Apolyton Hall of Fame: August 2002

[Locutus]

Wow, 4 posts from 4 different CtPers in succession, in a non-CtP forum (only Martin is still missing ). This means the end of the world must be very close now...

I really think the SMAC, Alt Civ and Civ2 sections should be more involved as well, but considering you only posted in OT last time around it's a comprise I shall have to live with...

[Solver]

LOL, I said, let's teach them .

Yeah, shamefully, I'm a sinner and do have an occasional OTF post .

[Locutus]

I agree, time for revenge - Revenge of the Nerds V

Ah, but I sinned far worse than that, I even made it into the Civ3 news on more than one occasion (AND I post in OT from time to time)...

[Solver]

That's not a sin, I post in Civ 3 section all the time. Your sin is not playing CtP1-MP .

[DeepO]

Originally posted by DarkCloud
It was true in the Civ III section... actually it was more like 1% or less

Bah, allow this relative Civ3 n00bie to comment on this: in OT it is normal you have to post within the hour, or the topic of the thread has changed so much you can't follow anymore. In Civ3, things are a lot slower. So if you give us 1 day to vote, surely you can't expect all the regulars to have even seen your thread.

Due to some coincidence, I got in the list, together with Aeson, Catt, Thesues and alexman, we were (IIRC) the only civ3 people. But, I dare to say that the Civ3 contributions of July-August 2002 were biggest among our 5, Of course, if you start by argueing that you should be an 'old' poster to know the people who made this site big in the first place, and after 2 years they are still those that need to be voted on, I have little to say. Sure, there are a lot of posters that were important, but if they aren't contributing anymore, why still vote on them? I posted very little the past month, because Candle'Bre is taking up all of my time, I don't expect anyone to vote for me in the September vote. People who did contribute a lot but are gone now should be remembered, sure. But if they're not active now, there is little reason to vote on them either. Let them be remembered by the threads that get reread, the mods they made, the scenarios they're still famous for, but if you're not in the HoF when you really did something: too bad.

Just my little opinion on things (and a little campaigning perhaps ),
DeepO

[Solver]

Bah, allow this relative Civ3 n00bie to comment on this: in OT it is normal you have to post within the hour, or the topic of the thread has changed so much you can't follow anymore. In Civ3, things are a lot slower. So if you give us 1 day to vote, surely you can't expect all the regulars to have even seen your thread.

Another thing I dislike about OT, to keep current there, I got to stay there all the time .

[DarkCloud]

Sure, there are a lot of posters that were important, but if they aren't contributing anymore, why still vote on them? I posted very little the past month, because Candle'Bre is taking up all of my time, I don't expect anyone to vote for me in the September vote. People who did contribute a lot but are gone now should be remembered, sure. But if they're not active now, there is little reason to vote on them either. Let them be remembered by the threads that get reread, the mods they made, the scenarios they're still famous for, but if you're not in the HoF when you really did something: too bad.

But that's the whole Idea of the HoF, to honor those who came before (and some who are still here)
I do agree that those who left should have a harder time entering the hall of fame since they abandoned apolyton, but they should still be honored for all the good work they did in the past.

-
Well, thanks Ming and Jay Bee, but I suppose the veteran's comittee is a bust.
Thank you for volunteering, but there is far too little interest on the subject.

Thanks again

[Solver]

OK then, an official announcement: I WON'T leave Apolyton until I get in the HoF. Gives me time till 2015 or so...

[DeepO]

DarkCloud, I think we more or less agree. What I meant to say is that if you haven't entered the HoF around the time you did your stuff, it means you'll have to be remembered otherwise. Seeing it like that, I see no reason to vote on people because they don't receive proper recognition to what they did 2 years ago, only if they remained active a very long time, or are active now (and in some way exceptional).

The strange thing is that giving people bonusses depending on age only makes this effect worse... even if I agree that those who are longer here can have a better understanding of what someone has done up to now.

DeepO

[Ming]

Originally posted by DeepO
The strange thing is that giving people bonusses depending on age only makes this effect worse... even if I agree that those who are longer here can have a better understanding of what someone has done up to now.

But that's the whole point. People who have been around longer have experienced first hand the history of this site and are "usually" in a better position to judge what they consider important.

I think the weighted vote system based on length of membership is one of the smartest things that DC brought to HOF voting.

And just because a person is no longer active for whatever reason, their past contributions are what helped make this the kind of community that it is. To ignore their contributions because they no longer post is simply ignorant.

[DeepO]

Originally posted by Ming
And just because a person is no longer active for whatever reason, their past contributions are what helped make this the kind of community that it is. To ignore their contributions because they no longer post is simply ignorant.

Who's ignoring their contributions? That's not what I said, I only feel that there is no need to start campaigning for someone that isn't active anymore, just because he is being slowly forgotten. If he didn't make the HoF back when he was important, or if his contributions aren't reread anymore, too bad. Give way to people that are contributing now...

Re: the weighted votes: I agree, to a certain extend. Even if the age seems a little arbitrary (there are more people who just register and then come by every month or so, who have a more important vote then people who have been very active from the day they registered). But, I'm not sure how the carrying over of votes over different months will work. If each month the final result of last month is added, you'll get a similar effect, and having weights on the votes is a bit too much IMHO. If, only the new votes are also added to the next month (so not what carries over from 2 months ago and before), this doesn't work... and you'll need voting.

Maybe it would be an idea if there was a committee that picked 30 names on which people could vote, it may be influenced by their own personal opinions, but you could get a mix of old folks, and n00bies too. Plus, you can have a limited number of people from each forum, a few from OT, and a few from Civ, CtP, etc. But then the whole discussion becomes who is veteran enough to make the first selection

DeepO

[Ming]

Originally posted by DeepO
If he didn't make the HoF back when he was important, or if his contributions aren't reread anymore, too bad. Give way to people that are contributing now...

DC didn't start the HoF threads until AFTER some of the old timers and great contributers had already left.
This doesn't make their contributions to the site any less important than those that were around when he started the HoF

[rah]

Originally posted by Ming


But that's the whole point. People who have been around longer have experienced first hand the history of this site and are "usually" in a better position to judge what they consider important.

I think the weighted vote system based on length of membership is one of the smartest things that DC brought to HOF voting.

And just because a person is no longer active for whatever reason, their past contributions are what helped make this the kind of community that it is. To ignore their contributions because they no longer post is simply ignorant.

totally agree with the first two paragraphs.

But the last paragraph only partially. As long as it's a popularity contest voted on by those that are still here, it will remain tougher for those that have left to be voted in. Unless the contributions were really great, (translate to memorable), they won't get in. I have no problem with that.

And for all you whinning about certain people being worthy and not being in,........Don't just whine, go out and campaign for them. (like you're doing here )
Go back to your specialty areas and remind the people to vote. If there aren't enough to swing the vote, because not enough people that remember are left, maybe the person doesn't belong there.

Rich

[DeepO]

Originally posted by Ming
DC didn't start the HoF threads until AFTER some of the old timers and great contributers had already left.
This doesn't make their contributions to the site any less important than those that were around when he started the HoF

Okay, I can understand that... so basically we're still catching up. Bah, maybe another mechanism to catch up would be better, which also gives a chance to the current contributors.

But as Rah said, it is a popularity contest in many ways... consider it good or bad, but it will still break down to popularity, nothing more.

DeepO

[Ming]

Originally posted by DeepO
Bah, maybe another mechanism to catch up would be better, which also gives a chance to the current contributors.

But as Rah said, it is a popularity contest in many ways... consider it good or bad, but it will still break down to popularity, nothing more.

In ALL ways it's a popularity contest And I've stated that many times before.

As far as current contributers... they have the same chances as anybody else... be around a while, get known, and THEN win a popularity contest... What more should they need then that