Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiwi Peewee
There's recently been a lot of talk around the Hall of Fame on Letsbeef, and it seems to me that a lot of users feel it needs some sort of change or overhaul. To that end I am writing this thread with some ideas I have had. Since the only thing that makes the HOF worth anything is whether the users respect it, I want to get everybody's thoughts before changing anything, and to make sure that there is site-wide consensus and understanding. Please feel free to share whatever ideas or thoughts you have too.
I've tagged in the thread users who I think may be invested in the topic.
1. Updates
A lot of the HOF induction pages are out of date, for instance battlers have come back, won titles, and had major accomplishments since their induction (i.e. All-Boro). This could either be remedied by editing the existing content of their induction pages to include it, or by adding a new section at the end of every HOF page which gave an account of the battler's activity and accomplishments since being inducted.
2. "Impact" Hall of Fame
A few people, most recently @ EtH and Dono, have been nominated to the Hall Of Fame despite there not really being a category that fits them. Would it be worth creating another branch of the hall of fame, that functioned essentially as a "miscellaneous HOF", for users whose legacy didn't fit into just specifically text battling, audio battling or track making? Other plausible candidates could include @ NOBLE and @ Godbody. I'm particularly interested to know people's thoughts on this, and whether anyone can come up with a more fitting name.
3. Nominations
There seems to be a great deal of confusion over the nomination process itself. There is actually a relatively straightforward, if not-at-all-transparent, mechanism outlined here, however it requires @ RULE to be active to process every nomination which unfortunately can't be the case forever. I think it might be time to come up with a better process to handle nominations. Purely having it down to a poll is not workable because of the extent that cheating and trolling often affect those polls, and because HOF is not a popularity contest. However, I think it's very important that the users have ultimate power over the inductions because it is their respect which makes the HOF valid. |
I've always felt that the HoF process could be more systematic. I've never liked the fact that it seemed to be led primarily by nomination threads. Nomination threads should be a part of it, but should not be the primary basis of it. The issue with nomination threads is that, not only is it a popularity contest, it is skewed in favor of what is freshest in people's minds, and a lot of people's memories don't go back as far as is sometimes necessary to ensure that the right people make it into the Hall of Fame at the right time. What we need is a way of weighing HoF nominations against other HoF nominations. We should keep it only for battle related accomplishments. There are plenty of other ways to acknowledge people who have made an impact over the years. There are the LetsBeef Promoter, Forum Top Poster, Great Thinker, and Donor awards. We can even create a new award if we don't think some people quite fit into these. But battling is the site's core activity, and the Hall of Fame should reflect that.
If I were to overhaul the HoF process, I would first start by reducing it to either one or two per year for each category (text, audio, tracks) instead of one each month as the current schedule indicates.
We only have two grand championships each year but a new Hall of Famer is inducted each month? That basically makes it easier to get into the Hall of Fame than to win a grand championship in certain regards. It shouldn't be like that. The whole point of the HoF is that it is something to be coveted, so inductions should be a lot more rare.
How long candidates have been members and how long they were active should be a factor. I've seen some people inducted where, even though they deserved it or would've deserved it eventually, were inducted way before others who had accomplished similar things but who aren't fresh in the site's memory.
There should be a points system similar to the "Greatest of Champions" thread where points are given for each factor (battle accomplishments, length of membership, site impact, or whatever other factor we decide to add). Nomination threads can also earn someone points, but it shouldn't weigh more than those other factors. Then when it's time to induct the one or two people for that category that year, everyone who was nominated in the category should have their points weighed against each other before we decide who to nominate that year.