The ATS Hall of Fame.

a reply to: charles1952

Thanks for the eloquent and considered reply.

I don't want to get into a protracted conversation - you've put forward some very good and relevant points to support your suggestion, I'm not saying I wouldn't be anti such an innovation its just that for the reasons I mentioned I don't think its entirely necessary.
Respect is something that is earned through time and we all have different members who we individually hold in high regard, for me personally that's enough.

Just a couple of points though;

OK, I'm easy. Either allow retired members to be nominated or limit it to members who were active starting on a given date. Doesn't matter to me.

There are more than just a few members who have contributed enormously to ATS and its growth who for various reasons then suffered a fall from grace and are now no longer with us - would they be excluded from such a 'club'?
In my opinion, for what its worth, some ex-members have contributed immensely to what ATS was and how it has developed and built up its reputation - but how can ATS agree to that despite their post bans?

I'm not sure if I understand what you mean by self-indulging. If you're referring to me as an individual,.....

No, not at all - I most certainly wasn't inferring that you were somehow being 'self-indulgent' - apologies if it came across that way.
I meant ATS as a whole.
As much as I enjoy and respect ATS, (and I assure you I do, I can't express how much I have learnt from ATS, how it has helped me develop personally and how I have gained some valued friendships over the years), but I fear it may be a step towards taking ourselves just a tadge too seriously.

I understand the benefits of what you propose, that your motivations aren't one's of personal aggrandisement and that I'm more than likely in the minority....but that's just the way I see it.

However, I think it could be a good idea if we could somehow remember and honour the memory of some of our esteemed members who are unfortunately no longer with us, JKRog, William One Sac etc.

On the plus side - its good to occasionally stimulate a discussion that reminds us all of just what it is that sets ATS apart from all the other sites out there.

a reply to: charles1952
You value intelligent, respectful, and even pleasant discourse.
This is apparent to any (correct that - most) that have encountered you on this site.
Thus - you would want this "quality" to be recognized and valued...as you do.

Nothing wrong with that...

keep lobbying...
I believe I am acquiring a glimmer in my eye, for the... "What a nice guy/gal" ...designation (a'la Blazing Saddles)

a reply to: Freeborn

Dear Freeborn,

Thanks a lot. Agreed, no protracted discussion.

There are more than just a few members who have contributed enormously to ATS and its growth who for various reasons then suffered a fall from grace and are now no longer with us - would they be excluded from such a 'club'?

In my opinion, for what its worth, some ex-members have contributed immensely to what ATS was and how it has developed and built up its reputation - but how can ATS agree to that despite their post bans?

However, I think it could be a good idea if we could somehow remember and honour the memory of some of our esteemed members who are unfortunately no longer with us, JKRog, William One Sac etc.

Absolutely correct. Americans, as a group, tend to forget pretty easily. Remembrance and respect are important lessons to learn.

There are many ways to remember those who are no longer with us. The first to come to mind is an elegant page entitled "ATS Pioneers."

but I fear it may be a step towards taking ourselves just a tadge too seriously.

You might be right. I see a nomination as equivalent to saying about someone "He's a decent bloke, I'd buy him a pint anytime." The Mods approval would be like a group of friends throwing a quick surprise party. The mention on the profile would tell new members "I can ask him, he won't make fun of me or bite my head off."

With respect,
Charles1952

a reply to: beezzer

Beezer, for some reason that picture gives me the creepies. Is that a tatoo?

Sir Charles, I am not entirely convinced that we need a Hall of Fame. I think most regulars know who are the solid contributors, and who are not. Some years ago I asked if we could have a star take-away ability. A very public way to mark posts that were written by, well, not nice people. I have since come to realize that those would be completely opinion based (not unlike stars!). The Mods do a great job of making sure the really ugly posts are edited or removed. They also do a great job of giving good posters credit.

Besides, I go in phases of contributing and of lurking. I'll never get enough stars to be in the HOF! So there!

a reply to: Lolliek

Dear Lolliek,

I've never met a Princess before. I humbly bow.

If I may explain just a little. This Hall of Fame, or Captain Bill's Whiz Bang Club, or whatever it is eventually named, doesn't care a bit about stars. Nor does it care about flags or anything else really. Well, OK, applause might be a factor, and a certain amount of time as a member.

We know which of the members with whom we have regular contact are solid and which are not. But when we step outside our regular circle of topics? And what about those who are new or not regulars? And this would not be a popularity contest in any sense.

Certainly, the really ugly posts are stricken, but that's the stick. They can't catch them all, and many are ugly but not quite so ugly as to be removed. I'm looking for the carrot, something that might inspire those with so-so conduct to clean up their act. Something that shows the membership that ATS cares enough about civility to select examples of civil posters and throw a few letters on their mini-profile or something similar. Something that shows the respectful poster that they are not just appreciated for a great thread or post, but for who they are and how they act.

I'm hoping.

With respect,
Charles1952

a reply to: Lolliek

originally posted by: Lolliek
Beezer, for some reason that picture gives me the creepies. Is that a tatoo?

I know, right?

I didn't want to be impolite- particularly in this thread.

Some people just have bad hair (or is it hare?) days.

a reply to: charles1952

If I may explain just a little. This Hall of Fame, or Captain Bill's Whiz Bang Club, or whatever it is eventually named, doesn't care a bit about stars. Nor does it care about flags or anything else really. Well, OK, applause might be a factor, and a certain amount of time as a member. We know which of the members with whom we have regular contact are solid and which are not. But when we step outside our regular circle of topics? And what about those who are new or not regulars? And this would not be a popularity contest in any sense.

Why don't you just judge every individual post based on its content instead of placing posters into catagories in order to decide the merit of their posts?

A ridiculous and elitist idea.

a reply to: charles1952

Hi Charles,

I always enjoy your posts as they are always civil, filled with good manners and they always come as examples of decorum.

You are already a Hall of Famer in many member's hearts. Personally, I thought it was a great idea you had there, when I first read it, but after reading the whole thread, I think that it would bring good and bad along the process.

Overwork for the staff, could be a cause of jealousy amongst certain members, favoritism would automatically come to mind for many...also a sense of "Hey...darn...I've always been an example (in my mind) of civility and decorum here, so why didn't anyone suggest my name?" type of thinking and sour taste.

Charles, you've been here as long as I have, which isn't that long really but we already know who the real Hall of Famers are. Anyone that's been here a while knows.

Their names and avatars are their badges..very easy to recognize..

I highly respect you and your opinions but I do see problems that could emerge from such an endeavor. Just my opinion though and as always, I could be absolutely wrong all across..

a reply to: NotADroidUAreLooking4

Dear NotADroidUAreLooking4,

I could be wrong, several posters have said that it's not a good idea. And, depending on how you define it, it might be an elitist idea, but I think it would be very difficult to show that it was a ridiculous idea.

Why don't you just judge every individual post based on its content instead of placing posters into catagories in order to decide the merit of their posts?

Ummm.... I guess I wasn't clear. This has nothing to do with judging posts in any manner. Just as ATS puts silver and gold borders around people with the 100 or 50 highest WATS scores, I'm suggesting a small identifying label for the people who have the highest "Decorum scores" according to the Mods. If the poster has a history of doing well, they get nominated. When the Mods have time to look at the nomination, it is approved or not. That's all.

With respect,
Charles1952

a reply to: charles1952

Maybe I misinterpreted this bit.

We know which of the members with whom we have regular contact are solid and which are not. But when we step outside our regular circle of topics? And what about those who are new or not regulars?

But you seem to suggest that without such a title people would have a hard time discerning wether or not a post(er) is solid, when all one needs to do is judge the content of a post.

I noticed a large, bright message across the bottom of my screen today. It concerned the Middle-East threads and referred to a thread by Springer, telling people that hatred and viciousness, hidden or opened, was going to stop, and he meant it.

The thread was written five years ago.

Over and over and over, we're told "Stop behaving badly, we mean it," and over and over and over some posters stop violating the rules of decorum for maybe a week or two at best.

I don't really care what kind of "carrot" the management comes up with, but I think my plan is a good one and it appears that I've answered all objections.

This new banner message telling us to behave ourselves is proof, if any more is needed, that trying to scare or punish disrespectful poster, without any additional approach, is a complete failure. The "stick," by itself, does not work. Whenever there is a controversial enough issue, some posters will go back to spitting on others.

Please, give this idea serious consideration, and don't just brush it off. Failing that, come up with something of your own, but try something. Stop relying on the failed policy of "sticks" only.

a reply to: charles1952

originally posted by: charles1952
Failing that, come up with something of your own, but try something. Stop relying on the failed policy of "sticks" only.

For a time, anyway, why not just use the banner in my sig?

If it pops up enough- particularly in problem threads- maybe it will have an impact.

a reply to: loam

Dear loam,

Thank you, that is an excellent idea. We may end up using it faute de mieux.

But what is concerning me now is what management will choose to do. Will there only be more threats? Or are they willing to provide a positive incentive towards respectful conversation?

With respect,
Charles1952

a reply to: charles1952

I honestly don't think it really matters what else ATS Staff do. It's clear they work hard to enforce a more civil board, but I'm sure it's not easy.

As for us, the members, we can serve as an example by consistently engaging in respectful discourse- helpful for newcomers who don't quite get how things work around here.

Just sayin'

a reply to: charles1952 What a great idea.People need to be appreciated it sends a positive vibe out and it just might make someone smile!

originally posted by: charles1952
(WanDash quote) "Another 0.0001% vs the 99.9999% club."

(charles1952) "The 0.0001% would be the people who can't control themselves, the people who lash out in anger even if they could have just stepped away from the keyboard for a minute."

...

Sorry I didn't get back to you on this... It looked to me as if interest in the discussion had fizzled...
I have not seen, as you propose, above.

Including myself in the batch that could have stepped away from the keyboard...I would account the ratio closer to 50/50...and that is (candidly) an "evangelistic" accounting (meaning - I'm adding/multiplying numbers to/on the 'good side'...and throwing in cemetery votes, as well........just to make it look like...I'm.........nice)...

So - as in any hypothetical scenario...if we take your number (or my politically-optimistic 50/50) ----- what separates one poster...from the 50%'ers...ENOUGH...to become worthy of such an honor?

I'm kind of seeing a disconnect between the premise of - Hall of Fame/Billy's All-Time Nicest Guys/Gals - coming from 50% of the site membership...UNLESS it is that...with their Charisma/Restraint...they inspired another member to waste a thread (statistically-speaking) on nominating them for The Nice Guy Award.

I - honestly think that this would just be another badge...for those wearing...ALL of the badges...already...
(which does not imply that they wear them, undeservedly)...

Nevertheless & Nonetheless & Maybe I wish I were wearing a Dress... Thanks for your reply!
If you think, again - that you haven't expressed yourself well enough...that I could not 'get it'...then, please, try again. Because - we know what that really means ----- I'm dense...

a reply to: WanDash

Dear WanDash,

There's no need to try and correct you. Why, when you're correct?

At some level, I don't really care what the criteria are, as long as they reflect respectful behavior on the boards. Maybe 50 % of the posters are super polite and respectful. Fine, let them get the badge. As a possible side benefit, it may put more peer pressure on those that don't have it.

It will take some time to get the badge to all deserving people, but from the time the first person gets one, an announcement will be made. "Not only will we ban the bad guys, we'll applaud the good guys."

With respect,
Charles1952

a reply to: charles1952
Well - COOL!
Good luck with it, then!

a reply to: WanDash

Dear WanDash,

Thanks for your kind wishes, I hope this cones into being. I do wish for further substantive comments from management.

At the moment it appears that they're going to ignore it to death, but I may be jumping to conclusions. Perhaps they're discussing it over scotch and cigars at this very moment.

With respect,
Charles1952

originally posted by: charles1952
a reply to: WanDash

Dear WanDash,

Thanks for your kind wishes, I hope this cones into being. I do wish for further substantive comments from management.

At the moment it appears that they're going to ignore it to death, but I may be jumping to conclusions. Perhaps they're discussing it over scotch and cigars at this very moment.

With respect,
Charles1952

count me in for the whiz bang club!

i'm sure i can trust TPTB to make the right choices. (looks over shoulder)

while we're at it, how about a "most improved" section? lol!