VIP Memberships: Keep Them or Dump Them.

[The Master]

We now are at a crossroards where the members have to decide if they want to give up their vip status to allow all members here larger avatars, larger profile pictures, larger pm boxes, limited sig and more.

Since the people most affected are the ones who paid for vip memberships it has to be the members who decide on what happens.

[GoseiManta]

I say keep them because an incentive to donate is always good. Some people may not be yip-and-gippity to donate just to keep the site running. Money is money, the more ways to encourage folks to donate, the better.

[The Master]

how donations are going it would be more of an incentive to remove them since the last donation was 5 months ago and give features to every members to get them to come back or stay.

[DaiRed]

I want to use a sig here. Dump it.

[Revan]

I'm all for equality here.....thats all I'm gonna say...lol

[Sushi Samurai]

Like every other ranger forum site allows anyone to have sigs. But all i need r sigs, dont really care about the other stuff

[The Grand Kage]

Everyone should be treated equally, so I say dump it, and as you said Mike, their is no point in keeping them, because the last donation was that long ago.

[GoseiManta]

Well, it appears that it's already a done deal.
*Shrugs.*
Dump the VIP's, but expect a bit of a backlash from people who paid with understanding they were getting something in return. A privilege bestowed in exchange for the surrender of funds that could've been put some-where else.
Equality has nothing to do with it.
Creating inequality would only come into play if The Master just handed out sigs, and big avatar privilages to his friends, or people he liked.
That's inequality.
Just so we're clear..

[Evil Ranger]

I was wondering when the first stupid board management would happen after I returned....

So where do I start:

First off I am pretty sure you are creating legal issues here. You had a form of legal contract with the VIP users when you accepted their money. But fine nobody is going to start a law suit for this amount of money.

Secondly, is this the same board where the owner was begging for money about 1 to 2 years ago? Why the hell remove the incentive for people to spend a bit more money here so you can keep paying the server bills.

Furthermore, isn't this the same board that removed signatures 4 years back for good reasons because every single idiot that logged on suddenly had a bitchsize avatar that was 10 times the size of their average post? What would be the great answer to this issue? Having signature mods to check size or simply to have the average page content reduced to 60% text and 40% avatars/signatures.

[Hadouken]

I paid for this priveledge, it may be selfish...But I say keep em'. Its easy for those who said "dump em" to say that, since they didn't actually pay anything for them.

If you get rid of them, I want my money back...or at least half. You will get backlash about this.

Bah, its gonna happen, we all know Mike makes these decisions and never listens to people.

[Thor]

Definately keep them, that's really no question for me. Me and other VIPs paid for it, so it would just be wrong to say now "No VIP anymore, sigs and bigger avatars for everyone." ...this has nothing to do with equality at all. Some members paid to get bigger avatars and sigs and in that case everyone will get it without paying.

I also think that this poll makes no sense. There are more not-VIP's than VIP's on here, so most likely there will be more votes for "Lose Them", because there are more people who would get an advantage by VIP's losing their status.

[Fire Warrior]

I also say keep them. Getting rid of VIPs will just alienate those who've already paid to get the PRIVILEGE for bigger avatars and signatures, not keep more people coming. And then what will our payment have been for: nothing.

[SHR]

I say lose them. Equality should be free for everyone. Whether you paid or did not pay. Plus like Mike said, the last donation was 5 months ago!

ER-The avatars don't have to be "bitchsize" avatars. They dont' have to be huge like 200x200. Whats a big deal if everyone gets 120x120 avatars, IMO that's not huge at all.

[Evil Ranger]

ER-The avatars don't have to be "bitchsize" avatars. They dont' have to be huge like 200x200. Whats a big deal if everyone gets 120x120 avatars, IMO that's not huge at all.

My bad.... the bitchsize was referring to the signatures (which is worse)

[Lord of Darkness]

No use of this disscusion.. who has VIP wants to keem 'em, but who doesn't has VIP wants to lose them, so no use!

[Sakuya Tachibana]

You think having the larger PM and sigs limited to VIP's is crap? Try RB, the only way to even HAVE an avatar is to pay for VIP. There is no such thing as a signature on RB ~AT ALL~.
Don't like it? Then stop bitching about it and deal with it!

Note: This is in my opinion as a Member & VIP, the fact I'm Staff has no link to this message!

[Hadouken]

I say lose them. Equality should be free for everyone. Whether you paid or did not pay. Plus like Mike said, the last donation was 5 months ago!

The way I see it, I didn't pay for VIP to donate...I paid for a product which I have use of. To see that product that I paid for, to be given out for free after I paid my own money for it, is infuriating.

It isn't about equality - thats a pile of crap. It's about Mike trying another one of his schemes to boost site traffic...And just like the board split, and his thousands of ideas before...This will fail.

However...If he refunds everyones VIP payments (which I highly doubt) then i'll be fine with that.

[Evil Ranger]

No use of this disscusion.. who has VIP wants to keem 'em, but who doesn't has VIP wants to lose them, so no use!

I am not a VIP and still want to keep it around....

[SHR]

My bad.... the bitchsize was referring to the signatures (which is worse)

Oh I completely agree about teh sigs then. If they have big sigs, it stretches out the page and makes the page longer in width and length.

[AbaWhite2027]

Im gonan have to say if these ppl pay to have things like icons under there names, colored names in posts or in the shoutbox then let them keep it. It would be diffrent if it wasn't free and just a sweet deal these members got.

(Just maybe limit the size of those banners on there siggies)

Plus im sure you guys can use the donation help :)

[The Grand Kage]

What if it where dropped once your VIP ran out?

[Thor]

What if it where dropped once your VIP ran out?

When the VIP of really everyone ran out then it would be ok, but not a single day earlier. I'm not against dumping VIP because I'm egoistic and want to keep my status, I'm against it because it wouldn't be fair for everyone who bought it.

[SHR]

Well how long would it take until all the VIP memberships ran out?

[Evil Ranger]

It's just said how everyone jumps on the change to get a signature without thinking about the long term effects it will have on this board.... it really is just sad....

Almost as sad as a board owner thinking that the current paying vips wouldn't be pissed of by this idea and by posting it in the general board space instead of their VIP lounge (I assume they still have one) :)

[Thor]

It's just said how everyone jumps on the change to get a signature without thinking about the long term effects it will have on this board.... it really is just sad....

Almost as sad as a board owner thinking that the current paying vips wouldn't be pissed of by this idea and by posting it in the general board space instead of their VIP lounge (I assume they still have one) :)

Nope, their is no VIP lounge.

And with such a change VIP's (often members who use to spend that much time on here, that they are even willing to pay) will get pissed and might leave, in case they haven't already ...another nail in the casket of this board.

[Fire Warrior]

The only, and i mean only, way I would support the removal of VIPs is if everyone who paid for it gets a full refund. Not one of those "you get this much back because you used this much time," I mean the whole thing. And since that will never happen...

All I can say is this: Mike, stop trying your stupid schemes to boost traffic when all they do is kill you board a little more each time.

[Joker]

Well I'm glad I didn't donate like I started to yesterday lol uh...keep the VIP. Other VIP and non-VIP members have made good points...but I would be for keeping VIP at least until all of them ran out. It is a good little incentive to have, but in the end if you change things now you'll lose some members.

I have noticed through the years that RT has taken a blow to it's member size...or active members it seems. I don't know. Anyway Keep VIP.

[ZeoX]

I say let the VIP members only vote on this, It doesn't really affect the rest of us.

Yes we'd get cool stuff, but really THEY are the ones that have to give something up. you poll EVERYONE when the ones gaining something are in the vast majority, then of course its gonna pass.

So I say let those that have something to lose decide.

[ImBillPardy]

I say fight to the death winner picks what happens! And can we stop the in house bickering, its hard to get me serious or annoyed but in house bickering fucks me off to no end ive already left so many sights because of it...and i was only involved in the bickering once (fucking Tommo over at HOJ) but seriously lets just get along or ELSE!

http://www.halolz.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/halolz-dot-com-batmanarkhamassylum-chokeabitch.jpg

[Evil Ranger]

Nope, their is no VIP lounge.

That's just sad... It take 5 minutes for an admin to set up this extra feature for paying members.

And with such a change VIP's (often members who use to spend that much time on here, that they are even willing to pay) will get pissed and might leave, in case they haven't already ...another nail in the casket of this board.

Indeed....


All I can say is this: Mike, stop trying your stupid schemes to boost traffic when all they do is kill you board a little more each time.


Don't let it get to you mate, that's what drove me off the board staff hand this board. Just smilie, sit back and enjoy the ride :)

[Jiemusu]

Haha, I just love threads like this.

Right, here goes.

The way I see it, I didn't pay for VIP to donate...I paid for a product which I have use of. To see that product that I paid for, to be given out for free after I paid my own money for it, is infuriating.

Totally see where Hadouken is coming from. If I paid something for myself, only to discover that it would soon be taken away as a special status that I paid for with my hard earned money, and given to everyone, then I would be furious. I mean what would be the point in me paying in the first place? If I could just wait, and get it free? I've paid, I deserve something extra to everyone else, the board owner would owe me at least that, something extra, if my funds are going to waste.

Seeing as VIPs would probably be axed completely in those circumstances, Mike would be required to return the money the VIPers paid directly back to them.

But what am I thinking, that would require Mike to actually listen to, and consider the effects, of someone else apart from himself. How silly of me.

It isn't about equality - thats a pile of crap. It's about Mike trying another one of his schemes to boost site traffic...And just like the board split, and his thousands of ideas before...This will fail.

Rangertalk redux, again and again.

We could list a number of failed attempts at getting this site back to the prime it was.

Mike randomly deleting the whole site and redirecting it to a completely empty one to start from scratch, without even giving members or staff so much as a month warning before hand, simply because as the board owner, he "had enough and wanted a change".

Changing the name about a million times, changing the main board franchise focus about a thousand times. Either because he couldn't decide what he was even doing, or because the site started to fail so badly it had no chance whatsoever with competing with other ranger sites, that he figured making it a general otaku site or even a Kamen Rider focus site would somehow bring it a fresh atmosphere for fresh traffic.

Desperate for measures, he reverted back to rangerdom, creating a sister site to "network" more.

That failed, so he just merged the sites.

Now he's trying to remove the idea of V.I.Ps so everyone feels important by having sigs, so he gets more traffic.

The sad thing is, if he handled himself like a real administrator before hand, he wouldn't be in shitcreek now.

Almost as sad as a board owner thinking that the current paying vips wouldn't be pissed of by this idea and by posting it in the general board space instead of their VIP lounge (I assume they still have one) :)

Evil, that would require Mike to actually pay attention to the thoughts and feelings of anyone but himself. You know you're asking too much.

Nope, their is no VIP lounge.

And with such a change VIP's (often members who use to spend that much time on here, that they are even willing to pay) will get pissed and might leave, in case they haven't already ...another nail in the casket of this board.

Most people have left already, and gone to Rangercrew. A board not without it's imperfections, but one that doesn't piss about with it's members.

This site is a shell of what it once was.

Take me, I considered myself once a highly active member of this board, did all I could as a staff member (for what cause?) and apparently I'm still the top poster of this board, even though I stopped being an active member early August last year when Mike decided to be a massive douche, demoting staff that "didn't agree with his ego", me, Phazon, hell probably others too, I haven't really been keeping track on that front. I abandoned and left this site, because I found it sick the way things were handled.

Early August 2009 I stopped, 5 months later and I'm still apparently the top poster. In fact I don't think the top poster board has even budged at all, that's really worrying. Not being up myself or anything, but with 2,067 posts belonging to me, barely budged since last year, and still being the highest, that really reflects what this board has come to.

People aren't posting enough, activity isn't what it should be.

The only, and i mean only, way I would support the removal of VIPs is if everyone who paid for it gets a full refund. Not one of those "you get this much back because you used this much time," I mean the whole thing. And since that will never happen...

Agreed, to be fair, it's the least Mike can do.

But that would involve doing something for another human being.

All I can say is this: Mike, stop trying your stupid schemes to boost traffic when all they do is kill you board a little more each time.

True words.

But if you ask me, the board is already dead.

I have noticed through the years that RT has taken a blow to it's member size...or active members it seems. I don't know. Anyway Keep VIP.

Like I said, they've all gone to Rangercrew because that site doesn't toy with it's memberbase.

Like I said, I'm apparently the most active member according to the specifics, and I left the site about 6 months ago. This, is really worrying.

I say let the VIP members only vote on this, It doesn't really affect the rest of us.

Yes we'd get cool stuff, but really THEY are the ones that have to give something up. you poll EVERYONE when the ones gaining something are in the vast majority, then of course its gonna pass.

So I say let those that have something to lose decide.

Yeah, because that won't be a bias vote at all.

All or most the V.I.Ps will likely want it to stay, more of the non V.I.Ps will opt for it to be gone, and you're only taking the votes of those that more than not are bias to it needing to stay?

Smooth.

That's just sad... It take 5 minutes for an admin to set up this extra feature for paying members.

Mike =/= listening to and doing things for another human being.

Don't let it get to you mate, that's what drove me off the board staff hand this board. Just smilie, sit back and enjoy the ride :)

Despite your status and run time being both bigger and longer than me, I understand where you're coming from.


Anyway, my main view.

V.I.P members paid for this shit, they should at least get their money back if everyone else is getting these privileges.

You should keep V.I.Ps because it gives the board money? Er nothing is going to save the board now. Mike thinks it's cool to handle things exactly how he wants without listening to anyone else, he can fork out and pay for the crap out of his own pockets, I think it's sick that you people do everything for him, and he only goes to thank you by messing around with that trust.

Don't give him your money, let everyone have a signature, then Mike can stop treating others as worthy for certain privileges only if they give him money, maybe he can start treating members as human beings with thoughts and feelings, and not turn it into an elitist thing of who can fill his wallet up the most.

V.I.Ps didn't even get a V.I.P lounge for crying out loud, Mike wasn't thinking about them, all he wanted to do was persuade gullible fools into giving him money, because he knew they wouldn't give him any attitude or lip, they would just go along with it. You didn't even get a lounge. What was your privileges? Customizing your profile, colourful name, use of signature? You paid for that. You might think it's a way of saying "I give to the site I love", but really it's "who's the biggest tool".

Paying for signatures, that's crazy, it always was, I always thought it was. So Rangerboard demands you pay even for an avatar? Yeah, let's use Rangerboard as the grounds and means of a respectful comparison, whoever mentioned Rangerboard before needs to get real. Look at the site, look how cluttered and unorganized it is. I'm not here to bitch about other boards but, you implied that we should be grateful because another board makes you pay for avatars, that board has it's own flaws, flaws that prevent me from feeling comfortable for using it as a suitable comparison. "SOMEONE ELSE DID IT SO I CAN TO!" Let's be serious here, no.

What about all the millions of other boards out there? Of all the boards I've been a member of, they've pretty much allowed sigs and avatars without paying apart from two, Rangerboard with sigs and avatars for V.I.Ps only, and this (multi name changing board of indecision) with sigs for V.I.Ps only.

You shouldn't pay for something that's pretty much a given when you sign up to most boards, sigs are a necessary part of a message board, they give your account a sense of identity. You shouldn't have to feed the site owners' pockets just to have a sense of identity.

[Raging Phoenix]

I'm guessing siggies are enough to handle if only a few have them (I remember having to tell staff members (!) that their siggies were too big). I fear a huge amount of siggies that fill your screen and lots of work for the Admins/Super Mods to remove them.

I wouldn't mind the bigger avatars though, that will hurt no one.

That's the technical side of things though, I feel it's a bit unfair to have it be special perks for VIPs, and then remove it after a while. Those people paid for it, though the old VIP memberships weren't that expensive, granted. I dunno about the new ones with the different levels and all. I actually feel VIPs don't get enough. It's simply not appealing for them to be VIP, because they get very little and it can be quite a hassle (I never did it simply because it would involve credit cards that I don't have). I'd actually suggest bringing back the subforums for VIPs, and I don't mean that place which was like a boardgame room for VIPs, I mean that every VIP has their own subforum they can post stuff in and moderate. They can choose whether it's RPGs, Fan-Fics, discussions, art or a combination of those things. I remember some guy called Angel Ranger had one and Bluestar too at some point.

[Jiemusu]

Message boards have this thing, called moderation. vBulletin has this feature, called infraction, within that infraction is an option that is labelled "signature violation".

If you're staff, enforce that, it's your job as a staffer. Just because a few bad apples break a few guidelines, a site is going to let all members suffer unless they pay?

Too much work? Employ more staffers then. I'm sure there are quite a few weak willed people, void of independent thought, on this site that Mike will be happy to promote because they'll just go along with whatever he says, and Mike likes that.

About the unfairness for those that have paid, either return every dime back to them, or wait until their V.I.P runs out before going ahead with the change.

Raging Phoenix, if we give V.I.Ps each their own subforums to moderate, we might as well just make them moderators.

So effectively, every member is a V.I.P, and you pay Mike to get staff powers.

[Raging Phoenix]

Take me, I considered myself once a highly active member of this board, did all I could as a staff member (for what cause?) and apparently I'm still the top poster of this board, even though I stopped being an active member early August last year when Mike decided to be a massive douche, demoting staff that "didn't agree with his ego", me, Phazon, hell probably others too, I haven't really been keeping track on that front. I abandoned and left this site, because I found it sick the way things were handled.

Early August 2009 I stopped, 5 months later and I'm still apparently the top poster. In fact I don't think the top poster board has even budged at all, that's really worrying. Not being up myself or anything, but with 2,067 posts belonging to me, barely budged since last year, and still being the highest, that really reflects what this board has come to.

The fact you were removed from staff wasn't because your views differed, and you should know that.

To be honest, if you really hate Mike that much, just don't come here. Or at least don't bash about like that. You clearly don't know Mike. Something people don't understand is that no person is "evil". It is to no benefit to Mike to hurt his own site, so it's just a failed project he felt was right at the start.

Although the site has seen a decline in members lately and it might not be as active anymore, it once WAS active, while Mike was board owner, something many other boards can't say, so he has done at right at least for a while. The only reason it might not come back, is because I recon the community itself is shrinking. The latest seasons haven't been real successes, even though they weren't bad and now it's stopped altogether. Some nostalgia might kick in, but still.

Message boards have this thing, called moderation. vBulletin has this feature, called infraction, within that infraction is an option that is labelled "signature violation".

If you're staff, enforce that, it's your job as a staffer. Just because a few bad apples break a few guidelines, a site is going to let all members suffer unless they pay?

Too much work? Employ more staffers then. I'm sure there are quite a few weak willed people, void of independent thought, on this site that Mike will be happy to promote because they'll just go along with whatever he says, and Mike likes that.

About the unfairness for those that have paid, either return every dime back to them, or wait until their V.I.P runs out before going ahead with the change.

Raging Phoenix, if we give V.I.Ps each their own subforums to moderate, we might as well just make them moderators.

So effectively, every member is a V.I.P, and you pay Mike to get staff powers.

Fact is that signatures will be large, whether you moderate them or not. And even for the short while they may be huge before a Mod catches it, it's annoying. Also, moderating is enough work when you have to read all the new posts of the day, if you also have to check whether no one changed their siggy to something ridiculous... I don't think it can be done. Because some people, trying to beat the system, might just change it and not post, so that you don't spot it or something. Good staff is hard enough to find, good members don't make good staff.

About the people who do make it to staff, they are all but weak willed. You're quite bitter and I find that sad. I suggest you take some looking at yourself. Sure Phaze got demoted as well, but in the end he agreed the whole adventure between him and Mike and the new board was probably a wrong idea from both sides (IIRC).

Also, giving them their own subforums will only allow them to organize their own threads and apply minor moderation in it. Their exact powers, even in their own subforums, would have to be carefully picked and it's only there so they can keep their own forum organized in the way they want it. I'm thinking stuff like stickying and closing threads.

Also, how do members "suffer" when they don't have a siggy? Is it THAT important? Does it really mess up your whole experience? If that's the case, I feel sad for you. Having siggies is just a little extra right now you can use for some cool picture or linking to a thread you made. That's not what a board is about, so the fact it's optional if you pay a little isn't that weird. The fact I'm against everyone having them because it makes for huge siggies everywhere is just why I don't like them in the first place. As a staff member I rarely used them purely for that reason. I don't like siggies and that's why I'm glad only VIPs have them. I recon they are a bit more responsible on average as well, compared to Mr. Johnny Two Shoes who just registers, makes a humongous siggy and starts spamming away.

[Jiemusu]

The fact you were removed from staff wasn't because your views differed, and you should know that.

To be honest, if you really hate Mike that much, just don't come here. Or at least don't bash about like that. You clearly don't know Mike. Something people don't understand is that no person is "evil". It is to no benefit to Mike to hurt his own site, so it's just a failed project he felt was right at the start.

Although the site has seen a decline in members lately and it might not be as active anymore, it once WAS active, while Mike was board owner, something many other boards can't say, so he has done at right at least for a while. The only reason it might not come back, is because I recon the community itself is shrinking. The latest seasons haven't been real successes, even though they weren't bad and now it's stopped altogether. Some nostalgia might kick in, but still.

Not that any of this is really relevant, but under it all, that's very likely exactly the root of what it was. I was the most active poster, and probably the most active and enthusiastic staffer at the time, constantly trying to help new members, and I got booted because I picked Mike up on something after he failed to assist me with helping a member with a V.I.P query. I'd probably brush it off and leave it if it was just me, but a similar thing happened to Phazon Ranger a short time later, demotion due to not seeing a perfect eye to eye, or to put it simply "disagreeing", having an independent thought which doesn't correlate to him. The correlation is noticeable if the apparent lead admin is denied their role shortly after, for debatably the same thing. Phazon handles things maturely and wants to talk it out, Mike just dismisses that because he's "being disrespected" when someone just had a tiny clash with what he thought. Big deal if you reckon it's "sorted", the fact is it happened, and the fact is the board faces constant politics both staff internal, and members globally, that kills it slowly each time, and I'm not the only one that thinks that.

And hate is such a strong term to use Rage, don't throw it around if you don't understand it's meaning. So is evil, again don't throw it around if you don't know it's meaning. I'm not saying I hate Mike, or that he is evil, so don't put words into people's mouths unless stems from your own subconscious, I'm simply saying Mike makes poor decisions based off what he feels is only good for him at the time, and never really listens to what the members want, hence reflected on the appalling downfall of the site as shown.

You just have to read over this thread, and look at what people are saying, I calculated about 4 or 5 people standing up so far in this thread, and expressing what they feel about Mike related politics. It's not just me.

Yes it was active, before Mike toyed with the memberbase without listening to them or their needs, and generally started to drive each member away.

Those that have stayed, I applaud them, but soon they will leave.

Fact is that signatures will be large, whether you moderate them or not. And even for the short while they may be huge before a Mod catches it, it's annoying. Also, moderating is enough work when you have to read all the new posts of the day, if you also have to check whether no one changed their siggy to something ridiculous... I don't think it can be done. Because some people, trying to beat the system, might just change it and not post, so that you don't spot it or something. Good staff is hard enough to find, good members don't make good staff.

From what I've learned from this board, and many others, pretty much anyone can make a "good staffer" in the eyes of the member and admin, they don't even need to be any good at their job, they can be rubbish at it, but they can be moulded, or just agree with what the top dawg wants to hear so that they can keep their spot.

If there are large signatures, the problem is that member, not all members who don't pay.

Are you honestly, honestly, telling me that it's too much work for THIS board to moderate signatures on top of the main board content? No Rage, this board isn't active anymore. I left about 6 months ago, and I'm apparently still the top poster, not enough traffic is coming through, don't tell me it's too much hard work, if it is then this site needs to employ better more competent staffers. I've part of many message boards bigger than this, even a respected staffer on one, which actually have constant activity and traffic steaming through daily, with a larger active memberbase, and they still find the time to both MODERATE THE BOARDS, as WELL AS SIGNATURES. Don't tell me the staff here find it too hard for a board as small and inactive as this, because if they are at all good staffers like you say, I don't believe that for one second.

Many staffers on other boards (including me) manage it absolutely fine, so what's so different here with the staff team? Am I missing something, or did I just hit the nail right on the head?

About the people who do make it to staff, they are all but weak willed. You're quite bitter and I find that sad. I suggest you take some looking at yourself. Sure Phaze got demoted as well, but in the end he agreed the whole adventure between him and Mike and the new board was probably a wrong idea from both sides (IIRC).

Just pointing out the observations bud. That's what I do, I voice what others are too quiet or afraid to do.

Also, how do members "suffer" when they don't have a siggy? Is it THAT important? Does it really mess up your whole experience? If that's the case, I feel sad for you. Having siggies is just a little extra right now you can use for some cool picture or linking to a thread you made. That's not what a board is about, so the fact it's optional if you pay a little isn't that weird. The fact I'm against everyone having them because it makes for huge siggies everywhere is just why I don't like them in the first place. As a staff member I rarely used them purely for that reason. I don't like siggies and that's why I'm glad only VIPs have them. I recon they are a bit more responsible on average as well, compared to Mr. Johnny Two Shoes who just registers, makes a humongous siggy and starts spamming away.

Yes, a signature is part of your identity, it sets you as different to everyone else, and yes you could argue that avatars do the same, but sigs help that.

Many boards don't add charges for sigs, now why is that?

These boards are also far more active.

Go figure.

[Raging Phoenix]

Not that any of this is really relevant, but under it all, that's very likely exactly the root of what it was. I'd probably brush it off and leave it if it was just me, but the same thing happened to Phazon Ranger a short time later, demotion due to not seeing a perfect eye to eye, or to put it simply "disagreeing", having an independent thought which doesn't correlate to him. The correlation is noticeable if the apparent lead admin is denied their role shortly after, for debatably the same thing. Phazon handles things maturely and wants to talk it out, Mike just dismisses that because he's "being disrespected" when someone just had a tiny clash with what he thought. Big deal if you reckon it's "sorted", the fact is it happened, and the fact is the board faces constant politics both staff internal, and members globally, that kills it slowly each time, and I'm not the only one that thinks that.

And hate is such a strong term to use Rage, don't throw it around if you don't understand it's meaning. So is evil, again don't throw it around if you don't know it's meaning. I'm not saying I hate Mike, or that he is evil, so don't put words into people's mouths unless stems from your own subconscious, I'm simply saying Mike makes poor decisions based off what he feels is only good for him at the time, and never really listens to what the members want, hence reflected on the appalling downfall of the site as shown.

Do not patronize me, for I don't patronize you.

You just have to read over this thread, and look at what people are saying, I calculated about 4 or 5 people standing up so far in this thread, and expressing what they feel about Mike related politics. It's not just me.

Yes it was active, before Mike toyed with the memberbase without listening to them or their needs, and generally started to drive each member away.

Those that have stayed, I applaud them, but soon they will leave.

I think the ones who do state a similar opinion never tried talking with Mike. I must say I felt the same way at some point, however I never vented it on here, because I don't feel that's fair. After I decided to step down I did explain to him how I felt. We had a good talk and it made many things clear to me. It would help you if you try and see it from the other side instead of focussing on how he was to you and how you felt about it.

From what I've learned from this board, and many others, pretty much anyone can make a "good staffer" in the eyes of the member and admin, they don't even need to be any good at their job, they can be rubbish at it, but they can be moulded.

If there are large signatures, the problem is that member, not all members who don't pay.

Are you honestly, honestly, telling me that it's too much work for THIS board to moderate signatures on top of the main board? No Rage, this board isn't active anymore. I left about 6 months ago, and I'm apparently still the top poster, not enough traffic is coming through, don't tell me it's too much hard work, if it is then this site needs to employ better more competent staffers. I've part of many message boards bigger than this, and which actually have constant activity and traffic steaming through daily, with a larger active memberbase, and they still find the time to both MODERATE THE BOARDS, as WELL AS SIGNATURES. Don't tell me the staff here find it too hard for a board as small and inactive as this, because if they are at all good staffers, I don't believe that for one second.

You say the traffic will be higher when everyone can have signatures. I'll talk about that later, but fact is that if there were signatures, you'd have more members (according to you), so it wouldn't be so inactive. Also I think it's perfectly clear most members would love to be Moderator, just to show how much they love this site and how they are important, and then don't do anything with their position.

Your argument about how other boards do it... Well, I think you pretty much took that argument out before yourself...

Just pointing out the observations bud. That's what I do, I voice what others are too quiet or afraid to do.

Don't assume people who don't say the things you say are just afraid to say them, for some simply don't agree. I think some things have changed internally after you left as well.

Yes, a signature is part of your identity, it sets you as different to everyone else, and yes you could argue that avatars do the same, but sigs help that.

Many boards don't add charges for sigs, now why is that?

These boards are also far more active.

Go figure.

Other sites are also often not called RangerTalk, so maybe it's the name too? So in fact Mike was right changing it. I also think most boards don't have me as a member, so maybe that's it?

Linking signatures to activity is a very poorly drawn conclusion in this matter. And again you said yourself saying "another one does it, so why don't we" is a bad argument to begin with. Although that's not even entirely true.

I always thought your identity is mostly shown by your opinions and posts in general. Your name and avatar add to that. However, your name is simply to understand it's the same person posting. I used to recognize members by avatars. They don't require siggies in addition to that. It seems just a way to advertise RPGs or other random stuff. It's quite superficial.

[Jiemusu]

Do not patronize me, for I don't patronize you.

Didn't patronize you then. You really must stop throwing words out at me without utilizing their meaning correctly for the applied context. That's not patronizing, that's being blunt. Patronizing would be treating you like a child, and I'm not doing that, I treated you like an equal then.

I think the ones who do state a similar opinion never tried talking with Mike. I must say I felt the same way at some point, however I never vented it on here, because I don't feel that's fair. After I decided to step down I did explain to him how I felt. We had a good talk and it made many things clear to me. It would help you if you try and see it from the other side instead of focussing on how he was to you and how you felt about it.

People are too afraid to vent sometimes, and that just makes me sad, that people have displeasure, just tuck it away, and pretend nothing is wrong when they know full well it is. If it was up to me, I'd have the memberbase voice their concerns more, and feel free to do so. They shouldn't be afraid to come out, but many are.

I see what you're saying, but sometimes when people behave in such a matter, they almost don't deserve to be treated in a civil way until they at least acknowledge their errors. I acknowledge mine, but then I also acknowledge the good I did that was ignored. I was the one that came up with the rules of this site, I tried to help fellow staff out with queries, and then booted because of a disagreement. My point of me illustrating this is to show what kind of politics the board faces far too often, so you and Mike "had a talk", ok that solves it between you two, but not the whole board.

It's different for you because you're a "respected member" that Mike would likely acknowledge existed.

And for the record, yes I did try to have a "human talk" with Mike, he was really vague the whole time, and just signed off/blocked me without even handling it maturely. He wasn't prepared to discuss it like an adult, just a kid that wanted his own way. I've a reason to be displeased.

Mike needs to improve on his communication to members.

You say the traffic will be higher when everyone can have signatures. I'll talk about that later, but fact is that if there were signatures, you'd have more members (according to you), so it wouldn't be so inactive. Also I think it's perfectly clear most members would love to be Moderator, just to show how much they love this site and how they are important, and then don't do anything with their position.

The reason traffic will be higher if everyone can have signatures is because they give people more of an identity that will make more people feel more welcome, hence activity. But it's not an instant boost, it takes time, precious time that was lost due to unfortunate constant past situations.

The thing I find so strange is that, if members "love this site", why isn't the activity higher? Why isn't my post count of 2,070 topped by someone else after 6 months of (pretty much) inactivity?

Your argument about how other boards do it... Well, I think you pretty much took that argument out before yourself...

This makes no sense.

Other, bigger, more active, boards manage to moderate sigs, and yet this smaller, less active, board can't.

Don't assume people who don't say the things you say are just afraid to say them, for some simply don't agree. I think some things have changed internally after you left as well.

While I can't view things internally through inactivity, somehow I seriously doubt that. RT/OH (whatever name it's going to have next, Weeboo United or whatever) faced constant internal clashes and politics, only to apparently be healed with staff changes, then the same thing happens, and it's roots lie in the decision Mike makes. It didn't change then, so why would it change now?

Other sites are also often not called RangerTalk, so maybe it's the name too? So in fact Mike was right changing it. I also think most boards don't have me as a member, so maybe that's it?

Again, this doesn't make much sense.

Linking signatures to activity is a very poorly drawn conclusion in this matter. And again you said yourself saying "another one does it, so why don't we" is a bad argument to begin with. Although that's not even entirely true.

Not exactly my point.

I'm saying signatures will help as grounds, not that it's the prime solution.

Every board I'm part of, apart from this and Rangerboard, allow sigs for everyone.

These boards are successful with daily traffic, but RT is constantly in need of gimmicks to grab back the running memberbase. Signatures will help with that.

The "others do it, so why don't we" argument doesn't fit as smoothly here, I used that in reference to Rangerboard not having avatars for non V.I.P, which is a RARE thing for a message board. Here, I'm talking about HAVING sigs for non V.I.P, which is a COMMON thing for a message board.

Minority =/= majority.

I always thought your identity is mostly shown by your opinions and posts in general. Your name and avatar add to that. However, your name is simply to understand it's the same person posting. I used to recognize members by avatars. They don't require siggies in addition to that. It seems just a way to advertise RPGs or other random stuff. It's quite superficial.

Call me crazy, but I like to see members with their own unique individualism. I despite the idea of clones everywhere. Yes, people act differently through their posts and opinions, but then at an overview all you're seeing is text, there's no face or image to match that text too, avatars are very important in that respect. They make a poster seem, more human.

Signatures help with that, signatures are a members' own personal space, which they can customize in accordance to it's ruling, again it promotes individualism. I don't approve of someone having to pay to achieve true individualism, they should just have it. It helps you understand what character or team that person may prefer, what they're currently doing across the board or even just the internet, you can tell alot from sigs.

[Raging Phoenix]

Didn't patronize you then. You really must stop throwing words out at me without utilizing their meaning correctly for the applied context. That's not patronizing, that's being blunt. Patronizing would be treating you like a child, and I'm not doing that, I treated you like an equal then.

You act as though I don't know what I am saying. That's patronizing.

People are too afraid to vent sometimes, and that just makes me sad, that people have displeasure, just tuck it away, and pretend nothing is wrong when they know full well it is. If it was up to me, I'd have the memberbase voice their concerns more, and feel free to do so. They shouldn't be afraid to come out, but many are.

I see what you're saying, but sometimes when people behave in such a matter, they almost don't deserve to be treated in a civil way until they at least acknowledge their errors. I acknowledge mine, but then I also acknowledge the good I did that was ignored. I was the one that came up with the rules of this site, I tried to help fellow staff out with queries, and then booted because of a disagreement. My point of me illustrating this is to show what kind of politics the board faces far too often, so you and Mike "had a talk", ok that solves it between you two, but not the whole board.

It's different for you because you're a "respected member" that Mike would likely acknowledge existed.

And for the record, yes I did try to have a "human talk" with Mike, he was really vague the whole time, and just signed off/blocked me without even handling it maturely. He wasn't prepared to discuss it like an adult, just a kid that wanted his own way. I've a reason to be displeased.

Mike needs to improve on his communication to members.

During your time as a Mod you listened to no one and just powered through. That's the reason you were demoted. You were bossing around your equals. I recon you actually talked to Mike after HE demoted YOU. Ofcourse this is just an assumption, but that would be a difference, your relationship would have been severed. I left because my love for the board and the community as a whole had faded away. Therefore I could still talk on a friendly level.

Either way, I'm not saying Mike handles everything to perfection, but you can't expect it. In the end it helps yourself if you try and view it from the other side. I know it is hard, it wasn't easy for me either. Either way, you pull Phazon Ranger into this like he had the same problem you had, but they were entirely different. The fact you think they are so similar shows you never really grasped what was going on.

The reason traffic will be higher if everyone can have signatures is because they give people more of an identity that will make more people feel more welcome, hence activity. But it's not an instant boost, it takes time, precious time that was lost due to unfortunate constant past situations.

The thing I find so strange is that, if members "love this site", why isn't the activity higher? Why isn't my post count of 2,070 topped by someone else after 6 months of (pretty much) inactivity?

2000+ post is hard for anyone to top, the spamming involved isn't worth it for most. On top of that I do agree the forum is less active, which doesn't allow as much posting to begin with. I never denied the board is having issues with activity, I just think signatures will hardly make an impact. I feel that, if VIP memberships would be more interesting, like with the subforums, they would be bought more, given it being an active and stable board, so they don't feel it'll be redundant in 2 months time.

This makes no sense.

Other, bigger, more active, boards manage to moderate sigs, and yet this smaller, less active, board can't.

That's exactly the reason. The smaller the board, the less there is to do, so members will be less active. Therefore it's harder to find staff between them, as it's doubtful they want to put the time in. The activity difference is, IMO, mostly because there's a more narrow top of members (activity-wise). I'm guessing there are, comparibly, more people who post under 10 posts in total, yet they all have access to signatures. As Evil Ranger stated, the siggies were removed before BECAUSE they were abused.

While I can't view things internally through inactivity, somehow I seriously doubt that. RT/OH (whatever name it's going to have next, Weeboo United or whatever) faced constant internal clashes and politics, only to apparently be healed with staff changes, then the same thing happens, and it's roots lie in the decision Mike makes. It didn't change then, so why would it change now?

Simply put: Mike takes a lot of effort in being open towards his staff now. I haven't spoken to him lately to see the results, but that's the essence of what was the problem before.

Again, this doesn't make much sense.

Means your conclusion is thin.

Not exactly my point.

I'm saying signatures will help as grounds, not that it's the prime solution.

Every board I'm part of, apart from this and Rangerboard, allow sigs for everyone.

These boards are successful with daily traffic, but RT is constantly in need of gimmicks to grab back the running memberbase. Signatures will help with that.

The "others do it, so why don't we" argument doesn't fit as smoothly here, I used that in reference to Rangerboard not having avatars for non V.I.P, which is a RARE thing for a message board. Here, I'm talking about HAVING sigs for non V.I.P, which is a COMMON thing for a message board.

Minority =/= majority.

Like you said signatures aren't a prime solution. I'd go as far as saying it is no solution at all. I think there are very few people who'd drop off without signatures, and equally few who'd come/stay with signatures. It adds nothing.

Also, "not equal" is typed as <>, not =/=

Call me crazy, but I like to see members with their own unique individualism. I despite the idea of clones everywhere. Yes, people act differently through their posts and opinions, but then at an overview all you're seeing is text, there's no face or image to match that text too, avatars are very important in that respect. They make a poster seem, more human.

Signatures help with that, signatures are a members' own personal space, which they can customize in accordance to it's ruling, again it promotes individualism. I don't approve of someone having to pay to achieve true individualism, they should just have it. It helps you understand what character or team that person may prefer, what they're currently doing across the board or even just the internet, you can tell alot from sigs.

Signatures are not the difference between being a number or being a unique member. Name and avatar do that enough. Signature is just an extension of that, that doesn't actually add to it. It's much like having a personal colouring of your nametag or a forced skin used on your profile. The little it brings doesn't weigh in against the trouble it brings.

[Question]

Also, "not equal" is typed as <>, not =/=

Both are fine. I've always used =/=.

[Jiemusu]

You act as though I don't know what I am saying. That's patronizing.

There's probably a reason why you think that, it's because I don't think you really understand what I'm saying.

In the following quotes I'm about to quote, it illustrates this. Not meaning this as a snipe, but I really feel you're not quite getting the full picture of my posts.

During your time as a Mod you listened to no one and just powered through. That's the reason you were demoted. You were bossing around your equals. I recon you actually talked to Mike after HE demoted YOU. Ofcourse this is just an assumption, but that would be a difference, your relationship would have been severed. I left because my love for the board and the community as a whole had faded away. Therefore I could still talk on a friendly level.

This, for one, is you not getting the full picture of the circumstances. This is why I don't feel you know why I was demoted. I wasn't "bossing around equals". If staff made threads asking for assistance, I gave them help, yes I was blunt and too the point, that's in my nature, and the super mods refused to listen to that because they thought they were superior and didn't need to listen to a "new regular mod". You don't make threads asking for advice, and then crap on someone when they give it. It was a rare event, because I'm one of the few people who actually voice concern, and probably one of the rare people on the staff that voiced concern if they saw it, the particular super moderators didn't like moderators that actually have a voice and independant attitude, possibly because they were not used to such a thing due to possible recurring passive staff members in the past.

Other boards I've been to manage it just fine, but this one seems to stem from mechanical solidarity and high cohesion. I was demoted because I asked Mike to help me out with a link to getting a V.I.P (because he hadn't put it up ANYWHERE yet and a new member was asking how to get it) so I confronted Mike quite urgently because I wanted to (here's the killer) HELP a new member, he took it as an act of aggression and demoted me there and then. I was thinking of the new member, Mike only thought about his precious ego being challenged, and the super mods were fearful that I was somewhat doing a better global image than them and felt challenged too. Likewise, Mike probably isn't used to staff having a true voice. But you know the killer? It's because I was "acting on impulse". You know what's up with that? It's because I was moving at a speed faster to what the board was going, the board was going too slowly, and I was going too fast for it's tastes. THAT, my friend, is the outline to why I was demoted. Don't talk about what you don't know.

And yes, I did just say "don't talk about what you don't know" because for that quote, it was true.

Either way, I'm not saying Mike handles everything to perfection, but you can't expect it. In the end it helps yourself if you try and view it from the other side. I know it is hard, it wasn't easy for me either. Either way, you pull Phazon Ranger into this like he had the same problem you had, but they were entirely different. The fact you think they are so similar shows you never really grasped what was going on.

And explain why the "viewing of both sides" should come only from one side? Is Mike void from this too?

I'm not thinking of me, I'm thinking of the memberbase. I'm ALWAYS thinking of the memberbase, always did.

And I never said mine and Phazon's situations were the same, I said as an outline or overview they follow a similar basis worthy as counting as a correlation. I really wish you'd start reading my posts. Again, this is why you probably feel like I'm acting like you don't know what you're talking about. This is the second time in this mass quote where you've misunderstood.

You didn't grasp what was going on with me and Mike either, but we could be here all day playing pong with that.

2000+ post is hard for anyone to top, the spamming involved isn't worth it for most. On top of that I do agree the forum is less active, which doesn't allow as much posting to begin with. I never denied the board is having issues with activity, I just think signatures will hardly make an impact. I feel that, if VIP memberships would be more interesting, like with the subforums, they would be bought more, given it being an active and stable board, so they don't feel it'll be redundant in 2 months time.

The board is at a very delicate line Rage, Mike can't afford to do anything to alienate members more. Mike needs to try and WIN members back, asking them for money so they can have advanced features isn't really the best way to go about it, he has to suit for them now.


That's exactly the reason. The smaller the board, the less there is to do, so members will be less active. Therefore it's harder to find staff between them, as it's doubtful they want to put the time in. The activity difference is, IMO, mostly because there's a more narrow top of members (activity-wise). I'm guessing there are, comparibly, more people who post under 10 posts in total, yet they all have access to signatures. As Evil Ranger stated, the siggies were removed before BECAUSE they were abused.

The smaller the board, the more focused and detailed you can do moderation tasks. Having a smaller board isn't an excuse for staff to slack, it means they can actually do a higher quality and deeper job.

With that notion, sig moderation really isn't going to put a heavy slice onto your duty.

If they are abused, MODERATION. The notion of "meh, just ditch them" is so, so lazy. It's a smaller board, staff have less reason to take that lazy attitude, the job is easier with less members and a smaller board.

Say what you want, this memberbase is NOT booming with activity. Sig moderation isn't going to be that frustration for the "time" staff put in for the board they apparently "love."

Means your conclusion is thin.

Then say your opinion, don't beat around the bush.

Signatures are not the difference between being a number or being a unique member. Name and avatar do that enough. Signature is just an extension of that, that doesn't actually add to it. It's much like having a personal colouring of your nametag or a forced skin used on your profile. The little it brings doesn't weigh in against the trouble it brings.

The trouble it brings stems from lax and lazy moderation effort.

The little it brings promote individualism to members, and the feeling of unalienation, that makes them feel more valued.

Are you telling me you feel that 'Lax moderation > members feeling valued.'

I wow at this.

I don't really know why I'm even trying to help this site still, but as usual I act as the voice of the memberbase I'm thinking of, Mike needs to get some staff that actually moderate sufficiently enough so that the memberbase can have unalienated gain.

It's not about "what the staff want", it's about "what the members want." If you aren't prepared to put in that time to make the members feel valued, don't become a staffer. That's the cold, hard, truth.

[Mnikolic]

I'm all for equivalence. For features everyone has to pay for here on RangerTalk/Otaku Hero Access, are available on other boards for free.

But there's an alternative: members that upload maga-sized sig banners and avatars, you could just code some mod that will reduce those to reasonable sizes. Or diasble those completely.

So I say dump the VIP memberships.

[Raging Phoenix]

This, for one, is you not getting the full picture of the circumstances. This is why I don't feel you know why I was demoted. I wasn't "bossing around equals". If staff made threads asking for assistance, I gave them help, yes I was blunt and too the point, that's in my nature, and the super mods refused to listen to that because they thought they were superior and didn't need to listen to a "new regular mod". You don't make threads asking for advice, and then crap on someone when they give it. It was a rare event, because I'm one of the few people who actually voice concern, and probably one of the rare people on the staff that voiced concern if they saw it, the particular super moderators didn't like moderators that actually have a voice and independant attitude, possibly because they were not used to such a thing due to possible recurring passive staff members in the past.

Other boards I've been to manage it just fine, but this one seems to stem from mechanical solidarity and high cohesion. I was demoted because I asked Mike to help me out with a link to getting a V.I.P (because he hadn't put it up ANYWHERE yet and a new member was asking how to get it) so I confronted Mike quite urgently because I wanted to (here's the killer) HELP a new member, he took it as an act of aggression and demoted me there and then. I was thinking of the new member, Mike only thought about his precious ego being challenged, and the super mods were fearful that I was somewhat doing a better global image than them and felt challenged too. Likewise, Mike probably isn't used to staff having a true voice. But you know the killer? It's because I was "acting on impulse". You know what's up with that? It's because I was moving at a speed faster to what the board was going, the board was going too slowly, and I was going too fast for it's tastes. THAT, my friend, is the outline to why I was demoted. Don't talk about what you don't know.

And yes, I did just say "don't talk about what you don't know" because for that quote, it was true.

You told people what to do who were either your equal or your superior. You demanded they did, that in my book is bossing around. The fact you don't see this is your problem, and probably the underlying reason it escalated to your demotion.

And explain why the "viewing of both sides" should come only from one side? Is Mike void from this too?

I'm not thinking of me, I'm thinking of the memberbase. I'm ALWAYS thinking of the memberbase, always did.

And I never said mine and Phazon's situations were the same, I said as an outline or overview they follow a similar basis worthy as counting as a correlation. I really wish you'd start reading my posts. Again, this is why you probably feel like I'm acting like you don't know what you're talking about. This is the second time in this mass quote where you've misunderstood.

You didn't grasp what was going on with me and Mike either, but we could be here all day playing pong with that.

Phazon's situation and yours might have looked the same from the outside, but they were completely different. And to show you did say they were similar:
'I'd probably brush it off and leave it if it was just me, but a similar thing happened to Phazon Ranger a short time later, demotion due to not seeing a perfect eye to eye, or to put it simply "disagreeing"'
I can't discuss in public why it was so different.

The board is at a very delicate line Rage, Mike can't afford to do anything to alienate members more. Mike needs to try and WIN members back, asking them for money so they can have advanced features isn't really the best way to go about it, he has to suit for them now.

The most active and loyal members are VIPs. Why? Because they've put money in they don't want to waste.

The smaller the board, the more focused and detailed you can do moderation tasks. Having a smaller board isn't an excuse for staff to slack, it means they can actually do a higher quality and deeper job.

With that notion, sig moderation really isn't going to put a heavy slice onto your duty.

If they are abused, MODERATION. The notion of "meh, just ditch them" is so, so lazy. It's a smaller board, staff have less reason to take that lazy attitude, the job is easier with less members and a smaller board.

Say what you want, this memberbase is NOT booming with activity. Sig moderation isn't going to be that frustration for the "time" staff put in for the board they apparently "love."

Who's not reading who's post now?

Either way, signature moderation is a nag, especially since you have to get into the CP to do it. Internet Explorer for one doesn't save that password there, IIRC, making it even more troublesome. And for what goal?

Then say your opinion, don't beat around the bush.

I explained what I meant just after stating that, you didn't get / read it so I explained again. And even then I will be the judge of how I say things.

The trouble it brings stems from lax and lazy moderation effort.

The little it brings promote individualism to members, and the feeling of unalienation, that makes them feel more valued.

Are you telling me you feel that 'Lax moderation > members feeling valued.'

I wow at this.

I don't really know why I'm even trying to help this site still, but as usual I act as the voice of the memberbase I'm thinking of, Mike needs to get some staff that actually moderate sufficiently enough so that the memberbase can have unalienated gain.

It's not about "what the staff want", it's about "what the members want." If you aren't prepared to put in that time to make the members feel valued, don't become a staffer. That's the cold, hard, truth.

Let me rip you right out of a fantasy here, you are NOT talking FOR the memberbase here. Why? 2 reasons, you're inactive and simply because everyone has their own opinion. If I would be still active, I'd have the same opinion I have now, so your opinion would not be the voice of my opinion, and therefore not of the memberbase. And I don't know if you've noticed, most people are AGAINST removing VIP membership. And that while most people are not paying members, meaning they gain nothing from not axing it. It sounds very noble and all, but from what I read it's just an excuse to bitch against the site owner.

Also, it's true the staff does do what they do to make the experience on the board better for the members, but there's only so much they can do with their time, or the time they allow themselves to spend on the board. When I was a Super Mod I'd be busy most of my time moderating the 3-4 pages of new posts that had arrived. At that time I hardly played games or anything, so this was what I did with my free time. Aside from that I wanted to enjoy my time here too, because staff are members too. While I realize the site is not as active as it was back then, I still recon staff members still don't have all the time of the world, so giving them extra work that doesn't pay off at all is stupid. I've taken on a few timeconsuming project on this board myself in the past to know that's true.

[Blue Mystic Ranger]

Well I can go either way I enjoy being able to have my name in blue but I think it would be nice for people other then VIP having a big avatar it might bring in more people. There should be a limit to the size though so it shouldn't conflict with bandwidth *shrugs* But I think everyone would be really happy with having a signature I know the feeling on those sites that do that. So I say dump it. I don't want to fight it's really webmasters choice so that's what I go with.

[Rebelde]

Keep them! If you remove, people will definatly demand their money back.
Besides, people paid for their memberships. Removing them will be unfair to them.

To those of you who obviously can't live without a sig: Get a job, earn money, buy a membership! :P

[Me-Hostage]

Usually I would say keep them, but I feel like being fair to others, so I say dump them.

[Evil Ranger]

Usually I would say keep them, but I feel like being fair to others, so I say dump them.

What is fair in giving something to others for free if you and others had to pay for it in the past?

[The Grand Kage]

As I said on the top of Page 3, Why don't we disable the VIP system and let those who have it now keep it until it expires?

[Fire Warrior]

Because our VIP memberships take 5 years to run their course (if memory serves me right. I'd check, but the link in my CP is gone...go figure). The way i see it, the VIP system is fair: everyone starts off with the same PRIVELAGES, and then they pay to get more if they choose. How not fair is this? It's simple economics.


That is, unless you're a communist. Think about it.