[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/ext/alfredoramos/seometadata/event/listener.php on line 114: Undefined array key 8910429 [phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/ext/alfredoramos/seometadata/event/listener.php on line 114: Trying to access array offset on value of type null Dance of the Title Fairy: Accepting Applications - Mafiascum.net
I'll nth "Cocky and I Know It", if RC accepts it then I think it's good, if RC doesn't like the idea that he's cocky he'll deny it. Seems simple enough.
He's very cheerful in my experience, and is always looking on the bright side of things. Add to that the musical reference since he seems to prefer titles with puns or references, I figure it's a slam dunk for him.
I mean realistically speaking, the best title is probably one that somebody chooses for themselves in some ways. It is what they feel best represents them. Then again, if you'd prefer titles reflect what other people see about the person, then you'd get the best title by having people vote on it and not letting the user yes or no it. Of course, the best middle ground is having people vote for it, and then giving the final say to the user. Like we do.
In post 972, Shaziro wrote:I mean realistically speaking, the best title is probably one that somebody chooses for themselves in some ways. It is what they feel best represents them. Then again, if you'd prefer titles reflect what other people see about the person, then you'd get the best title by having people vote on it and not letting the user yes or no it. Of course, the best middle ground is having people vote for it, and then giving the final say to the user. Like we do.
Except that's a failed system. Because again, it's not truly a "community gift" it's a "I have x number of friends" gift.
Counterpoint: You got a title
A title that is in the same vein as a load of titles he dislikes for being in that same vein.
Psyche, have you considered setting up a standard format for title noms? Like, a fill-in-the-blanks form? "Name of person being nominated" "Title being nominated for" "Explanation of nomination" "Notable examples that would strengthen this nomination"? Maybe set up a little code block just like for the replacements queue, so people can just copy paste and fill it in?
I mean, it isn't based off the name. Like, at all. That said, the reason I preferred Tony Award over Showtime was partly because of the username being a thing.
In post 2513, vonflare wrote:Also we need matching titles for Hiplop and SummerInWonderland, 100%
Believe this has been suggested before, but they're more than just "Those two scummers who are a couple", so making their titles based on that concept alone seriously undersells what they offer the site.
In post 2784, Elbirn wrote:I would support it because it's more and more is always better
More is not always better, and while I understand the idea behind giving banned users a title that signifies they are banned, it just doesn't seem like it'd add all that much value.
I'd say that the fact that he's actively campaigned for it should probably disqualify it, but there's already one title where that didn't apply that I know of, so fuck it right?
This title is just as shit as Shotty's was. Actively campaigning for a title goes counter to the stated idea of what a title is for. That argument is bad and you should know it, FB.
In post 3083, vonflare wrote:FTR I didn't 'actively campaign' for doot outside of april fools day when everyone was doing it as a joke
and I resent sharizo comparing me to shotty
I compared the title to shotty's, not you to shotty.
I'd consider repeatedly bringing it up and arguing that it is better than other (equally shitty) titles to be basically exactly what shotty did. You as a person aren't like Shotty though, much to everyone's benefit.
Firebringer, even if the rule -was- made to deal with Shotty, do you not understand that A: The title is bad, B: It is a good rule to have, and C: It is applicable to this situation?
And yes, I think Shea's title is arguably something he campaigned for. I've said that lots of times. I mentioned it (Somewhat passive-agressively, apologies) just a bit ago. That doesn't change that it's not a thing to do for future titles. In either case, Psyche has said it's dead, and I'm not thinking he was being sarcastic. Let it go.
If you want to argue about your title or better understand my position on it, PM me TSQ. I'd prefer to keep it out of this thread though, as it has the potential to become an off topic argument.
This is a reminder and warning to explain your title nominations when you make them, or immediately afterward. It's pretty low-effort, and if you don't, you're making it the job of everyone around you to think through your post, even just to see that it's a joke nom. Nominations without explanations will be read as shitposts, and of course joke noms will and have always been read as much as well. If you want to kid around, we have places for that; it's not here.
This has always been in the rules, but I've never attached any penalty to their breaking because no one really got set into a clear and disruptive pattern of low-effort/joke noms. But I'll put my foot down from here out since I have to, I guess. Nice day!
In other news, Psyche, what are some of your favorite titles and why? I'm trying to get a feel for what makes a good title in -your- mind specifically.
Your favorite titles are some of my least favorite, and this makes me sad, but your explanations are something I can work with. Thanks for taking the time!
