KMC News & Suggestions

Originally posted by Badabing
I've posted these suggestions so far:

Most of the other suggestions were good ideas. They would just prove too difficult to apply unless a mod was given admin powers, which probably will never happen.

Are there any other ideas for cleaning up the TV and Movie forums, or any other franchises which you think need added?

My suggestion is actually pretty doable. 🙂

It will just require 2 things:

1) A Subforum in the Battlezone area that says "Feat Interpretation Challenges"
2) A rule that states that:

In the event wherein one poster wishes to challenge the interpretation of another in either a respect thread or vs thread with regards to his/her interpretation of a specific "feat", said poster may issue a "Feat Interpretation Challenge". The challenge is then resolved in the "Feat Interpretation Challenges" forum as per normal BZ rules. If the challenge is not accepted or if either of the poster loses the BZ, then their interpretation is no longer usable as any form of evidence/source within the VS forums and they are no longer allowed to introduce new interpretations of this specific "feat" for at least 30 days.

Any other poster who agrees with the challengee (not even sure if that's a word) may also accept the challenge in his/her behalf in the event that said challengee is incapable/unwilling to accept the challenge.

Seems doable and it will certainly reduce the "feat" argument standstills in the VS forums.

My two cents.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
My suggestion is actually pretty doable. 🙂

It will just require 2 things:

1) A Subforum in the Battlezone area that says "Feat Interpretation Challenges"
2) A rule that states that:

In the event wherein one poster wishes to challenge the interpretation of another in either a respect thread or vs thread with regards to his/her interpretation of a specific "feat", said poster may issue a "Feat Interpretation Challenge". The challenge is then resolved in the "Feat Interpretation Challenges" forum as per normal BZ rules. If the challenge is not accepted or if either of the poster loses the BZ, then their interpretation is no longer usable as any form of evidence/source within the VS forums and they are no longer allowed to introduce new interpretations of this specific "feat" for at least 30 days.

Any other poster who agrees with the challengee (not even sure if that's a word) may also accept the challenge in his/her behalf in the event that said challengee is incapable/unwilling to accept the challenge.

Seems doable and it will certainly reduce the "feat" argument standstills in the VS forums.

My two cents.

I dont see how this solves anything though, rather than simply moving the issue to a place where it can't help but spill over again into other things

I, for one, don't really feel I should have to justify a respect thread I've put dozens of hours into because there is someone who wants to fanboy some part of it

Originally posted by Nibedicus
My suggestion is actually pretty doable. 🙂

It will just require 2 things:

1) A Subforum in the Battlezone area that says "Feat Interpretation Challenges"
2) A rule that states that:

In the event wherein one poster wishes to challenge the interpretation of another in either a respect thread or vs thread with regards to his/her interpretation of a specific "feat", said poster may issue a "Feat Interpretation Challenge". The challenge is then resolved in the "Feat Interpretation Challenges" forum as per normal BZ rules. If the challenge is not accepted or if either of the poster loses the BZ, then their interpretation is no longer usable as any form of evidence/source within the VS forums and they are no longer allowed to introduce new interpretations of this specific "feat" for at least 30 days.

Any other poster who agrees with the challengee (not even sure if that's a word) may also accept the challenge in his/her behalf in the event that said challengee is incapable/unwilling to accept the challenge.

Seems doable and it will certainly reduce the "feat" argument standstills in the VS forums.

My two cents.

Let it be known that we are now petitioning for a Feat Interpretation Challenge Forum.

Feat. Interpretation. Challenge. Forum.

FEAT. INTERPRETATION. CHALLENGE. FORUM.

FEAT...

Ok, I'm done.

But seriously, that's essentially what the vs. forum is 75% of the time.

Originally posted by Digi
Let it be known that we are now petitioning for a Feat Interpretation Challenge Forum.

Feat. Interpretation. Challenge. Forum.

FEAT. INTERPRETATION. CHALLENGE. FORUM.

FEAT...

Ok, I'm done.

But seriously, that's essentially what the vs. forum is 75% of the time.

The main difference would be that it would be a rule that limits said debates via period/post and sets rules/guidelines and judges to actually resolve such standstills conclusively.

I agree it's not an elegant solution but it does deal with instances where posters are just discussing one "feat" over and over again with no resolution on either side at the expense of the thread in question.

At the end of the day, it just introduces a "put up or shut up" rule wherein if one or more poster decide to just simply ignore the overwhelming evidence in front of him/her, he/she can simply be made to back it up in a limited post/period debate that can conclusively resolve the matter.

Originally posted by Oliver North
I dont see how this solves anything though, rather than simply moving the issue to a place where it can't help but spill over again into other things

I, for one, don't really feel I should have to justify a respect thread I've put dozens of hours into because there is someone who wants to fanboy some part of it

The issue of the respect thread is a valid concern. Perhaps only have challenges whenever a VS thread attains a standstill. Or perhaps such a "challenge" can only be initiated by a mod (who notices that a specific "feat" has been debated to death at the expense of the thread in question) who notices a standstill between two debating parties to resolve the issue?

Originally posted by Oliver North
I dont see how this solves anything though, rather than simply moving the issue to a place where it can't help but spill over again into other things

I, for one, don't really feel I should have to justify a respect thread I've put dozens of hours into because there is someone who wants to fanboy some part of it

Originally posted by Nibedicus
The main difference would be that it would be a rule that limits said debates via period/post and sets rules/guidelines and judges to actually resolve such standstills conclusively.

I agree it's not an elegant solution but it does deal with instances where posters are just discussing one "feat" over and over again with no resolution on either side at the expense of the thread in question.

At the end of the day, it just introduces a "put up or shut up" rule wherein if one or more poster decide to just simply ignore the overwhelming evidence in front of him/her, he/she can simply be made to back it up in a limited post/period debate that can conclusively resolve the matter.

The issue of the respect thread is a valid concern. Perhaps only have challenges whenever a VS thread attains a standstill. Or perhaps such a "challenge" can only be initiated by a mod (who notices that a specific "feat" has been debated to death at the expense of the thread in question) who notices a standstill between two debating parties to resolve the issue?

It's cute that you're still taking this seriously. I like your conviction. Clearly it's something that rankles your sensibilities.

But I just think we should keep suggestions out of the realm of make-believe. No one - NO ONE - outside a select few on the vs. forum are in the same personal bubble that would make this seem like a good idea for an entirely new forum. Maybe talk to Bada/Pr, or just hold separate BZ's when you have a dispute...the BZ format should support a challenge of this type.

I don't mean to be a jerk. It probably sounds like I am. I'm just telling you this from a realistic perspective.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
The issue of the respect thread is a valid concern. Perhaps only have challenges whenever a VS thread attains a standstill. Or perhaps such a "challenge" can only be initiated by a mod (who notices that a specific "feat" has been debated to death at the expense of the thread in question) who notices a standstill between two debating parties to resolve the issue?

I'd be willing to say there are feats that are either clearly unquantifiable/hyperbole, or those that resort to crazy calculations that are obviously not what the writers had in mind (see the speed traveling feats thread), and for those, I'd almost say mods could straight out ban that type of feat, especially for vs forums.

I suppose my preference for more obscure characters is the issue. I'd hate to make a Starhawk respect thread and have a Thor fanboy try to challenge me over certain feats, when the intent of the writer is clear (just as an example). For stuff like Hulk v Superman or the more common debates, I suppose I see exactly what you are saying, I just try to avoid those debates like the plague. An entire forum dedicated to that seems like the cesspool of KMC I'd never want to approach.

long story short, I think we need to treat vs threads different than respect, and my biggest concern would be making rules for one type and trying to apply it to the other in a way that makes it an overall negative. To use another example, the Man-Thing respect thread I made is terribly biased in his favor, however, I'd expect a lot of that to be challenged in a vs thread more than a respect thread. Hopefully that makes sense? I feel like I'm all over the place...

Originally posted by pym-ftw
i can get where your coming from but if we have a Mod/Judge ruling on a feat it cant be challenged directly on the boards and will stop page after page of nothing but "fanboyism"...

my worry is more about respect threads than the vs forum, more because of the effort I want to put into them. I tend to leave vs forum debates when they get to that point, whereas I'd actually be really pissed if I had a respect thread that devolved to that point.

Originally posted by Digi
It's cute that you're still taking this seriously. I like your conviction. Clearly it's something that rankles your sensibilities.

But I just think we should keep suggestions out of the realm of make-believe. No one - NO ONE - outside a select few on the vs. forum are in the same personal bubble that would make this seem like a good idea for an entirely new forum. Maybe talk to Bada/Pr, or just hold separate BZ's when you have a dispute...the BZ format should support a challenge of this type.

I don't mean to be a jerk. It probably sounds like I am. I'm just telling you this from a realistic perspective.

Well, it doesn't really "rankle my sensibilities" per se. It's just that Bada asked for suggestions to address the issue of "misrepresentation of comics" and I simply brainstormed an idea. As per any brainstormed idea, it's seldom ever perfect or even doable. It's just a proposal to keep ideas flowing.

The "entirely new forum" is also just an idea, and yes, the BZ would be able address this just fine. The idea of a new forum is simply one way to keep it organized but is in no way even all that relevant to the proposal itself.

The basic core of the idea is really just the "put up or shut up" rule. People who continuously ignore the evidence presented in front of them should be made to face a BZ challenge or drop their line of logic in order to prevent derailing a thread entirely.

The only thing I foresee is two Superman fanboys battlezoning over whether Superman lifted a Multiverse or infinite weight and everyone subsequently rolling their eyes over the blatantly asinine false absolute being forced.

I'm not trying to sh1t on your idea, but I frankly don't appreciate having everyone else beholden to the arguments of two specific people (one of whom, or both, is invariably high/lowballing said feat).

This isn't exactly a forum-wide crisis that is systemic. The two people battlezoning a feat should have that battlezone judgment restrict them and them only. And if one of them reneges and brings up their losing argument again in some other thread, he can be reported for it with zero tolerance, as that is the agreed consequence.

And if they don't want to do a battlezone and they're committed to trolling a thread because they don't want to be cornered, just report them for ordinary trolling.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
The basic core of the idea is really just the "put up or shut up" rule. People who continuously ignore the evidence presented in front of them should be made to face a BZ challenge or drop their line of logic in order to prevent derailing a thread entirely.

from my experience, those people will never accept a BZ challenge 🙁

Guys, this isn't a debate thread or a thread to vent frustrations about fanboys. And we can't have a feat verification/challenge forum. That happens in the vs forum threads.

Isn't a "Feat Interpretation Challenges" thread basically "The Abhilegend soapbox"?