Mafiascum.net

In post 3722, RadiantCowbells wrote:

In post 3721, Alisae wrote:Honestly
everyone who has tittles currently deserves them and no one else really deserves them so...

fight me

I read this as "titties" and had to do a double take on which thread this is!

I agree with mastina's post except the part about no one ever getting doot

someone must get it eventually, it has been foretold

In post 3726, vonflare wrote:I agree with mastina's doot except the part adoot no one ever getting doot!

Someone must doot eventually, it has been foredoot!

Amateur.

In post 3727, Aristophanes wrote:

In post 3726, vonflare wrote:I agree with mastina's doot except the part adoot no one ever getting doot!

Someone must doot eventually, it has been foredoot!

Amadoot.

Amadoot.

There's no such thing as deserving a title.

In post 3715, Alchemist21 wrote:Time to dispatch two Jedi knights so that a settlement can be reached.

In post 3716, Cheetory6 wrote:The Title Federation has set up a blockade of Thadoot. Our heroes Qui von flare and Papi Ozi-Toe must save the day.

Best posts in this thread

I heard thread got interesting.

Oh nvm

In post 3729, SleepyKrew wrote:There's no such thing as deserving a title.

^
you can be a great user without having done anything that would make a good title.

im not sure at all whether anyone has ever deserved a thing tbh

Entitlement to have titles

In post 3729, SleepyKrew wrote:There's no such thing as deserving a title.

Perhaps that is not the best of wording. What I more mean there is more or less that you can be a great user with a strong established site presence, and be the type of person when a title is suggested to receive the reaction of "A title for this user WOULD be nice, but what was suggested isn't good enough", essentially.

As in, there is a for the scummer to receive a title, but in spite of the desire, no suitable title has materialized for them. RadiantCowbells is an excellent example of that model for me; he's had at least two or three attempts to title him which lasted for long periods and the general consensus was exactly that--"He could have a title, but not these titles because these titles aren't good enough", basically.

If I had to give it a succinct definition, it'd be:
"Scummers who are the same type of scummer as scummers who already have titles, yet do not possess one".

So that creates a feeling of, they "should" have a title; they "deserve" a title.

Obviously nobody's inherently deserving of a title or really entitled to one, but it makes a quick shorthand for point of reference. (It's easier to say "RadiantCowbells should have/deserves a title" than it is, "RadiantCowbells is the type of scummer who would have a title yet he currently does not possess one and my desire is for that to change".)

Anyone can have a title. There is no type of scummer that has a title.

In post 3736, SleepyKrew wrote:Anyone can have a title. There is no type of scummer that has a title.

Limitations have progressively been removed, I suppose, but saying there isn't a type of scummer that has a title isn't true.

We used to have minimum requirements before a user was eligible for a title.
We used to have different requirements on what warranted validity of a title.
These metrics were things which when they existed defined a type of scummer who would get a title--they had to fulfill the requirements we set.

Said requirements have been loosened and even removed with time, but they existed long enough to be ingrained in site culture, more or less.

You don't see a newbie who just finished their first game nominating a user for a title in spite of there being no rule preventing them from doing so;
You don't see a newbie who just finished their first game being nominated for a title in spite of there being no rule preventing them from doing so.

So while in THEORY anyone can have a title. While in THEORY there is no restrictions. By site culture. There are still restrictions. You don't nominate certain things; you don't approve certain things, etc. So yes, there is a type of scummer that has a title. This type of scummer is very, very, very broadly defined, sure, yes. But it exists all the same even though there's no rule about it.

You can rant about anything

Is that a challenge?

Yes.

Rant about paper bags

I once had a dream that this thread stayed on topic


but that was only a dream

If you are lying UC Voyager, I command all of Mafia Scum to re-dubbed you regayoV CU

That would actually be a good title.

Then again, making no sense probably not something you want a title for.

We already have a title for making no sense, one more can't hurt

Now that I'm back I aim to climb the ranks of posts by users without a title.

You have a title.

Ok sorry, without a non-default title.

Your unnecessary negativity has confused me.

We are ALL confused on this blessed day.