Topic: [Suggestion] Dedicated sub-forum for Legendaries (Read 1611 times)

Quote from: GermanGiant on April 22, 2016, 12:32:01 PM

-snip-
I think, this will be different because lots of Legendaries are still active as opposed to donators.

What would be legendary only topics though?

Anything from block size controversy to Lightning Network implementation, but with less noise and more rationality. Right now, bitcoinTalk.org, forum.bitcoin.com, /r/bitcoin, /r/btc all are full of chaotic newbies. A Legendary, who has spent a significant amount of his online life in bitcoin related discussions, will most likely be far less chaotic than a random newbie.

I dont think the rank matters in this regard. There are less legendary users, but not everyone with a high rank knows what they are talking about.

Quote from: DaddyMonsi on April 25, 2016, 10:39:57 PM

-snip-
Other forums have this section or sub forum for Moderators and Admins where they can discuss what action needs to be taken and what are the thoughts of other Moderators and Admins and it's also a good section to police its own ranks. However, those section in other forum can only be visible to Moderators and Admins only to protect the them from members with issue and to avoid further drama.

This forum has a mod only section as well -> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=3.0

The suggestion is to open a subboard for the highest user rank and I question that it would do anything for anyone.

DaddyMonsi

legendary

Activity: 1344

Merit: 1006

Quote from: GermanGiant on April 22, 2016, 12:32:01 PM

There is already the donators sub-forum which is essentially dead and I can't see a Legendaries sub-forum going any different. What might be interesting is a sub-forum for default trust. There are often issues which require discussion about inclusion or exclusion and at the moment the only way to communicate is to PM 10 people and spam everyone's inboxes when anyone replies. A sub-forum may organise this differently.

I think thats a good idea. It should be read only to everyone though to keep things transparent.

-snip-
I think, this will be different because lots of Legendaries are still active as opposed to donators.

What would be legendary only topics though?

Other forums have this section or sub forum for Moderators and Admins where they can discuss what action needs to be taken and what are the thoughts of other Moderators and Admins and it's also a good section to police its own ranks. However, those section in other forum can only be visible to Moderators and Admins only to protect the them from members with issue and to avoid further drama.

notlist3d

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1000

Quote from: notaek on April 25, 2016, 04:34:56 PM

I wonder why OP is so concerned about this though! You have a long way to go before entering Legendary BTW.

Activity: 574 Roll Eyes

Quote from: GermanGiant on April 25, 2016, 11:40:56 AM

Quote from: GermanGiant on April 22, 2016, 12:32:01 PM

-snip-
I think, this will be different because lots of Legendaries are still active as opposed to donators.

What would be legendary only topics though?

Anything from block size controversy to Lightning Network implementation, but with less noise and more rationality. Right now, bitcoinTalk.org, forum.bitcoin.com, /r/bitcoin, /r/btc all are full of chaotic newbies. A Legendary, who has spent a significant amount of his online life in bitcoin related discussions, will most likely be far less chaotic than a random newbie.

Best solution would be to create a thread with self moderation.
It'll eventually keep newbies away.

Only time I use self moderation is in my reviews. As everytime some try to use it as a hardware sales (it's mean for support), or they just like to spam it. I personally don't care newbie or legendary as long as they bring good information/posts. So I don't see a huge reason for trying to be just legendary.

It would create like a "club" that really would do nothing. I cant think of any topic I have I just want to limit to legendary accounts. Normally I enjoy talking to all levels, and all parts of the world. And I enjoy helping and talking to new people... so that could be why I don't see reason to have legendary board.

notaek

legendary

Activity: 1268

Merit: 1009

I wonder why OP is so concerned about this though! You have a long way to go before entering Legendary BTW.

Activity: 574 Roll Eyes

Quote from: GermanGiant on April 25, 2016, 11:40:56 AM

Quote from: GermanGiant on April 22, 2016, 12:32:01 PM

-snip-
I think, this will be different because lots of Legendaries are still active as opposed to donators.

What would be legendary only topics though?

Anything from block size controversy to Lightning Network implementation, but with less noise and more rationality. Right now, bitcoinTalk.org, forum.bitcoin.com, /r/bitcoin, /r/btc all are full of chaotic newbies. A Legendary, who has spent a significant amount of his online life in bitcoin related discussions, will most likely be far less chaotic than a random newbie.

Best solution would be to create a thread with self moderation.
It'll eventually keep newbies away.

suchmoon

legendary

Activity: 3654

Merit: 8909

https://bpip.org

Quote from: Chris! on April 25, 2016, 11:59:22 AM

Maybe rather than based on ranking there could be a subforum where you could 'vote in' only certain people that you would like to be part of the sub-community.

Alice, Bob and Hercules all decide to open a group thread/subforum.

Bill wants in. Alice an Hercules both accept his request and he's now part of the group. You always need at least 50% of the current group to agree (or have a few set people that can vote, say the 3 originals) and with enough votes they can also get kicked out.

This would be a good way to converse with like-minded people without the worry of random signature spammers coming in with there terrible 'lol. Ya. Mining is good and such. I can has a bitcoin in a 2 yearses with the little aunt miner version 200.0.1.'

You can do that with a self-moderated thread to some extent. Not sure if adding more complication (voting) on top of it would make it any better. There is no lack of confirmation bias already in the forum.

dogie

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1185

dogiecoin.com

Voting of any kind does not work on here when there are people running multiple accounts.

Chris!

legendary

Activity: 1382

Merit: 1122

Maybe rather than based on ranking there could be a subforum where you could 'vote in' only certain people that you would like to be part of the sub-community.

Alice, Bob and Hercules all decide to open a group thread/subforum.

Bill wants in. Alice an Hercules both accept his request and he's now part of the group. You always need at least 50% of the current group to agree (or have a few set people that can vote, say the 3 originals) and with enough votes they can also get kicked out.

This would be a good way to converse with like-minded people without the worry of random signature spammers coming in with there terrible 'lol. Ya. Mining is good and such. I can has a bitcoin in a 2 yearses with the little aunt miner version 200.0.1.'

GermanGiant

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 501

Quote from: GermanGiant on April 22, 2016, 12:32:01 PM

-snip-
I think, this will be different because lots of Legendaries are still active as opposed to donators.

What would be legendary only topics though?

Anything from block size controversy to Lightning Network implementation, but with less noise and more rationality. Right now, bitcoinTalk.org, forum.bitcoin.com, /r/bitcoin, /r/btc all are full of chaotic newbies. A Legendary, who has spent a significant amount of his online life in bitcoin related discussions, will most likely be far less chaotic than a random newbie.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: target on April 23, 2016, 03:20:33 AM

They do have special advantage in their signature as far as i know. Dividing us from the Legendary won't help the community grow.

Giving them a separate sub-forum is not the same as 'dividing' them from the other members.

Quote from: target on April 23, 2016, 03:20:33 AM

Lets say the admin allows it, what do they have to talk about besides the ones in the open forum?

There might be a higher chance for actual discussions without the spam seen from lower ranked members.

Quote from: target on April 23, 2016, 03:20:33 AM

would they have the advantage to which they'd be notify during the start of ICO?

It's not like people don't do this already via PM and other means of 'private' communication, right? Roll Eyes

target

legendary

Activity: 2282

Merit: 1041

They do have special advantage in their signature as far as i know. Dividing us from the Legendary won't help the community grow. Lets say the admin allows it, what do they have to talk about besides the ones in the open forum? would they have the advantage to which they'd be notify during the start of ICO?

hilariousandco

global moderator

Activity: 3990

Merit: 2717

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: GermanGiant on April 22, 2016, 12:32:01 PM

Quote from: otrkid70 on April 22, 2016, 10:56:41 AM

What benefits does this provide to anyone?

Currently, the forum is full of low quality posts. The same question is being answered by 10 or more people for signature payment. These things wont probably happen in Legendary forum. People will get to see more knowledgeable, in-depth conversation and will learn a thing or two about bitcoin.

But over time all those accounts will all become Legendary too. I have thought about a board where there's no signature shown or posts made in there don't apply towards post count. Maybe people could be whitelisted into it posting in it. Think it would probably be easier to just restrict signatures to higher ranks like Hero or Legendary or just get rid of them all together though to be honest. Something really needs to be done. Said it before but it wont be long before the only people posting here are those from the Philippines/Indonesia etc on their ten alt accounts regurgitating the same old shit over and over again.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: HostFat on April 22, 2016, 09:11:49 PM

If someone will create a special sub-forum for Legendaries, please disable signatures and avatars on it, to me it even better.

I disagree. Most of the signature spam comes from members with lower ranks. It is quite rare to see a legendary member with really useless posts.

Quote from: Blazed on April 22, 2016, 05:32:14 PM

Having a DT1 sub would be pretty useless as there are not very many of us. I suppose maybe a DT2 sub might be somewhat useful to discuss ratings, but then again not sure it would get used much.

I'm certain that it would not have much activity. I also disagree with this because it could feel like DT members are having "backroom deals" for the remaining members (since they technically "control" trust ratings).

botany

legendary

Activity: 1582

Merit: 1064

The signature restrictions for different members can be changed to give benefits to legendary members.
Right now hero and legendary are almost at par.

HostFat

staff

Activity: 4270

Merit: 1209

I support freedom of choice

If someone will create a special sub-forum for Legendaries, please disable signatures and avatars on it, to me it even better.

dogie

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1185

dogiecoin.com

Quote from: Quickseller on April 22, 2016, 05:26:19 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on April 22, 2016, 05:26:19 PM

There is already the donators sub-forum which is essentially dead and I can't see a Legendaries sub-forum going any different. What might be interesting is a sub-forum for default trust. There are often issues which require discussion about inclusion or exclusion and at the moment the only way to communicate is to PM 10 people and spam everyone's inboxes when anyone replies. A sub-forum may organise this differently.

I think thats a good idea. It should be read only to everyone though to keep things transparent.

There are pros and cons for it being public. For example discussing CiTM in the public before he was overthrown got you disavowed from DT and negative trusted. People can be unwilling to speak out at their own risk and also propagates people using smurfs.

Well CITM (and those in his trust list) would have been able to see threads about CITM, so having a private DT sub would not have changed this.

That's true, maybe he wouldn't have tried to go out all guns blazing if he hadn't been called out publicly (several times).

Vod

legendary

Activity: 3668

Merit: 3010

Licking my boob since 1970

Except that I have never left negative trust because someone was speaking out against me.

Except in my case of course. Wink

The negative feedback you left for me is such grasping at straws, it's obvious it's for speaking out against you.

I'm sure there are a dozen others who would post the same, if anyone cared what you thought anymore.

suchmoon

legendary

Activity: 3654

Merit: 8909

https://bpip.org

Quote from: Quickseller on April 22, 2016, 05:26:19 PM

Quote from: suchmoon on April 22, 2016, 04:00:38 PM

I think it would be bizarre to have a subforum dedicated for one user's (two if you include QS but he's not in DT) scheming.

Except that I have never left negative trust because someone was speaking out against me.

I was referring to your attempts to remove people from DT and to re-add yourself.

Blazed

legendary

Activity: 2128

Merit: 1119

Having a DT1 sub would be pretty useless as there are not very many of us. I suppose maybe a DT2 sub might be somewhat useful to discuss ratings, but then again not sure it would get used much.

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2996

Merit: 2374

Quote from: suchmoon on April 22, 2016, 04:00:38 PM

There is already the donators sub-forum which is essentially dead and I can't see a Legendaries sub-forum going any different. What might be interesting is a sub-forum for default trust. There are often issues which require discussion about inclusion or exclusion and at the moment the only way to communicate is to PM 10 people and spam everyone's inboxes when anyone replies. A sub-forum may organise this differently.

I think thats a good idea. It should be read only to everyone though to keep things transparent.

There are pros and cons for it being public. For example discussing CiTM in the public before he was overthrown got you disavowed from DT and negative trusted. People can be unwilling to speak out at their own risk and also propagates people using smurfs.

Well CITM (and those in his trust list) would have been able to see threads about CITM, so having a private DT sub would not have changed this.

I think it would be bizarre to have a subforum dedicated for one user's (two if you include QS but he's not in DT) scheming.

Except that I have never left negative trust because someone was speaking out against me.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

This was already suggested at least once. The issue here is what would be discussed in the sub (everything? Which would be a horrible mess) and potential inactivity. There as a legendary-only self moderated thread which was used for testing purposes in the German section (basically, a bot was used which deleted any posts from non-legendary members). There was inadequate activity to justify a single thread (however, it could be due to lack of legendary members that speak German). Now, if you are really interested in this idea OP, then you could open a self moderated thread in the Off-topic section just for legendary members and see how it goes.

suchmoon

legendary

Activity: 3654

Merit: 8909

https://bpip.org

There is already the donators sub-forum which is essentially dead and I can't see a Legendaries sub-forum going any different. What might be interesting is a sub-forum for default trust. There are often issues which require discussion about inclusion or exclusion and at the moment the only way to communicate is to PM 10 people and spam everyone's inboxes when anyone replies. A sub-forum may organise this differently.

I think thats a good idea. It should be read only to everyone though to keep things transparent.

There are pros and cons for it being public. For example discussing CiTM in the public before he was overthrown got you disavowed from DT and negative trusted. People can be unwilling to speak out at their own risk and also propagates people using smurfs.

Why wouldn't that same thing happen in a DT-only subforum? You mean a subforum for DT1 and DT2 members, right?

I think it would be bizarre to have a subforum dedicated for one user's (two if you include QS but he's not in DT) scheming.

notlist3d

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1000

There is already the donators sub-forum which is essentially dead and I can't see a Legendaries sub-forum going any different. What might be interesting is a sub-forum for default trust. There are often issues which require discussion about inclusion or exclusion and at the moment the only way to communicate is to PM 10 people and spam everyone's inboxes when anyone replies. A sub-forum may organise this differently.

I think thats a good idea. It should be read only to everyone though to keep things transparent.

There are pros and cons for it being public. For example discussing CiTM in the public before he was overthrown got you disavowed from DT and negative trusted. People can be unwilling to speak out at their own risk and also propagates people using smurfs.

Without a common topic just being leggendary is kinda wide open. Some posts might be posted there that would help others... so you might be hurting other forums by limiting who can post/see.

I see at end of day it turning into a offtopic area. I don't think we really need it in any way. Sure would be neat to have a private forum... but long term I'm just not sure it would be good for the forum. Or if it will even be active.

dogie

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1185

dogiecoin.com

There is already the donators sub-forum which is essentially dead and I can't see a Legendaries sub-forum going any different. What might be interesting is a sub-forum for default trust. There are often issues which require discussion about inclusion or exclusion and at the moment the only way to communicate is to PM 10 people and spam everyone's inboxes when anyone replies. A sub-forum may organise this differently.

I think thats a good idea. It should be read only to everyone though to keep things transparent.

There are pros and cons for it being public. For example discussing CiTM in the public before he was overthrown got you disavowed from DT and negative trusted. People can be unwilling to speak out at their own risk and also propagates people using smurfs.

shorena

copper member

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1528

No I dont escrow anymore.

Quote from: GermanGiant on April 22, 2016, 12:32:01 PM

There is already the donators sub-forum which is essentially dead and I can't see a Legendaries sub-forum going any different. What might be interesting is a sub-forum for default trust. There are often issues which require discussion about inclusion or exclusion and at the moment the only way to communicate is to PM 10 people and spam everyone's inboxes when anyone replies. A sub-forum may organise this differently.

I think thats a good idea. It should be read only to everyone though to keep things transparent.

-snip-
I think, this will be different because lots of Legendaries are still active as opposed to donators.

What would be legendary only topics though?

GermanGiant

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 501

Quote from: otrkid70 on April 22, 2016, 10:56:41 AM

What benefits does this provide to anyone?

Currently, the forum is full of low quality posts. The same question is being answered by 10 or more people for signature payment. These things wont probably happen in Legendary forum. People will get to see more knowledgeable, in-depth conversation and will learn a thing or two about bitcoin.