Member Application Changes!

[virr 808]

I'm not vertex :(

I edited it for him to make him seem not stupid, but i guess he's dumber than i thought.

[Tatost 604]

@Kypari that means if I played on the one server that you did not, you would -1 me? I think instead you should look towards trying to know that person, otherwise leave it up to the others.

If a member proves to be unfit, we always have the member protest option here on the forums.

[Aegean 849]

I'm not vertex :(

Edited <3

[Thunder 79]

@Kypari that means if I played on the one server that you did not, you would -1 me? I think instead you should look towards trying to know that person, otherwise leave it up to the others.

If a member proves to be unfit, we always have the member protest option here on the forums.

Most applications state what server they play on and if I per say play on that server a lot I should be able to -1

[Kypari 579]

@Kypari that means if I played on the one server that you did not, you would -1 me? I think instead you should look towards trying to know that person, otherwise leave it up to the others.

If a member proves to be unfit, we always have the member protest option here on the forums.

That's why I said that if people +1 him then the -1 would be void.

Edited April 10, 2017 by Guest (see edit history)

[james8470 160]

I think if that -1'ing people because you've never seen them should be allowed now because we shouldn't have random people that no one has ever even heard of in xG in my opinion. If other people have heard of them then the vouch would be void.

 

Good thinking, but maybe something other than a -1?

Because their not necessarily bad players, you just don't see them.

Edited April 10, 2017 by james8470 (see edit history)

[Aegean 849]

I do not like -1'ing a player due to not knowing / seeing them, there's 24 hours in a day and even if you play 6 hours every single day, you might not see them. If the people he plays with doesn't +1 for whatever reason, then he would not get accepted which defeats the purpose of what I'm going for.

Edited April 10, 2017 by Guest (see edit history)

[Kypari 579]

I do not like -1'ing a player due to not knowing / seeing them, there's 24 hours in a day and even if you play 6 hours every single day, you might not see them. If the people he plays with doesn't +1 for whatever reason, then he would not get accepted which defeats the purpose of what I'm going for.

It should be based off of activity on rank.xenogamers and we would see how long they've been on the server for. I don't really want people that know one has ever even heard of in the clan if you get what I mean. :coffee:

[Aegean 849]

It should be based off of activity on rank.xenogamers and we would see how long they've been on the server for. I don't really want people that know one has ever even heard of in the clan if you get what I mean. :coffee:

That's the goal, we are discussing a proper period of time that they must have been on the servers before we accept them.

[Forest 309]

Do keep in mind that there are many contributing factors to how often you may see an applicant which is why it is rarely a legitimate reason to negatively vouch for someone (unless the rank site shows otherwise). Most prominently, the largest factor is the possible time-zone difference between yourself and the applicant. Like Aegean said, there are 24 hours in a day which allows huge flexibility in terms of when a Player actually hops on the Server. At the time you may be playing, the applicant may be in school or at work, and vice-versa.

 

Additionally, you should only be negatively vouching if you have a valid reason to be doing so. If nothing comes to mind, you should not be going out of your way to dig up some dirt on the applicant, so-to-speak. If the applicant plays on a Server that you do not play on, then you should have no sway on that application (assuming this is your only reason to negatively vouch).

 

Of course you can give your opinion on the applicant if you have a reasonable understanding of their character or have interacted with him/her, but again, you should not be negatively vouching based on how often you see the applicant as this is completely subjective and otherwise unfair due to the number of Players who don't play on every Server but have a selective one or two of which they prefer.

[Egossi 1017]

people that know one has ever even heard of in the clan

How the fuck does one call themselves british and not know the difference between "no one" and "know one" lol

[Kypari 579]

How the fuck does one call themselves british and not know the difference between "no one" and "know one" lol

Hopefully I am redeemed of this tragic mistake.

[MineCrack 62]

Activity doesn't even matter until you are a staff member.

 

Not sure why some of you are making a big deal about it. It's not like people get their membership stripped for being inactive.

[Kypari 579]

Activity doesn't even matter until you are a staff member.

 

Not sure why some of you are making a big deal about it. It's not like people get their membership stripped for being inactive.

I just don't think people who have never been seen on the servers by anyone should be in the community because no-one even knows them

[MineCrack 62]

I just don't think people who have never been seen on the servers by anyone should be in the community because no-one even knows them

 

Haha what? How does that make sense to you?

 

Activity does not matter until people are staff. Someone wants to support xG by joining the clan, they apply. It gives them incentive to keep returning even if they play for 1 hour every two weeks. There's no point in declining someone from joining a gaming community just because they're not as active as you or if you don't see them on. That's malarkey, xG is not an exclusive club.