Reincorporating All Account Types In The 20-29 Bracket Into One Forum

Status
Not open for further replies.
Activate, is this about the topic, or is this about me? Because if it's the latter, PM me. Your post makes it pretty evident that you're taking this--and making this--personal.

There is no NEED for this topic. It is incredibly simple. Put veterans in one of the two boards or give them one. It's not broken, don't fix it.

You've been on a crusade ever since Lil got banned and I oftentimes wonder if you recognize it. You are consistently misrepresenting your motivations for a "need" to solve "problems" that don't exist. Like this thread for example.

You represent it as an organization and information issue, when it's quite obviously about absolving guilt. You don't want to feel guilty about playing non-trial toons in the 20-29 bracket. Rather than thinking about that you've taken it upon yourself to throw rival bands under one roof in the hopes that lines will become so unrecognizable no one will have to think about the feeling of guilt. Much less deal with it or grow beyond such a petty emotion. Personally, I advise you to think long and hard about that word.

I am responding to your actions. I've already attempted to have a conversation with you, privately, you declined. So long as you grandstand with your moderator status in an attempt to push your personal issues onto us I will oppose you. I continue to give you the benefit of the doubt regarding your intentions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Perfectly stated. 20-29 is the Neighborhood, f2p/Vet/p2p are your street.



With firm but gentle moderation this could be more present-day United Kingdom/New York City and less post-Saddam Iraq/ post-Tito Yugoslavia.
It's going to be Iraq under Kincaide Hussein's rule, Failed to pay will be the Ba'ath party, The veterans will be the Shi'ites, and the old 29's will be the kurds.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Alright so I think there should be 2 groups. Whether you want to use chants or guild boas is another topic but I don't think that should be the driving force to split a forum up.

There are tons of things like guides, or scaling indexes, or F2PDev that are tailored specifically to 20s... That kind of information varies greatly when you are 29. So now what we'll be doing is prefacing each thread with a [F2P] or a [20] to denote whom it applies too... I just think it makes more sense to make that distinction with a different subforum.

One be 20's
One be 21-29
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Give 20's their own section and 29's another.

The 20's section includes everything about 20's. Either F2P, P2P, Vet.. whatever terms you want to use. If it's about level 20 content, it goes here.

The 29's section includes everything about.. well, 29's.

I personally don't care to see anything about 29's. I just don't relate.
However, I can relate to anybody who plays 20's. F2P, P2P, Vets, etc. We all share common ground.
I believe this is where the division of communities comes into play. Just because Blizzard lumps everything into one bracket, doesn't mean TwinkInfo needs to do the same.

Each section could also have an "Alternate Twinking" sub-forum.

20's alternate twinking includes: 21-24

29's alternate twinking includes: 25-28

..but honestly, do people even twink at a different level besides 20 or 29 anymore?
Quoting myself. I feel like this is a good idea, but it's getting lost in the shuffle of things.
 
Quoting myself. I feel like this is a good idea, but it's getting lost in the shuffle of things.

^This but I would just do 20 and 21-29. If they fall some where between 21 and 28 they are locking to benefit from secondary stats more. It's still the same group of people.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
^This but I would just do 20 and 21-29. If you are anything above level 20 then you are locking for a specific reason, that that's to benefit from secondary stats more. It's still the same group of people.
I do like that approach much better. 20's section is all about 20's. Period. The 29's sections would get the alternate thinking sub-forum for 21-28.
 
For those of you worried about "trial" subject getting regulated to second page. There are more topics about bitching and moaning in the trial section than there are guides about veteran accounts on the first page.
I can't believe there was s such an uproar over something so trivial as this. Some authors actually contributed to the trial sections with guides instead on the "bad day" section or the " what music are you listening to" section and you want to create a whole damn new section just so you won't have to read their threads. WOW...

/cheers
Sweetsidney
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Allright guys, I've thought about the feedback that you've given.

I thought that we had heard a large enough sample of the population to predict which way the population wanted to go with reorganization. We talked about it in the staff room and everyone seemed to be generally in favor of, or agreed with the logic behind, reunification. I posted this thread in order to gauge how the larger population would react to what it seemed to us was already the direction the population wanted to go. Given the number of likes the original post in this thread has, I think that we were right to assume that the majority is in favor, BUT! I totally understand that many of you feel like you were underrepresented in this, and even that I was forcing some decision upon you. I assure you, I was not. Several among you are not going to accept that reassurance because you have a beef with me, and that's fine, I respect that. If there's anything I can do to change that perception, I would. But you're mistaking my eagerness for heavy-handedness.

In that vein, I do feel that I didn't handle this as well as I could have. I have that hindsight perspective now. I did not want to hijack [MENTION=23518]Turtle[/MENTION]'s thread but I could see it did not clearly contain the poll option that many of you had already expressed. What I did was to start a new thread that explored that option, and closed the old thread (Turtle's) in order to keep the conversation in one thread. That was a mistake on my part. What I should have done was to help Turtle modify his poll to include more robust options, reset the poll for him, and let the conversation continue there. I thought doing it this way was a more expedient solution, but I took away Turtle's agency and his efforts in the process, and that was an unintended mistake. Turtle, I'm sorry.

I would be more than willing to help create a better thread with poll options, if you guys don't feel that this thread is the best place to discuss this matter. I want people to feel like they have a voice, even knowing that eventually we will have to choose some option, which won't be to everyone's preference.

I also want to apologize for the position that the forums should be organized by information rather than by community. Several of you have raised very good points about why that is a flawed way of thinking, and I have come to agree, so I thank you for your patience and your willingness to give feedback even when you're concerned that we're not listening. But I want you to be thinking now about the very real fact that people in this bracket have lots of freedom to change account types now, and how is that going to affect the way those same people are forced to change communities and the stigma against them, if we are not all considered one community.

If you want to continue a conversation here, then please do so. If you would prefer that I close my thread and reopen Turtle's thread and help him with more poll options, I will do that instead. This isn't my will and it isn't my idea, this was just me trying to facilitate the direction you all appeared to already be heading. If you all as a community want to gather more information about what direction you all want to be heading, if you would rather see it spelled out in a poll, I totally understand that. I apologize sincerely for any toes that I stepped on in my eagerness to find a solution before this issue becomes a crisis.
 
So keep it the way it is now really, just change the titles. F2P goes to 20 and 20-29 goes to 21-29.
A few threads might have to be moved but it won't be much.


If you are level 20 all this stuff applies to you. Whether you want to use chants or not is irrelevant. If a guide wants to call it out they can do that; it's only a few lines. And that would be a great thing. Here's your gear here's your chants and if you are a vet you can use this. There won't be a difference in talents, rotations, or just general class playing. For the gear scaling index and F2PDev I'll add support for ALL 20's. I've always pushed to provide all the information I can and let the player decide how they want to gear. And it would b the same thing here with vets.

I think this is best way to go.
 
So keep it the way it is now really, just change the titles. F2P goes to 20 and 20-29 goes to 21-29.
A few threads might have to be moved but it won't be much.


If you are level 20 all this stuff applies to you. Whether you want to use chants or not is irrelevant. If a guide wants to call it out they can do that; it's only a few lines. And that would be a great thing. Here's your gear here's your chants and if you are a vet you can use this. There won't be a difference in talents, rotations, or just general class playing. For the gear scaling index and F2PDev I'll add support for ALL 20's. I've always pushed to provide all the information I can and let the player decide how they want to gear. And it would b the same thing here with vets.

I think this is best way to go.
^This
 
Important stuff

IMO you guys should make this decision. I feel that people's frustration with vets upgrading might sway it. This website is about providing helpful information. What division of forums will do that best?

If you are a 20 in this bracket you need a place to go for info.
If you want to play something other than 20, you need a place to go.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Allright guys, I've thought about the feedback that you've given.

I thought that we had heard a large enough sample of the population to predict which way the population wanted to go with reorganization. We talked about it in the staff room and everyone seemed to be generally in favor of, or agreed with the logic behind, reunification. I posted this thread in order to gauge how the larger population would react to what it seemed to us was already the direction the population wanted to go. Given the number of likes the original post in this thread has, I think that we were right to assume that the majority is in favor, BUT! I totally understand that many of you feel like you were underrepresented in this, and even that I was forcing some decision upon you. I assure you, I was not. Several among you are not going to accept that reassurance because you have a beef with me, and that's fine, I respect that. If there's anything I can do to change that perception, I would. But you're mistaking my eagerness for heavy-handedness.

In that vein, I do feel that I didn't handle this as well as I could have. I have that hindsight perspective now. I did not want to hijack [MENTION=23518]Turtle[/MENTION]'s thread but I could see it did not clearly contain the poll option that many of you had already expressed. What I did was to start a new thread that explored that option, and closed the old thread (Turtle's) in order to keep the conversation in one thread. That was a mistake on my part. What I should have done was to help Turtle modify his poll to include more robust options, reset the poll for him, and let the conversation continue there. I thought doing it this way was a more expedient solution, but I took away Turtle's agency and his efforts in the process, and that was an unintended mistake. Turtle, I'm sorry.

I would be more than willing to help create a better thread with poll options, if you guys don't feel that this thread is the best place to discuss this matter. I want people to feel like they have a voice, even knowing that eventually we will have to choose some option, which won't be to everyone's preference.

I also want to apologize for the position that the forums should be organized by information rather than by community. Several of you have raised very good points about why that is a flawed way of thinking, and I have come to agree, so I thank you for your patience and your willingness to give feedback even when you're concerned that we're not listening. But I want you to be thinking now about the very real fact that people in this bracket have lots of freedom to change account types now, and how is that going to affect the way those same people are forced to change communities and the stigma against them, if we are not all considered one community.

If you want to continue a conversation here, then please do so. If you would prefer that I close my thread and reopen Turtle's thread and help him with more poll options, I will do that instead. This isn't my will and it isn't my idea, this was just me trying to facilitate the direction you all appeared to already be heading. If you all as a community want to gather more information about what direction you all want to be heading, if you would rather see it spelled out in a poll, I totally understand that. I apologize sincerely for any toes that I stepped on in my eagerness to find a solution before this issue becomes a crisis.

Modify my poll to what you have just mentioned OR create a new thread.
I agree that it was lacking options. Make it seem to were to votes are public if possible. Would not want voters who aren't associated with this to vote and not be aware. Reset it. Start a new poll thread if you want, my prime goal was to make TI members voices be heard.

....that's my opinion in agreement and I hope everyone else agrees.
 
Threads in the f2p section get bumped down to page 2 in a matter of less than 24 hours with the current veteran content in there as well. Adding 29s into the fray alone will be way too many threads circulating for one person to go thru on one page, if u give each 3 main type of accounts a tag then it really is no different than having 3 different "brackets" that each one resides in. U say u do this for organization, but organization requires preciousness and separation, not generalization. If every sect of this bracket are put together there is no way under the general format of ti for it not to overflow and be a mess. People can cross-sect interact with each other by just going into the others bracket and talking. There are many friendly ppl accepted in the f2p bracket right now who are p2ps, and vice versa as well. Of curse the abrasive ppl dont hold the same spot and often cause problems, but they would do the same thing if the brackets merged. Actually they would do it even more because of the troll bait or watever being right infront of their eyes anytime they come on, rather than having to actively go into another bracket. And im sure we all know how ppl rarely ever change their internet ego's (as shown by the 100s of banned trolls / drama starters). U ignored this the first time i posted and only brought up the first part of my post [MENTION=8138]Kincaide[/MENTION] , please address this

[MENTION=8138]Kincaide[/MENTION] , please address this issue. im sure u guys had some sort of plan before making a thread on how the public feels.
 
I have been on a mostly lurking role lately, but from a lurking role here is my perspective. PLEASE do not merge the two. I can barely keep up with just the f2p section as I work, go to school, and fix cars on the side. If they were in the same section, I would get so lost in so much crap that wouldn't be relevant to me (f2p/vet only). I dont have the time to sort through it, and someone said it already, but threads go to the second page in the f2p section within a day, there is no way I click to the second page, I barely have time/patience for the first.

From, I suppose, a logistics standpoint, this is a terrible idea to merge the two. I know I'm not the only one mentioning it, but you are clearly over looking this.


Edit: Just look at the above post :D^^^
 
[MENTION=8138]Kincaide[/MENTION]Threads in the f2p section get bumped down to page 2 in a matter of less than 24 hours with the current veteran content in there as well.

It's like week 2 of vets... there's going to be a lot of spam. I doubt this will be an issue in months ahead.

This should be policed through the normal means; "does this belong in a guide section", "does this belong in a Q&A thread" and closed accordingly.

The normal process should be able to handle this IMO. I do agree with you 29s don't belong with 20s, but for different reasons.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is so much cross- pollination between the groups that one forum makes the most sense. What is the real difference between a f2p of class X and vet 20 of class X? A few looms and enchants. And a vet 20 of class X and a 29 of class X? With scaling 1 or 2 pieces of gear, a glyph, and in most cases a couple of abilities. But all have one huge similarity, all play in the 20-29 bracket.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[MENTION=18878]AlbinoCow[/MENTION] I'm sorry, I'm not sure what it is that you feel has not been addressed. I said that many of you had made some very good points about organization and that I had come to agree.

Since the conversation is still ongoing in this thread, would you guys like me to just add a poll of the various options to this thread?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top