Well that exculdes me form the council for the next....um, Iam not sure for how long, But yes that would be a good idea.

You are extremely close to becoming a Senior Member though.

Hmm, this should be interesting to add to the board's features in terms of coding. I may have compretended one thing a bit wrong though; if only one member will be in the limelight at a particular time, and later replaced by another member to be judged, it'll still take half of forever with the current amount of active members to loop through everyone. And if someone would be BLIS'ed and want to improve his rating, he'd surely be queued for a rather long time. That is, unless multiple users are put on the "chopping block".

Yeah, I was actually contemplating that exact notion as I was typing this out. I was figuring a Forum could be made that restricted only Senior Members to view it. Then, say 3-5 members at a time would be put on the block at a 3 day stint. Of course, to be fair, the decisions could be made public, so all non-Senior Member would be made aware.

Either that, or just do it in GC, and have Senior Staff sift through the voters and make sure they are all Senior Members (If Senior Member criteria is the way we end up deciding to go).

Now, for the rating system. Is the judgement of posts going to be from here on? Or is the judgement of posts going to be based on the members lifelong posts. Because if were going to count past history into this... I'm going to have a score of like .3....

Like I said before, that is still undetermined. We have many possiblities. We can (1) At the start of this system, base a rating on the next 2 weeks, (2) take in the prior 2 weeks or so from when the system starts, (3) take in the members last 50 posts or so from when the system starts, etc.

That will be determined, but first, the coding and everything for the system must get set up. After that, the Council will get elected, and we can figure this out from there.

Couldn't a new forum be made to where all members can VIEW it, but only people in the Senior Member group could post in it? That should be simple, it'd be ran similar to most forums' Announcement forums...

Good point, if one guy gives a rating of 0/0, while the others are giving out 3/4's and the like, there's obviously something else going on.. Same as a 6/6 and a bunch of 2/4's.

Yes, it is possible, though making the access be based off of member level will take a bit of coding.

Sorry if this sounds a bit noobish, but wouldn't it be the same as, say, a news poster usergroup? Or is member status handled differently?

Just curious. Knowledge is power. :D

The only reason I'm not trying to make overly complex Forum restrictions is because of exactly what WW said above. I'm not the one that knows how to do the coding for it, so it anything would have to be ran by him first.

Our little genius.

I still dislike the idea, I'd rather just have a member of the month or something to be decided by the staff. This is way too complicated and like I said will end up being a popularity contest.

This way is the fairest way tho, thats the whole point of most of chruser's post conserning this matter.
I dont see why 5 or 6 people cant be put up at a time. It doesn't take long to read though 25 or so post. On my days off i'am board out my mind waiting for people to post here, 2am - 4am are friggin slow.
Also a thought, post in the test forum should be exculded as well.

I probably wouldn't dislike it as much if it weren't named after Grav.

Where's the NO RE GG award?

Few updates:

1.) No more GravitonSurge in front of the ratings. It was just dumb, served no purpose, and since this is his idea, being on Council is the perk, not the rating's names (And we still need more ratings).

2.) Test Forum added to Forums excluded.

3.) Weighted system out of 10 now instead of 6, since scores out of 10 are just easier to see as a percentage.

Let's get it on!

It almost sounds as if we are doing this thing. Are WW and Chruser going to set this up or not?

grr, hopefully not.

In my opinion, the sooner the better, symnzXx.