Post by Dangeresque on Aug 6, 2010 6:30:46 GMT
Let's take a look at that for a second:
Recent "regulars" include... hmmm... I'll use Kaos Herald and the now non-existant Leviathan Are Back. Niether are that regular, but they're a great example and as I recall both of them started appearing around the same time.
Kaos Herald came down to general and was destined to become a well liked member. He provided was interesting and curteous responses. His attitudes were the sort that generates a great del of respect, and he showed a great deal of respect in return. He is a good member... and yet he's not what one would call a "regular". He's not been around long enough and doesn't appear regulalry enough to really be regular. Does it matter? Does it make me hold a lesser opinion of him? No and no.
LAB on the other hand...
The guy comes down to general and immediatly begins contributing nothing but single word posts, that annoying leeeeeeeeeengthening of letters in words and mildly flaming a hell of a lot of members. I got ticked of by this and I know a few other people who were ticked off too, so what did I do? I explained to him what he was doing using a scene from Gran Torino that illustrates that respect is earnt and you just can't barge in and expect to be treated like the Queen of France (if you got that reference, wobble your arms!).
LAB agree'd that that was what he was doing and said, as I recall, I was "totally right". He then continued to act in the same way untill he eventually disappeared without warning, an action that cements him in my mind as a dud member of general. He wasn't regular, but that's not the reason I didn't like him.
Whether you're liked or not has nothing to do with your status as a regular or not. It has everything to do with how you present yourself to an established community. It helps to also know the conventions of both respect and the function of a typical internet community, sans the awful stuff that it makes sense to try and avoid.
Now, the reason Alice puled the word "regular" into the argument is because it actually has meaning here. A person who's been around long enough to be considered "regular" was around during the... for lack of a better term... "Golden Age" of general. Considering this thread relates to previous similar threads (that I would show you, if they hadn't all been deleted) that deals with the topic of the "Golden Age" it's a legitamate point to make when the context is considered. Jaka became fully active pretty much right after the close of the golden age. I do not recall ever making here a "HQ's of the Hive" datasheet nor featuring her in a comic because quite frankly she hadn't done anything that I could work with. Since then she's attained the status of "regular", so if you read Alice's post it makes perfect sense and isn't an insult at all. Then again, if I know Alice, nothing she posts is ever insulting.
However... this has ended. The solution has been found this time. I am pleased with how this one went, much better than the last one.
Recent "regulars" include... hmmm... I'll use Kaos Herald and the now non-existant Leviathan Are Back. Niether are that regular, but they're a great example and as I recall both of them started appearing around the same time.
Kaos Herald came down to general and was destined to become a well liked member. He provided was interesting and curteous responses. His attitudes were the sort that generates a great del of respect, and he showed a great deal of respect in return. He is a good member... and yet he's not what one would call a "regular". He's not been around long enough and doesn't appear regulalry enough to really be regular. Does it matter? Does it make me hold a lesser opinion of him? No and no.
LAB on the other hand...
The guy comes down to general and immediatly begins contributing nothing but single word posts, that annoying leeeeeeeeeengthening of letters in words and mildly flaming a hell of a lot of members. I got ticked of by this and I know a few other people who were ticked off too, so what did I do? I explained to him what he was doing using a scene from Gran Torino that illustrates that respect is earnt and you just can't barge in and expect to be treated like the Queen of France (if you got that reference, wobble your arms!).
LAB agree'd that that was what he was doing and said, as I recall, I was "totally right". He then continued to act in the same way untill he eventually disappeared without warning, an action that cements him in my mind as a dud member of general. He wasn't regular, but that's not the reason I didn't like him.
Whether you're liked or not has nothing to do with your status as a regular or not. It has everything to do with how you present yourself to an established community. It helps to also know the conventions of both respect and the function of a typical internet community, sans the awful stuff that it makes sense to try and avoid.
Now, the reason Alice puled the word "regular" into the argument is because it actually has meaning here. A person who's been around long enough to be considered "regular" was around during the... for lack of a better term... "Golden Age" of general. Considering this thread relates to previous similar threads (that I would show you, if they hadn't all been deleted) that deals with the topic of the "Golden Age" it's a legitamate point to make when the context is considered. Jaka became fully active pretty much right after the close of the golden age. I do not recall ever making here a "HQ's of the Hive" datasheet nor featuring her in a comic because quite frankly she hadn't done anything that I could work with. Since then she's attained the status of "regular", so if you read Alice's post it makes perfect sense and isn't an insult at all. Then again, if I know Alice, nothing she posts is ever insulting.
However... this has ended. The solution has been found this time. I am pleased with how this one went, much better than the last one.
