- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Umbrella Membership Termination; Is stupidity/ignorance sufficient ground | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Oct 16 2008, 07:15 PM (1,073 Views) | |
| dahlia | Oct 17 2008, 05:51 PM Post #16 |
wait? wut?
  ![]](http://z1.ifrm.com/2/120/0/p1000216/new_pip_r.png)
|
agreed. i could care less if your a F+ student or an engineer, if you lack "game knowledge" and theory then it matters. this is not a guild to practice real life education, granted we do like to have intellectual conversations some of the time, its for WAR. if you suck at WAR and don't not know about your class thoroughly then you do not belong here. as for the standardized tests, that is unnecessary because an applicants/members knowledge of the game is demonstrated in the way they play and what they say about their class and others classes over vent. as far as I'm concerned people should be good players first and foremost. Now im not saying invite every decent player regardless of whether or not they are completely fucking retarded because no one wants to sit on vent with someone who cant comprehend what you are saying. but if you can play and you are not overly annoying i don't give a shit. if your a healer you heal, tank throw guard on and cc, dps hop on the pain train. AND DO THIS WELL! all in all if you can play the game and know yours and others class thoroughly then its all good. although i would not mind putting in specific questions in the application sheet about some of WARs mechanics. for instance people don't know what is required to push the war to Altdorf and that type of bullshit is fucking unacceptable. im tired of telling people the difference between a FORTRESS and a KEEP, or how to guard the melee dps, or what an RvR tactic is or level up you fuckass then you can come to bastion or my personal favorite whats renown? edit: its unreasonable to think that we will all be "A team" players. "B players" are just as valuable and even having a few "c team" is worthwhile for filling in gaps in groups Edited by dahlia, Oct 17 2008, 05:55 PM.
|
 .umbrella leads the way. | |
 |
 
|
| Lucretius | Oct 18 2008, 01:19 AM Post #17 |
Forum Troll
|
"Yes. Cull the weak. Wintermute's judgment is absolute." +1
This is not a democracy, is it? I don't really know. If there is any place in the world where a dictatorship has it's proper place, that place is in an MMO guild. When clear boundaries are placed, and only a single persons temperament and opinion need to be taken into account, fewer problems naturally exist than if anything were left in the ambiguity of group-think. SIG HAIL SIG HAIL SIG HAIL Edit: I could see how some people might vote for some kind of test, but keep in mind that decisions that drastic are not made instantly on a whim, or on a spur of the moment. If a concern arises, proper attention will be paid before any drastic action is taken... at least that has been my impression of Winter's character in the short amount of time I've played with him. Even though he can become angry quickly I haven't seen him ACT in anger against someone, and that is the reason I don't feel the same way Solers does. I think that his judgment is overall very good. Heldunder is a good example, you can read his application thread to reference what I'm talking about. Everyone shit on him, but Winter saw through all the queer shit and evaluated him objectively and invited him as a trial. Had Winter not been the person in charge of recruitment I don't think Held would have made it into this guild. I think Held is a good player now that I've played with him. Also, even if a test were to be implemented it would be biased. Any member told "You're being tested" is going to try harder than they would normally, whereas if Winter were the judge he could evaluate whoever is in question in their truest state... when they don't know they're being observed. Edited by Lucretius, Oct 18 2008, 01:35 AM.
|
|
|
|
| Khatib | Oct 18 2008, 08:00 PM Post #18 |
Forum Professional
|
Oh absolutely. If you try to be too democratic in an MMO guild, shit NEVER gets fucking done. I'm just saying I prefer a small group -- the people who wear officer tags -- dictatorship by committee if you will -- making decisions in a timely matter as a group, rather than just one single person running the entire show. As smart as any one person might be, they don't have the time to be on 24/7, to get a chance to play first hand with everyone, to see everything that happens or hear everything that's said. When you use an officer group, there's a better chance to have solid first hand input on any situation and any person when it comes down to decision time, and with them being an officer, they ought to then be able to present solid facts to the rest of the group so the best decision can be made. Edited by Khatib, Oct 18 2008, 08:01 PM.
|
|
It is a curious thing, do you know, how your mind is supersaturated with the religion in which you say you disbelieve. - James Joyce | |
|
|
|
| Avelas | Oct 19 2008, 05:19 AM Post #19 |
Slacker
|
Cull the weak. Only way to create a strong population is by the removal of the weak, leaving the strong to prosper. No, I'm not Hitler, just an advocate of Darwin. |
|
|
|
| Wintermute | Oct 19 2008, 07:13 PM Post #20 |
Admin
|
If you would like to get technical, an outside force acting to "cull the weak" of a population (essentially the eugenic movement), misrepresents Darwin and evolution. So the view of culling the weak is more Hitler than Darwin. This is a common misconception of the public of what evolution actually is. One of the main facets of evolution is the concept of survival of the fittest. Survival of the fittest plays 2 parts in the evolutionary process. First on the basis of an individual member of a species. Survival of the fittest refers to an individuals ability to survive long enough to pass on its genetic material. Second referring to the survival of the fittest genes. It is fairly technical and nearly incomprehensible to those with out a biology background. But essentially comes down to those genes that are dominant are, over time, more likely to pervade a species genetic makeup. In nature, natural selection is the process though the weak and the sick are removed from the genetic pool. So it would be more accurate to compare any actions I take in removing someone from Umbrella to the eugenics movement. |
| |
|
|
|
| Avelas | Oct 19 2008, 07:58 PM Post #21 |
|
Slacker
|
Of course, just trying to state it simply. And partially it would be natural selection like, say if said person was in a battleground, he fails and dies to people and circumstances which he shouldn't. The only problem with that is the respawn which I guess darwin never had to think about. But yes I guess you are right in the broad sense of membership to the guild. My english fails, not my biology. But I wouldn't expect anything less from umbrella that if somehow an idiot managed to get in, he would be dealt with. But that leaves the main problem still, of how he would have gotten in. Edited by Avelas, Oct 19 2008, 08:03 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Ninjerk | Oct 19 2008, 09:31 PM Post #22 |
Forum Troll
|
As long as the recruitment process allows applicants to be evaluated without actually playing with them extensively in a premade group. |
|
|
|
| narg | Oct 20 2008, 04:39 PM Post #23 |
Spike
|
I voted no test based on an assumption - I'm assuming that the selected individual's intelligence and judgment is not affecting their gameplay or how often people want to play with the individual. If their intelligence is so lack luster that they are horrible players in WAR, then there's no reason to even have this thread because that was a given when one joined the guild that one had to be smart enough to play well. The issue that I feel this thread really revolves around is "Does the player's stupidity make him/her someone that no one wants to play with." In this case, if no one wants to play with the person then they should be kicked. So the reason I voted no on a standardized test is because one doesn't need a test to figure out if another is unsociable. I could care less if you read an article on brain sensors (and understood it), just be a good player and someone I don't mind playing with. If that's too much to ask, then gtfo. As for who makes the call for when someone is too unsociable or not a good enough player? Winter/Nex, of course. |
| The gamer formerly known as Spike | |
|
|
|
| Trainwreck | Oct 20 2008, 09:25 PM Post #24 |
am I doin it rite?
|
I couldn't have said it better myself. |
|
|
|
| Dervin | Oct 21 2008, 05:17 AM Post #25 |
Closet Fag
|
Dicktator Dervin, all decisions are final. |
| |
|
|
|
| Ninjerk | Oct 21 2008, 09:05 AM Post #26 |
|
Forum Troll
|
You should make a porn. |
|
|
|
| 2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
10:13 AM May 20