me: no. I say we either do or we don't: no trying to start with. If we do and fail, then afterwards we don't and can then justifiably say we tried.

Since we do try I rather fail to see the problem. Off course, if you've got any suggestions to improve the objectivity of the system, I would like to hear them.