What separates a Member and a Veteran?

[Tattoo247]

WHY MY NAME GATTA BE ALL WHITE?

 

Just kidding, but I was wondering what dictates a veteran, as far as years/posts/contributions ect.

 

 

[PINNAZ]

I would love to see a "Annual / End of Year Awards". I know you had a detailed thread somewhere @ - Get on it! Perhaps to be held in January if there is not enough time in December?

Regarding the "Legends / Hall of Famers", I think that there should be a handful of people inducted, as there has not been anyone in over 2 years? And most of the people in that group are no longer active. (I know that it is for retired members? But I think that description should change.)

I'm just going to publicly announce who I think absolutely deserves to be inducted to the "Hall of Fame".

• The current "Veteren" usergroup of @Tac @ @MegaAfroMan

- All are ex staff members, have contributed hours of their time to CoDz & each have posts counts in the thousands. These 3 are all easily worthy of that Title.

• Outstanding long-time members & contributors to CoDz - @MixMasterNut @Shooter @

- These 3 gentlemen have spent countless hours on CoDz publishing some of the best Zombies Storyline research you will come across. They should each be recognised by Treyarch. These 3 guys are long time serving members & each have post counts in the thousands. Each deserving the title of "Legends of CoDz".

I hope that the staff & other members agree with me that these 6 highly acclaimed members of CoDz deserve to be inducted to the "Hall of Fame"

I would also like the usergroup of "Veterans" changed to perhaps active members that have been here for over 3 years? Rather than just retired staff members. The title & description doesn't really go together.

Sorry if this is off topic & if I shouldn't have posted this publicly. But that is what I think!

Cheers

[GRILL]

Ideally, we want those in the HoF to be active members.

Those are great suggestions @PINNAZ - it's just MMX & Shooter are seemingly "done" with CODZ. I don't think we should induct anyone who hasn't been active in a certain amount of months. Maybe like 6 months? I dunno, maybe that's too harsh considering the off season. Still - MMN, the vets, and even yourself have stuck around. HoF should be role models, and the #1 priority of being a role model here is being "CODZ Faithful".

Again, that's not to label the non-active candidates as "unfaithful" - it's just, if your HoF you've got to have the whole package (at this point)

[MixMasterNut]

When I look at the current list of Hall of Famers, it seems like having been Carbonfibah's friend around the WaW and GKNova6 days counts for way more than it should.  Most of them have less than 200 posts and haven't logged on in years.

 

- Mix

[Undead]

I would also like the usergroup of "Veterans" changed to perhaps active members that have been here for over 3 years? Rather than just retired staff members. The title & description doesn't really go together.

 

Since this has been brought up a few times now might as well give it some attention. I actually agree with PINNAZ on this. We used to have a usergroup back called "Veterans" dedicated to members that have been with CoDz since the very beginning. Perhaps there could be multiple ways to become a Veteran;

 

- Be a member of CoDz for 3-5ish years

- Retired CoDz staff member

 

Whichever comes first. 

 

Also, don't worry. I intend to get started on the year-end awards soon

[GRILL]

When I look at the current list of Hall of Famers, it seems like having been Carbonfibah's friend around the WaW and GKNova6 days counts for way more than it should.  Most of them have less than 200 posts and haven't logged on in years.

 

- Mix

 

@MixMasterNut yeah, I sort of got at that a little bit in my above post when I said that ideally new inductee's will be active members.  We as a staff didn't feel it was our place to remove anyone already "grandfathered" under the previous Legendary (currently HoF) listing.  I can say that I never knew many of them, but they were put there for a reason - and we are going to respect that.

 

Our two active Hall of Famer's are Phantom & Alpha, and I'd love to add some more.  We'll be having a staff meeting here pretty soon, and this subject will be prioritized for sure.

 

Actually also, @Covert Gunman would be a good person to have in this conversation.  Let's here what you think Covy, and also - if you could provide any context regarding the folks in the Hall of Fame usergroup (what they did for the site to become "legends") that would be awesome.

 

EDIT:

 

 

 

I would also like the usergroup of "Veterans" changed to perhaps active members that have been here for over 3 years? Rather than just retired staff members. The title & description doesn't really go together.

 

Since this has been brought up a few times now might as well give it some attention. I actually agree with PINNAZ on this. We used to have a usergroup back called "Veterans" dedicated to members that have been with CoDz since the very beginning. Perhaps there could be multiple ways to become a Veteran;

 

- Be a member of CoDz for 3-5ish years

- Retired CoDz staff member

 

Whichever comes first. 

 

Also, don't worry. I intend to get started on the year-end awards soon 

 

 

@ @PINNAZ I like it.  We need to nail down a singular value though, I think 4 years would be good - because currently we have medals for 1, 2 and 3 years on CODZ.  And what's better than a medal? Usertitle.  Usertitle for that 4th year.  I'm all for it.

[PINNAZ]

Thanks for the reply @GRILL

I don't believe that "Hall of Famers" should still be active members, as it is just that. You are inducted into the Hall of Fame because of your past contribution, not your current contribution.

And anyone in that usergroup I still consider a "Role Model". I know what each of them have contributed to CoDz & why they are in that usergroup. I have actually gone to each of those members profile & looked at their previous posts. Though their post count does not reflect their activity on the Original CoDz forums, I still know the reasons why they are there.

And as yourself & Mix stated previously, the current "HoF" members have minimal post contributions (to the Modern day forum & only a few are ever so active. But that is the point. Though I would not de-rank any of those people, they all have made CoDz what it is today.

I still think that the 6 members I named in my previous post are easily worthy of that title/usergroup. They are all Role Models. They all raised the bar & inspired me to try & make my posts/threads nearly as good as theirs. If it wasn't for their contributions to CoDz, I probably wouldn't have been as engaged in COD: Zombies & this forum as I still am now.

Edit - For what it's worth, I think @perfectlemonade should be included in this group of possible inductees.

Anywho, when it all comes out in the wash, I would like to see the Titles of "Veteran" & "Hall of Famers" (I still like the old title of "Legend" better), their description & category reviewed to reflect what the Title actually represents.

As you said GRILL, 4 years is a good value for Veteran as we have medals for 1, 2 & 3 years service, survive 4 & you get a new title & usergroup.

I actually agree with PINNAZ on this.

What, you don't normally agree with me? haha

Thanks for your input & discussion on this guys as I think this topic needs an overhaul.

Cheers

[Boom115]

 

Why not make a UOTY (User of the Year)? Nominations from the pool of winners from the past 12 months. Sounds legit to me, and something of a cool prize. Although you'll have to find a color for that... perhaps something along the lines of this? Or this? Or this? Or at least this. It would be your choice.

 

 

I think that just seems like overkill. This forum and its most frequent posters change like the tides. UOTM is plenty prestigious on it's own and I feel as though a month long snapshot is far more accurate than looking at an entire year. HoF is a totally different category all together.

[Covert Gunman]

 

When I look at the current list of Hall of Famers, it seems like having been Carbonfibah's friend around the WaW and GKNova6 days counts for way more than it should.  Most of them have less than 200 posts and haven't logged on in years.

 

- Mix

 

@MixMasterNut yeah, I sort of got at that a little bit in my above post when I said that ideally new inductee's will be active members.  We as a staff didn't feel it was our place to remove anyone already "grandfathered" under the previous Legendary (currently HoF) listing.  I can say that I never knew many of them, but they were put there for a reason - and we are going to respect that.

 

Our two active Hall of Famer's are Phantom & Alpha, and I'd love to add some more.  We'll be having a staff meeting here pretty soon, and this subject will be prioritized for sure.

 

Actually also, @Covert Gunman would be a good person to have in this conversation.  Let's here what you think Covy, and also - if you could provide any context regarding the folks in the Hall of Fame usergroup (what they did for the site to become "legends") that would be awesome.

 

EDIT:

 

 

 

I would also like the usergroup of "Veterans" changed to perhaps active members that have been here for over 3 years? Rather than just retired staff members. The title & description doesn't really go together.

 

Since this has been brought up a few times now might as well give it some attention. I actually agree with PINNAZ on this. We used to have a usergroup back called "Veterans" dedicated to members that have been with CoDz since the very beginning. Perhaps there could be multiple ways to become a Veteran;

 

- Be a member of CoDz for 3-5ish years

- Retired CoDz staff member

 

Whichever comes first. 

 

Also, don't worry. I intend to get started on the year-end awards soon 

 

 

@ @PINNAZ I like it.  We need to nail down a singular value though, I think 4 years would be good - because currently we have medals for 1, 2 and 3 years on CODZ.  And what's better than a medal? Usertitle.  Usertitle for that 4th year.  I'm all for it.

 

Well, as is mentioned in the description for the Hall of Famers, each individual case is unique. @AlphaSnake and @Phantom you should be aware of why they're a part of this group. @Ibanez was a long standing member and staff member who put a lot of work into moderating the form. @shri046 was another staff member who actually worked a great deal on a lot of the early features for the site including the forum skin as well as the interactive Der Riese map. @Telixion is a fantastic guy who helped out a lot with the early Zombies storyline as well as various map strategies. @Vosty3 is yet another fantastic all around amazing guy who was extremely involved in the WaW and BO days with finding storyline hints. He was also a CoD VIP with @carbonfibah and we had a great connection with him and his site, WeTheGamerz.

 

Looking at the list of Hall of Famers, I do think there should be a change in description so that we can really highlight fantastic members without them having to have achieved a Staff position. I do also agree that there needs to be an adjustment of the requirement for Veteran status. Though I don't know if I'd approve of making it a 4 year requirement. There should be other requirements as well.

[ZombieOfTheDead]

 

 Though I don't know if I'd approve of making it a 4 year requirement. There should be other requirements as well.

 

 

Aw, so close to getting a color with more meaning.

[Undead]

I don't believe that "Hall of Famers" should still be active members, as it is just that. You are inducted into the Hall of Fame because of your past contribution, not your current contribution.

 

 

Ideally, we want those in the HoF to be active members.

 

I can see the point to both sides of this and I'm right in the middle. So I say, why not both?

 

@GRILL - I completely agree the the idea of having a few "living legends" as bonus role models for the forums. Plus, it would be nice for those inducted into HoF to actually have the pleasure of enjoying it a bit aside from any other reason. 

 

And @PINNAZ - You make an excellent point of some members whom have certainly made a mark but are no longer with us. Just because they are no longer active, doesn't mean their contributions should go unnoticed. There's a pretty firm handful of folks I rarely see around here anymore that are plenty deserving to be inducted to the HoF due to their groundbreaking threads during their prime.

 

So, here's my proposal: 

 

If the staff decides to go through with some kind of "Hall of Fame Ceremony" idea, I think they should choose a pretty fair balance between the "Role Models" today, and the legends among us. Plus, (assuming they will anyways) staff should post the reason why their choices were inducted during said ceremony.

[Rissole25]

I definitely think @ and @Ehjookayted should be added. MMX for obvious reasons, and Eye because he is/was like the original role model to everyone, and pretty much participated in every aspect of the forums.

[superstudmuffin]

You need to be careful, some of these awards tend to encourage quantity over quality. Being in the off season it seems that drivel is rewarded. I donated because I don't post alot, that's my way of contributing to the site.

I joined for love of zombies, talk tactics, ee theory. Not read about complaints and future zombies in every second thread. UOTM has lost all meaning if members talk crap just to keep the forum active.

For that you need a pub section, anything else actually related to what we have then and only then should a candidate be awarded.

[GRILL]

Well, as is mentioned in the description for the Hall of Famers, each individual case is unique. @AlphaSnake and @Phantom you should be aware of why they're a part of this group. @Ibanez was a long standing member and staff member who put a lot of work into moderating the form. @shri046 was another staff member who actually worked a great deal on a lot of the early features for the site including the forum skin as well as the interactive Der Riese map. @Telixion is a fantastic guy who helped out a lot with the early Zombies storyline as well as various map strategies. @Vosty3 is yet another fantastic all around amazing guy who was extremely involved in the WaW and BO days with finding storyline hints. He was also a CoD VIP with @carbonfibah and we had a great connection with him and his site, WeTheGamerz.

 

 

 

Looking at the list of Hall of Famers, I do think there should be a change in description so that we can really highlight fantastic members without them having to have achieved a Staff position. I do also agree that there needs to be an adjustment of the requirement for Veteran status. Though I don't know if I'd approve of making it a 4 year requirement. There should be other requirements as well.

 

 

Thanks @Covert Gunman I knew you'd be able to help us out with the specifics 

 

In the Hall of Fame description we have, it actually does not list being staff/retired staff as a requirement:

 

When you see a "Hall of Famer", you are seeing an exceptional user who has added to CODZ in monumental ways. Each individual is different, and it's quite hard to sum it up in once sentence - but basically anyone with this title has brought excellence & progress to CODZ in the form of content, back end work, overall presence, and knowledge.

 

When writing the description - I tried to keep the focus is on the individual being exceptional.  But I can totally see how it's too vague.  Perhaps (on top of workshopping the description), we could create some sort of a thread that has a log of what the Hall of Famer's have done?  We could put a link in the description for people to go to the page, and view all the reasons for each individual Hall of Fame member.

 

I'm all for some more requirements for Veteran status, the whole idea of 4 years was off the cuff to begin with.  So like, throw in some post count, brains, UOTM, that kind of stuff?  Or are we going to use criteria beyond the numbers (Mason)?

 

I can see the point to both sides of this and I'm right in the middle. So I say, why not both?

 

 

That's a good point @ - I think that a balance of new active inductees, and inductees (like MMX, Shooter, etc.) who have (seemingly) "moved on" from CODZ is the way to go.  Everyone's happy.  That's just my opinion though, we'll have to here from virtually all other staff (on this) - and it will certainly be prioritized at our next meeting as a topic of discussion.

[InfestLithium]

@GRILL

 

 I've always been a quality vs. quantity kind of guy. For criteria, I'm not sure if the number of years a person has been registered on CoDz (not to be confused with active years) is a considerable factor. I only say this being we definitely have Legends [in my eyes] such as @PINNAZ and @Hells Warrrior who have provided tremendous work despite only being here for a fairly short time compared to other Legends.

 

Now for Veterans, I can definitely agree we may need to do some number hunting. Brains could be an option but I'm worried that it's not entirely dependable because we barely re-introduced it so everyone is fresh on Brains, and we're still struggling to find common ground with what kind of posts to give brains...though I think that will improve over time. To me, being a Veteran sounds like a long-standing member; a CoDz Grandfather/mother, if you will. And if that's the case, years + brains + UotM definitely works.

[Undead]

Eh, I think brains is too varied of a statistic to go by. But so is post count. I think having some kind of "which ever comes first" would work if your going to count Brains or Post count as another mark for determining those who fall in the Veteran status. So perhaps something like this for example:

 

Veterans - 4 Years at CoDz + 50 Brains OR 2,000 posts + UOTM winner. Or alternatively, Staff members who have retired from staff.

[Tac]

For Hall of Fame, I completely agree that it should be about what you've done, past members (who meet the criteria) should be awarded such group. On top of that, so should current members who want to be active. They shouldn't have to quit the site to be recognized. However, I'm curious what would happen if someone who's active is inducted into the Hall of Fame AND THEN becomes part of staff, is that going to be allowed? Will they be allowed to take part in both at the same time?

[Chopper]

It's entirely possible that a genuine legend or HoF worthy member could never win the UOTM.

 

The whole point of these awards is that they are not set in stone, listed in black and white with rules and regulations to follow.

 

@Tac - I have never seen the reason for HoF members to not be part of the staff.  They don't need to be mutually exclusive.

 

A Legend or Hall of Famer will feel right, there won't be a debate about them because if there needs to be they probably don't deserve it.

[Hells Warrrior]

For Hall of Fame, I completely agree that it should be about what you've done, past members (who meet the criteria) should be awarded such group. On top of that, so should current members who want to be active. They shouldn't have to quit the site to be recognized. However, I'm curious what would happen if someone who's active is inducted into the Hall of Fame AND THEN becomes part of staff, is that going to be allowed? Will they be allowed to take part in both at the same time?

 

Well, you can have a main group and a secondary group, the staff group would always be the first one (if they became a HoF and a staff member). No reason why they can't be in both, you can even have the secondary group cover HoF and Donor, if need be, we could also show all of the groups images (moderator, Hall of Fame, Donor) for example, but might be a bit much lol

[Hells Warrrior]

@GRILL

 

 I've always been a quality vs. quantity kind of guy. For criteria, I'm not sure if the number of years a person has been registered on CoDz (not to be confused with active years) is a considerable factor. I only say this being we definitely have Legends [in my eyes] such as @PINNAZ and @Hells Warrrior who have provided tremendous work despite only being here for a fairly short time compared to other Legends.

 

Now for Veterans, I can definitely agree we may need to do some number hunting. Brains could be an option but I'm worried that it's not entirely dependable because we barely re-introduced it so everyone is fresh on Brains, and we're still struggling to find common ground with what kind of posts to give brains...though I think that will improve over time. To me, being a Veteran sounds like a long-standing member; a CoDz Grandfather/mother, if you will. And if that's the case, years + brains + UotM definitely works.

 

Aww shucks, I've got a tear in my eye.

[GRILL]

Okay okay okay, how about this - they have to have been a member for 3 years to be considered towards induction. No guarantee - still based on a scale of what they, as an individual, have done for CODZ.

I actually agree with @ in regards to the UOTM. let's leave UOTM out of this running.

[Tac]

This is for Veteran, correct? I think that sounds good. One thing I think may be important as well is for staff to gauge the opinions of Legends as to whether someone should be inducted. The opinion does not have to be used, obviously, but just a reference. There's no harm in getting more information about how people feel about a user, especially from members that are supposed to be the best role models and basically have contributed the most. I think they'd be a good secondary panel of judges.

[Undead]

This is for Veteran, correct? I think that sounds good. One thing I think may be important as well is for staff to gauge the opinions of Legends as to whether someone should be inducted. The opinion does not have to be used, obviously, but just a reference. There's no harm in getting more information about how people feel about a user, especially from members that are supposed to be the best role models and basically have contributed the most. I think they'd be a good secondary panel of judges.

 

Assuming your get a hold of any, that is.

 

So far the only even remotely active Legends/HoF members I've seen around would be Alpha and Phantom. And even then, they haven't really been around much to give much of a detailed opinion. But, I like the idea. It's just with the current list, I think a nod is about as much of a third-party opinion as you'll get from current Legends.

[Tac]

This is for Veteran, correct? I think that sounds good. One thing I think may be important as well is for staff to gauge the opinions of Legends as to whether someone should be inducted. The opinion does not have to be used, obviously, but just a reference. There's no harm in getting more information about how people feel about a user, especially from members that are supposed to be the best role models and basically have contributed the most. I think they'd be a good secondary panel of judges.

 

Assuming your get a hold of any, that is.

 

So far the only even remotely active Legends/HoF members I've seen around would be Alpha and Phantom. And even then, they haven't really been around much to give much of a detailed opinion. But, I like the idea. It's just with the current list, I think a nod is about as much of a third-party opinion as you'll get from current Legends.

Well that's the entire point, we've been talking about adding to it!

[Matuzz]

I think whole brains/post counts etc. as some sort of milestones that one would need to get to some group imo is not a good choice to put as artificial barriers to get into any group. There should be just one criteria that should be asked and that is:

Is he/she worth it?

[ZombieOfTheDead]

I think whole brains/post counts etc. as some sort of milestones that one would need to get to some group imo is not a good choice to put as artificial barriers to get into any group. There should be just one criteria that should be asked and that is:

Is he/she worth it?

This

 

Although, I think in the case of veteran, it's kind of implied in the name that you've been there awhile. Other than that, it should be based on who the staff thinks deserves it.