The Hall of Fame (again)
Wed Jan 28, 2009 5:59 pm
Seeing the other thread was closed for whatever ill conceived reason, I'm starting a new one.
This does not have to turn into "a big public flame", but there are some things that need to be addressed, and before anybody says "well you could handle these things privately", I tried messaging Andrew on xbox when I first removed and I got no response. Add that to the fact that he is never on msn, what other alternatives are there to hold a discussion about this? And also, what is the problem in this being out in the public where members can see what's going on? This is not an attempt to be "abusive", although some people love to take observations (as truthful as they may be) as "abusive". Maybe some people should show some maturity and stop hiding from issues and waiting until somebody says something "abusive" before responding.
But thats getting off the point. The point of this is a question as to what is going on with the Hall of Fame. I can understand it being moved. What I can't understand is how it has been neglected. If you wanted someone else to take over it, fine. The thing is though, nobody has. It's just sitting there, collecting dust. I'm not blaming Jae for anything, but once he left, it left me and Andrew as the only the Hall of Fame voters left (with the community vote, of course). Andrew decided he didn't want Ben on the panel as he would have to be given access to the NLSC members lounge.
This is not an attack, I'm just stating facts. The reason for me saying this is to show why there was a slide. But what was the solution? I was removed as mod there, and now its sitting in a corner of the hardwood classics forum and nothing is happening there.
Is that the solution?
This does not have to turn into "a big public flame", but there are some things that need to be addressed, and before anybody says "well you could handle these things privately", I tried messaging Andrew on xbox when I first removed and I got no response. Add that to the fact that he is never on msn, what other alternatives are there to hold a discussion about this? And also, what is the problem in this being out in the public where members can see what's going on? This is not an attempt to be "abusive", although some people love to take observations (as truthful as they may be) as "abusive". Maybe some people should show some maturity and stop hiding from issues and waiting until somebody says something "abusive" before responding.
But thats getting off the point. The point of this is a question as to what is going on with the Hall of Fame. I can understand it being moved. What I can't understand is how it has been neglected. If you wanted someone else to take over it, fine. The thing is though, nobody has. It's just sitting there, collecting dust. I'm not blaming Jae for anything, but once he left, it left me and Andrew as the only the Hall of Fame voters left (with the community vote, of course). Andrew decided he didn't want Ben on the panel as he would have to be given access to the NLSC members lounge.
This is not an attack, I'm just stating facts. The reason for me saying this is to show why there was a slide. But what was the solution? I was removed as mod there, and now its sitting in a corner of the hardwood classics forum and nothing is happening there.
Is that the solution?
Re: The Hall of Fame (again)
Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:38 pm
I honestly don’t remember any such messages on Xbox Live, the last message I remember getting from you was about GTA IV or possibly the NBA Live 09 demo…though I could be confusing that with the NBA Live 08 demo the year before but I vaguely remember you messaging me about a demo. In any case I’m sorry for the lack of communication but you can always shoot me a message at my nba-live.com account, I check that every day so if you want to get in touch with me ASAP that’s probably the best way.
You’re right, the Hall of Fame has gone untended since it opened and like I said, I was not trying to disrespect the concept or anyone inducted. It hasn’t been a priority because it doesn’t tend to be what people come to the site for, to read about former members of the community. I absolutely want to give those people credit but there’s a greater demand for roster patches and other updates/fixes, answers to questions about the games, Wishlists and established connections with the production team for future games and official fixes, stuff like that. It constantly gets shunted to the backburner as a result.
But that is the past and you’re right, this is not a time for hurt feelings or ego, this is about doing something productive with the Hall of Fame. And with that in mind, this is what I’d like to do with it.
I honestly feel we should scrap the current Hall of Fame and start over with more clearly defined criteria for nominees and some creative touches. The X’s suggestion about retired jerseys would be cool addition if we could whip something up and Ben’s suggestion that we only induct one person a year is definitely a logical approach, though we could certainly make exceptions if it’s difficult to distinguish between two nominees or there are other extenuating circumstances.
I know this might sound extreme but please, hear me out.
With the revamp, we would have a couple more inductions than normal but only because Tim, Lutz and Brien are in there by default. Because it has gone untended for a couple of years I think it would be appropriate to induct at least one or two other members to begin with and then proceed as normal with one or two inductions (as outlined above) each year.
And as far as the inductions go, I really think it should be someone who is no longer actively involved with the site/forum/community. Anyone’s who’s still taking part in discussions on a semi-regular basis shouldn’t really qualify because I think that in such a case, Hall of Fame “status” presents an unintended sense of elitism to newer posters that I’m sure a lot of people might find off-putting. After all, that is traditionally how the selection process for a Hall of Fame generally works: honouring the contributions of people who are no longer actively contributing. Of course, inductees would be free to pop by and post again if they wish but for the most part people past contributors who are no longer involved are usually no longer active because they are unable to be and effectively “retired”.
The nomination process would be fairly straightforward: a shortlist of eligible candidates would be agreed upon and then whittled down until we have our inductee (or inductees if there are special circumstances). If it comes down to a vote then I guess everyone will have their own criteria but my personal criteria would give preference to the person who has made the most contributions and who deserves to be recognised sooner rather than later. The older guys definitely should be in there first.
That’s about it, in a nutshell. I know it’s a bit radical but I think if we want to revamp it and make a good run of it now and in the future, a fresh start could be just what we need. There’s certainly more specifics to be worked out but I think that’s about it for the basic outline.
You’re right, the Hall of Fame has gone untended since it opened and like I said, I was not trying to disrespect the concept or anyone inducted. It hasn’t been a priority because it doesn’t tend to be what people come to the site for, to read about former members of the community. I absolutely want to give those people credit but there’s a greater demand for roster patches and other updates/fixes, answers to questions about the games, Wishlists and established connections with the production team for future games and official fixes, stuff like that. It constantly gets shunted to the backburner as a result.
But that is the past and you’re right, this is not a time for hurt feelings or ego, this is about doing something productive with the Hall of Fame. And with that in mind, this is what I’d like to do with it.
I honestly feel we should scrap the current Hall of Fame and start over with more clearly defined criteria for nominees and some creative touches. The X’s suggestion about retired jerseys would be cool addition if we could whip something up and Ben’s suggestion that we only induct one person a year is definitely a logical approach, though we could certainly make exceptions if it’s difficult to distinguish between two nominees or there are other extenuating circumstances.
I know this might sound extreme but please, hear me out.
With the revamp, we would have a couple more inductions than normal but only because Tim, Lutz and Brien are in there by default. Because it has gone untended for a couple of years I think it would be appropriate to induct at least one or two other members to begin with and then proceed as normal with one or two inductions (as outlined above) each year.
And as far as the inductions go, I really think it should be someone who is no longer actively involved with the site/forum/community. Anyone’s who’s still taking part in discussions on a semi-regular basis shouldn’t really qualify because I think that in such a case, Hall of Fame “status” presents an unintended sense of elitism to newer posters that I’m sure a lot of people might find off-putting. After all, that is traditionally how the selection process for a Hall of Fame generally works: honouring the contributions of people who are no longer actively contributing. Of course, inductees would be free to pop by and post again if they wish but for the most part people past contributors who are no longer involved are usually no longer active because they are unable to be and effectively “retired”.
The nomination process would be fairly straightforward: a shortlist of eligible candidates would be agreed upon and then whittled down until we have our inductee (or inductees if there are special circumstances). If it comes down to a vote then I guess everyone will have their own criteria but my personal criteria would give preference to the person who has made the most contributions and who deserves to be recognised sooner rather than later. The older guys definitely should be in there first.
That’s about it, in a nutshell. I know it’s a bit radical but I think if we want to revamp it and make a good run of it now and in the future, a fresh start could be just what we need. There’s certainly more specifics to be worked out but I think that’s about it for the basic outline.
Re: The Hall of Fame (again)
Fri Jan 30, 2009 6:54 pm
You’re right, the Hall of Fame has gone untended since it opened and like I said, I was not trying to disrespect the concept or anyone inducted. It hasn’t been a priority because it doesn’t tend to be what people come to the site for, to read about former members of the community. I absolutely want to give those people credit but there’s a greater demand for roster patches and other updates/fixes, answers to questions about the games, Wishlists and established connections with the production team for future games and official fixes, stuff like that. It constantly gets shunted to the backburner as a result
My only problem with this is you have gone out of your way to make it an issue. If you wanted to move it fine. But you've made it so it's only on you. I'm not a mod there. Ben was never allowed to be a panel member. I know you couldn't control Jae leaving, but you would think when he did you could of made things easier on yourself by enlisting in other peoples services so it wasn't all upto you, so you could take care of doing your posting, roster patches, wishlists etc
That's what pisses me off.
I honestly feel we should scrap the current Hall of Fame and start over with more clearly defined criteria for nominees and some creative touches. The X’s suggestion about retired jerseys would be cool addition if we could whip something up and Ben’s suggestion that we only induct one person a year is definitely a logical approach, though we could certainly make exceptions if it’s difficult to distinguish between two nominees or there are other extenuating circumstances.
The Jersey thing is so cliche though. I would rather them get their own page here at NLSC, where they can be honoured with their own or other peoples words. Also have a special icon for them when they post, not too dissimilar to the NLSC Team Member badge.
As for more defined criteria, that's all well and good but I'm confused (and no this isn't me attacking you). Didn't you say the HoF was suffering because of the time it was consumed. Now you want to completely re structure the layout of it? Isn't that more work? And by the time we finish talking about it and it's actually implemented, well,we probably could of put in 2 classes.
The fact is we're behind 2 classes, and we're not catching up by putting the section in the corner and hope everyone forgets about it :/
I also disagree about the elitism that you posted. Did you change when you were inducted? Did I change? Did Ben? I haven't noticed any change on any of us. It's the old post count theory, and I don't agree with it.
Personally, I think it's a great way of rewarding people who made the forums a popular and fun way to visit. We shouldn't have to wait for them to disappear before we can show them a sign of gratitude.
Re: The Hall of Fame (again)
Fri Jan 30, 2009 7:48 pm
Well, I envision the jerseys as being part of that page, just a little something extra and it ties in with the theme of basketball that's obviously appropriate on a site about basketball gaming. I guess it might be a bit cliche and corny but it's something extra that could be included on that page.
As far as the restructuring goes, I don't think it would be that time consuming. It's not so much the time it takes to do something with the Hall of Fame but more that new content like patches and the other stuff I mentioned take priority and the Hall of Fame is something that falls victim to procrastination and focus. Again, not to disrespect the idea or the inductees but when I'm thinking about what I can do for the site, I tend to think of other stuff aside from the Hall of Fame. That might sound terribly disrespectful and I don't intend it to be but it's the truth.
It also wouldn't be time consuming because I'm not looking at a huge change in the structure and I probably didn't do a good job of explaining that. Really, it's more about starting again from scratch and inducting people on different criteria. I do get what you're saying about recognising people's efforts but I still feel a Hall of Fame shouldn't be for people who are contributing so actively. Perhaps a different name would be more appropriate or a better defined mission statement to express what it's all about. As far as inducting people and everything, it would be a similar process. We'd just be starting over with more clearly defined criteria and purpose which would be outlined in a stickied thread.
As such, I envision that the first (new) class would be Tim, Lutz and Brien and then at least one (but perhaps a couple more since it has gone untended for a couple of years) old timers and people who aren't around right now, because there's probably fewer people around these days who remember them and I feel they should be honoured before anyone who's active, then proceed from here.
I guess there is where we have conflicting philosophies about the Hall of Fame concept and I do see what you're saying about recognising contributions but for me, a Hall of Fame recognises those contributions when they're at an end (or in a situation like this, when they're sparodic at best because the person has moved on). For example, I plan on being around for a while yet but it would be silly to keep a running tab of what I'm doing with the site and keep updating my induction profile. It's very flattering and I'd appreciate the compliments but it's really not necessary.
At the very least, I'd like to abdicate my induction while I'm still so heavily involved with the site. I appreciate it and all but no matter what happened in the past, sitting here today I don't feel I should be inducted while I'm still active and want to do so much more with the site, because I said you can't exactly keep a running tab of those things. When I do step down, I'd certainly be humbled and appreciative of any such induction and recognition of my works but for now, the emails and the thanks/comments/compliments I receive about my rosters and other projects are more than enough recognition for me at this point. Sitting here today, I don't think I should be in there yet and I probably shouldn't be on any kind of induction panel that votes me in.
But that's where the difference of philosophy comes in. I don't disagree with yours but I do remain a bit uncomfortable with the title of "Hall of Fame" if that's the objective. Perhaps my ideas about a Hall of Fame are too specific and narrowly defined but those are my honest feelings about it.
As far as the restructuring goes, I don't think it would be that time consuming. It's not so much the time it takes to do something with the Hall of Fame but more that new content like patches and the other stuff I mentioned take priority and the Hall of Fame is something that falls victim to procrastination and focus. Again, not to disrespect the idea or the inductees but when I'm thinking about what I can do for the site, I tend to think of other stuff aside from the Hall of Fame. That might sound terribly disrespectful and I don't intend it to be but it's the truth.
It also wouldn't be time consuming because I'm not looking at a huge change in the structure and I probably didn't do a good job of explaining that. Really, it's more about starting again from scratch and inducting people on different criteria. I do get what you're saying about recognising people's efforts but I still feel a Hall of Fame shouldn't be for people who are contributing so actively. Perhaps a different name would be more appropriate or a better defined mission statement to express what it's all about. As far as inducting people and everything, it would be a similar process. We'd just be starting over with more clearly defined criteria and purpose which would be outlined in a stickied thread.
As such, I envision that the first (new) class would be Tim, Lutz and Brien and then at least one (but perhaps a couple more since it has gone untended for a couple of years) old timers and people who aren't around right now, because there's probably fewer people around these days who remember them and I feel they should be honoured before anyone who's active, then proceed from here.
I guess there is where we have conflicting philosophies about the Hall of Fame concept and I do see what you're saying about recognising contributions but for me, a Hall of Fame recognises those contributions when they're at an end (or in a situation like this, when they're sparodic at best because the person has moved on). For example, I plan on being around for a while yet but it would be silly to keep a running tab of what I'm doing with the site and keep updating my induction profile. It's very flattering and I'd appreciate the compliments but it's really not necessary.
At the very least, I'd like to abdicate my induction while I'm still so heavily involved with the site. I appreciate it and all but no matter what happened in the past, sitting here today I don't feel I should be inducted while I'm still active and want to do so much more with the site, because I said you can't exactly keep a running tab of those things. When I do step down, I'd certainly be humbled and appreciative of any such induction and recognition of my works but for now, the emails and the thanks/comments/compliments I receive about my rosters and other projects are more than enough recognition for me at this point. Sitting here today, I don't think I should be in there yet and I probably shouldn't be on any kind of induction panel that votes me in.
But that's where the difference of philosophy comes in. I don't disagree with yours but I do remain a bit uncomfortable with the title of "Hall of Fame" if that's the objective. Perhaps my ideas about a Hall of Fame are too specific and narrowly defined but those are my honest feelings about it.
Re: The Hall of Fame (again)
Sun Feb 01, 2009 7:37 am
This is a site about basketball gaming now? I thought it was a fanpage for NBA Live, hence the reluctance for 2k and nba street content.
And the restructuring is time consuming. This dialogue has gone on for more then a week. By this time, we could of inducted a new class.
So why did you make it so it's all about you? Why did you remove me, demand that Ben not be a part of the HoF panel when Jae left? I understand you have bigger priorities with NLSC, but you have made it so it's only you in control of that section, so with that surely you must take responsibility when that section is ignored.
The Hall of Fame is not just about you though. If you personally don't feel comfortable with being in the HoF when you're still active, then that's you. But to change the entire rules so anyone active isn't eligible is so incredibly self centred.
Then who should be voting people in? The old system was set up where you weren't penalised for not voting for yourself, as Jae and I chose not to do and we still made it.
And the restructuring is time consuming. This dialogue has gone on for more then a week. By this time, we could of inducted a new class.
As far as the restructuring goes, I don't think it would be that time consuming. It's not so much the time it takes to do something with the Hall of Fame but more that new content like patches and the other stuff I mentioned take priority and the Hall of Fame is something that falls victim to procrastination and focus. Again, not to disrespect the idea or the inductees but when I'm thinking about what I can do for the site, I tend to think of other stuff aside from the Hall of Fame. That might sound terribly disrespectful and I don't intend it to be but it's the truth.
So why did you make it so it's all about you? Why did you remove me, demand that Ben not be a part of the HoF panel when Jae left? I understand you have bigger priorities with NLSC, but you have made it so it's only you in control of that section, so with that surely you must take responsibility when that section is ignored.
I guess there is where we have conflicting philosophies about the Hall of Fame concept and I do see what you're saying about recognising contributions but for me, a Hall of Fame recognises those contributions when they're at an end (or in a situation like this, when they're sparodic at best because the person has moved on). For example, I plan on being around for a while yet but it would be silly to keep a running tab of what I'm doing with the site and keep updating my induction profile. It's very flattering and I'd appreciate the compliments but it's really not necessary.
The Hall of Fame is not just about you though. If you personally don't feel comfortable with being in the HoF when you're still active, then that's you. But to change the entire rules so anyone active isn't eligible is so incredibly self centred.
At the very least, I'd like to abdicate my induction while I'm still so heavily involved with the site. I appreciate it and all but no matter what happened in the past, sitting here today I don't feel I should be inducted while I'm still active and want to do so much more with the site, because I said you can't exactly keep a running tab of those things. When I do step down, I'd certainly be humbled and appreciative of any such induction and recognition of my works but for now, the emails and the thanks/comments/compliments I receive about my rosters and other projects are more than enough recognition for me at this point. Sitting here today, I don't think I should be in there yet and I probably shouldn't be on any kind of induction panel that votes me in.
Then who should be voting people in? The old system was set up where you weren't penalised for not voting for yourself, as Jae and I chose not to do and we still made it.
Re: The Hall of Fame (again)
Sun Feb 01, 2009 9:22 am
I agree with Matthew here, if someone doesn't want to be inducted then it's their decision and it has to be respected. In terms of nominations, if people vote for an active poster, then it's because he's a positive influence here. It's just a basketball gaming forum, not the NBA. If you want people to be honored, then you should let everybody be elegible, not when they're 2, 3 years gone and they won't have the slightest idea they're being appreciated in a forum they once were a part of.
Re: The Hall of Fame (again)
Sun Feb 01, 2009 9:23 am
I'm pretty sure other than us three and Jeffx, nobody active would be going in the Hall of Fame anytime soon.
Is Jae active? Do we remove him since it is possible he could suddenly show back up again?
I don't care for the tag/icon, I personally wouldn't want it. Hell, I'm getting ready to go back to no-avatar.
Why are we even arguing about this? Just keep the current Hall of Fame (there's only two inductees anyone would question anyway), make some nicer write-ups about the people at some point, and move to the one person per year policy. Stick in Jeffx retroactively for 2007, and we can do 2008 nominations right now (maybe allow each sitting member one nomination, and then let the community nominate one (or two to make up for Jae missing) more...then during voting everyone just picks one person instead of ranking and points) and then 2009 at the end of the year. You don't have to give me access to any special NLSC team group for secret forums. Just make a "HOF" group and give it access to the HOF forum. This isn't a time consuming task that takes away from more important things, it's a ten minute thing once a year.
Is Jae active? Do we remove him since it is possible he could suddenly show back up again?
I don't care for the tag/icon, I personally wouldn't want it. Hell, I'm getting ready to go back to no-avatar.
Why are we even arguing about this? Just keep the current Hall of Fame (there's only two inductees anyone would question anyway), make some nicer write-ups about the people at some point, and move to the one person per year policy. Stick in Jeffx retroactively for 2007, and we can do 2008 nominations right now (maybe allow each sitting member one nomination, and then let the community nominate one (or two to make up for Jae missing) more...then during voting everyone just picks one person instead of ranking and points) and then 2009 at the end of the year. You don't have to give me access to any special NLSC team group for secret forums. Just make a "HOF" group and give it access to the HOF forum. This isn't a time consuming task that takes away from more important things, it's a ten minute thing once a year.
Re: The Hall of Fame (again)
Sun Feb 01, 2009 10:13 am
Matthew wrote:This is a site about basketball gaming now? I thought it was a fanpage for NBA Live, hence the reluctance for 2k and nba street content.
Perhaps I worded that poorly. I didn't mean basketball gaming in general.
I do see the sense in what you're saying and in your post too Ben, but again I wasn't talking about doing things a whole lot differently. I thought that's why we were having this conversation, to share our ideas on the Hall of Fame so something constructive could be done with it. But if we're going to keep it as is then sure, I would agree Jeffx should be 2007's inductee with at least two more (one for 2008 and one for 2009), though it doesn't necessarily need to be retroactive, the class of 2009 could simply be making up for the two down years. In any event, I agree that inducting two or three this time to make up for the last couple of years is appropriate and that Jeffx should be there.
Re: The Hall of Fame (again)
Thu Feb 12, 2009 5:56 pm
retired jerseys
Was messing around and cleaning up the server tonight, found these so thought I'd post them:
Re: The Hall of Fame (again)
Fri Feb 13, 2009 1:09 am
Yes, that sort of thing. Not by themselves but perhaps something like that could accompany the articles for the past inductees as well as the upcoming class.
Re: The Hall of Fame (again)
Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:05 pm
I'm guessing when somebody would be nominated, it'd be under different categories, e.g. Contributor, Admin, Patching, etc as they do in Bball Hall of Fame....
Re: The Hall of Fame (again)
Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:23 pm
We didn't make that distinction before but that's certainly something we could do. 
Re: The Hall of Fame (again)
Tue Mar 31, 2009 8:32 pm
Still nothing has been done about this section.
Why not? I'm not being "abusive" or however you want to put words in my mouth, but wouldn't you be pissed if you created something, all control gets taken away from your creation by someone who wants to revamp it, and it gets put in the to-do pile only to collect dust.
If you want to get rid of it, fine. If you want to take over it, then for fucks sake, do it.
Don't let it die while you procrastinate.
I just really don't understand why someone would goto the effort to put themselves in charge of something just to ruin it. I really don't.
Why not? I'm not being "abusive" or however you want to put words in my mouth, but wouldn't you be pissed if you created something, all control gets taken away from your creation by someone who wants to revamp it, and it gets put in the to-do pile only to collect dust.
If you want to get rid of it, fine. If you want to take over it, then for fucks sake, do it.
Don't let it die while you procrastinate.
I just really don't understand why someone would goto the effort to put themselves in charge of something just to ruin it. I really don't.
Re: The Hall of Fame (again)
Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:00 am
Very well, I'll proceed with my ideas. Thanks everyone for the input - if anyone does have anything more to say or would like to discuss this further, please PM me and if need be I'll unlock the thread.