Moderator: Community Team

The average user has never had a direct say on who gets site medals. You simply cannot ignore this and evaluate this suggestion in a vacuum. I said I am unconvinced for a reason -- because I think there are legitimate reasons why we might want such a framework in place. However, those reasons definitely need to be established before something like this can happen.jefjef wrote: So it's power thing? That's why you oppose it?
No, if I thought that clans did not contribute to CC then I would also oppose clan achievement medals (I do not). What I oppose is site recognition of contributions to an individual clan, because the average CC user is not particularly helped by, say, player X coming through on a bunch of wars for clan Y. I am entirely for medals that recognize substantial contributions to the clan community at large. If the clan community wants to set up their own internal recognition of individual clan contributions, obviously that's fine. But again, you've blitzed in here with a suggestion that completely ignores the context in which medals are presented. This can be rectified, though -- I hope you will do so.Clans and it's leaders do not contribute to CC? We do not volunteer our time to make this an enjoyable community? MANY of us in the clan world, leaders and members alike, contribute greatly to CC's welfare and profit. I find that view rather offensive as I'm sure others will too.
Then keep it that way, informally inside the clan community. If it's not a site recognition, why are you asking the site to recognize it?BTW: This is not a site recognition. It is a clan recognition for it's members. Our friends. CC's customers.



Support for a suggestion does not mean much if supporters of that suggestion actively ignore cogent criticisms of the suggestion -- because it shows either that people did not fully think through the suggestion, or do not have any desire to fully think it through. If this is indeed a good thing for the site to implement, it should not be hard to address my criticisms -- so why would you instead suggest that someone should lie to and/or ignore me?peanutsdad wrote:JJ i wouldn't bother even responding to metsfanmax truthfully, he's obviously not in support of this idea. Beings it appears he's the only that's not in support of it, as opposed to the now 4 pages of people that are in support of it, I wouldn't worry about it. Mythology and the CLA are fully in support of this, and hope it goes through.
Metsfanmax wrote:Support for a suggestion does not mean much if supporters of that suggestion actively ignore cogent criticisms of the suggestion -- because it shows either that people did not fully think through the suggestion, or do not have any desire to fully think it through. If this is indeed a good thing for the site to implement, it should not be hard to address my criticisms -- so why would you instead suggest that someone should lie to and/or ignore me?peanutsdad wrote:JJ i wouldn't bother even responding to metsfanmax truthfully, he's obviously not in support of this idea. Beings it appears he's the only that's not in support of it, as opposed to the now 4 pages of people that are in support of it, I wouldn't worry about it. Mythology and the CLA are fully in support of this, and hope it goes through.


clans refering candidates to a central authority would create the filter/standard bar4 U 2 NV wrote:i like the idea of new medals. i know many clan members who do outstanding work above and beyond what others do who need to be recognized in some way. i think having every clan able to distribute one may take the importance of what the medal can represent.
Clan A may have 3 people who organize several wars, highly active and always push their clan further. while clan B has 1 person who organized 1 war within the span of that year but was unheard from for the rest of the year. i'm sure i'm confusing but it's late and i'm tired lol. point is that there should be some sort of filter system with a standard bar.
Just because the average user has never had a say on who gets a medal doesn't mean it has to remain that way.The average user has never had a direct say on who gets site medals. You simply cannot ignore this and evaluate this suggestion in a vacuum. I said I am unconvinced for a reason -- because I think there are legitimate reasons why we might want such a framework in place. However, those reasons definitely need to be established before something like this can happen.
drunkmonkey wrote:I'm filing a C&A report right now. Its nice because they have a drop-down for "jefjef".



clan director ChemeFreak is in here supporting this suggestion. Yes they would have to issue them.Bruceswar wrote:While I support this idea it just will not work with the current CC setup medal wise. We would have to pass all our suggestions to CD's for them to review and then issue out Medals.
drunkmonkey wrote:I'm filing a C&A report right now. Its nice because they have a drop-down for "jefjef".
that's not quite true, certain criteria still needs to be met and checked for a Clan Achievement medal to be awarded.jgordon1111 wrote:Mets by your own standards this medal is a clan medal,just that each clan gets to decide which individual in the clan gets it.Not all cc members can receive clan achievement medals. So your first argument has defeated itself. It is taking nothing out of the moderators hands,because in the clan achievement medals the clan gets them,so in essence you dont decide who gets them you just hand them out, CC would still hand them out,not the clan leaders.
I suggest 1 per clan per year to keep it as a significant award. Not just another medal. If it isn't restricted everyone will be trying to give everyone a medal just cuz it's a medal. Clans could award to deserving individuals over the course of time.greenoaks wrote:that's not quite true, certain criteria still needs to be met and checked for a Clan Achievement medal to be awarded.jgordon1111 wrote:Mets by your own standards this medal is a clan medal,just that each clan gets to decide which individual in the clan gets it.Not all cc members can receive clan achievement medals. So your first argument has defeated itself. It is taking nothing out of the moderators hands,because in the clan achievement medals the clan gets them,so in essence you dont decide who gets them you just hand them out, CC would still hand them out,not the clan leaders.
some of the reasons suggested for what this could be awarded for i disagree with ie. has won games in clan wars. i also disagree with the limit of 1 per clan for every clan.
a clan could have someone create and maintain an extensive stats database, someone else create and run all clan wars and a third person spend countless hours training up clan members for combat. that's 3 medals right there. a different clan might have no one doing that stuff and so shouldn't be handing out a medal at all.
drunkmonkey wrote:I'm filing a C&A report right now. Its nice because they have a drop-down for "jefjef".

Of course not -- I just wish people would recognize that this is an issue instead of simply ignoring it. It's a major paradigm shift in what the site medals mean. I know some people may not care about this philosophical side of it but that doesn't justify some of the comments that have been made!jefjef wrote: Just because the average user has never had a say on who gets a medal doesn't mean it has to remain that way.
This potentially opens the door to other usergroups, for example, who want to award special medals for special contributions. If we say yes to clans it's just setting a double standard to say that other groups can't determine when people have done something special for their group of friends. I mean, where do you draw the line? The idea behind the site achievements was to recognize contributions to the community at large, so I don't think contributions to exclusive groups of users should be in that domain. I recognize that people like the idea of being able to reward clan members who participate a lot -- but that doesn't mean that this is the only way to recognize it (or even the most appropriate way).It's easy. CC says yes this is a fantastic idea for our customers. They code in a fancy image of a cool award. Each qualified clan picks a qualified member they, as a clan, wish to acknowledge. The said clans leaders pm a CD with who they wish to receive said award. CD enters award and the recipient receives a pm titled "You have been awarded a medal" and that awards image magically appears on the recipients wall.
Yes, all CC members can receive clan achievement medals because every member of CC is welcome to join a clan and participate in a war. However, not every CC member can potentially receive FOED's special contribution medal, because not every member is eligible to participate in their clan. Clan war medals are equivalent to tournament medals in that there's a well-defined criterion established by the staff to determine who is eligible for the medal. Not everyone will win a tournament medal in a given tournament (since inevitably some players will win and some will lose), but everyone can (if they play well). The same logic applies to clan wars. This clan special contribution idea is pretty much not related in any substantial qualitative way to the current clan achievement medals.jgordon1111 wrote:Mets by your own standards this medal is a clan medal,just that each clan gets to decide which individual in the clan gets it.Not all cc members can receive clan achievement medals. So your first argument has defeated itself. It is taking nothing out of the moderators hands,because in the clan achievement medals the clan gets them,so in essence you dont decide who gets them you just hand them out, CC would still hand them out,not the clan leaders.
Clans are NOT usergroups. Stop pulling at straws. That is a ridiculous argument. It's almost as if you are trolling...This potentially opens the door to other usergroups
drunkmonkey wrote:I'm filing a C&A report right now. Its nice because they have a drop-down for "jefjef".
The only reason clans are any different from other usergroups is because CC has formalized their matchups. There's nothing inherently better about them simply because they're exclusive and competitive -- it's just a different subculture on the site. What would your response be to a usergroup that petitioned for special contribution medals? "Sorry, you don't play games as intensely as we do, so contributions to your group don't matter as much?"jefjef wrote:Clans are NOT usergroups. Stop pulling at straws. This is a ridiculous statement.This potentially opens the door to other usergroups