[Suggestion] Dedicated sub-forum for Legendaries

[GermanGiant]

Legendaries do not have any special advantage over a Hero member. So, why not have a dedicated sub-forum for them ? The forum can be hidden from others like Staff forum. Alternatively, it can be made read-only for others.

Thoughts ?

[otrkid70]

What benefits does this provide to anyone?

This is an open forum made so everyone can see/reply to any threads or topics.  I wouldn't want to be a part of any "Hidden" forum section if i were Legendary. Seems kind of boring to me.

[dogie]

There is already the donators sub-forum which is essentially dead and I can't see a Legendaries sub-forum going any different. What might be interesting is a sub-forum for default trust. There are often issues which require discussion about inclusion or exclusion and at the moment the only way to communicate is to PM 10 people and spam everyone's inboxes when anyone replies. A sub-forum may organise this differently.

[Blazed]

I do not think it would be active and see no point to it. What would we discuss in that sub compared to everywhere else? Obviously, us Legendary users are better than any Hero or underlings, but we do not need a sub to prove it 

[GermanGiant]

What benefits does this provide to anyone?

Currently, the forum is full of low quality posts. The same question is being answered by 10 or more people for signature payment. These things wont probably happen in Legendary forum. People will get to see more knowledgeable, in-depth conversation and will learn a thing or two about bitcoin.

There is already the donators sub-forum which is essentially dead and I can't see a Legendaries sub-forum going any different.

I think, this will be different because lots of Legendaries are still active as opposed to donators.

[shorena]

There is already the donators sub-forum which is essentially dead and I can't see a Legendaries sub-forum going any different. What might be interesting is a sub-forum for default trust. There are often issues which require discussion about inclusion or exclusion and at the moment the only way to communicate is to PM 10 people and spam everyone's inboxes when anyone replies. A sub-forum may organise this differently.

I think thats a good idea. It should be read only to everyone though to keep things transparent.

-snip-
I think, this will be different because lots of Legendaries are still active as opposed to donators.

What would be legendary only topics though?

[dogie]

There is already the donators sub-forum which is essentially dead and I can't see a Legendaries sub-forum going any different. What might be interesting is a sub-forum for default trust. There are often issues which require discussion about inclusion or exclusion and at the moment the only way to communicate is to PM 10 people and spam everyone's inboxes when anyone replies. A sub-forum may organise this differently.

I think thats a good idea. It should be read only to everyone though to keep things transparent.

There are pros and cons for it being public. For example discussing CiTM in the public before he was overthrown got you disavowed from DT and negative trusted. People can be unwilling to speak out at their own risk and also propagates people using smurfs.

[notlist3d]

There is already the donators sub-forum which is essentially dead and I can't see a Legendaries sub-forum going any different. What might be interesting is a sub-forum for default trust. There are often issues which require discussion about inclusion or exclusion and at the moment the only way to communicate is to PM 10 people and spam everyone's inboxes when anyone replies. A sub-forum may organise this differently.

I think thats a good idea. It should be read only to everyone though to keep things transparent.

There are pros and cons for it being public. For example discussing CiTM in the public before he was overthrown got you disavowed from DT and negative trusted. People can be unwilling to speak out at their own risk and also propagates people using smurfs.

Without a common topic just being leggendary is kinda wide open.  Some posts might be posted there that would help others... so you might be hurting other forums by limiting who can post/see.

I see at end of day it turning into a offtopic area.   I don't think we really need it in any way.  Sure would be neat to have a private forum...  but long term I'm just not sure it would be good for the forum.  Or if it will even be active.

[suchmoon]

There is already the donators sub-forum which is essentially dead and I can't see a Legendaries sub-forum going any different. What might be interesting is a sub-forum for default trust. There are often issues which require discussion about inclusion or exclusion and at the moment the only way to communicate is to PM 10 people and spam everyone's inboxes when anyone replies. A sub-forum may organise this differently.

I think thats a good idea. It should be read only to everyone though to keep things transparent.

There are pros and cons for it being public. For example discussing CiTM in the public before he was overthrown got you disavowed from DT and negative trusted. People can be unwilling to speak out at their own risk and also propagates people using smurfs.

Why wouldn't that same thing happen in a DT-only subforum? You mean a subforum for DT1 and DT2 members, right?

I think it would be bizarre to have a subforum dedicated for one user's (two if you include QS but he's not in DT) scheming.

[Lauda]

This was already suggested at least once. The issue here is what would be discussed in the sub (everything? Which would be a horrible mess) and potential inactivity. There as a legendary-only self moderated thread which was used for testing purposes in the German section (basically, a bot was used which deleted any posts from non-legendary members). There was inadequate activity to justify a single thread (however, it could be due to lack of legendary members that speak German). Now, if you are really interested in this idea OP, then you could open a self moderated thread in the Off-topic section just for legendary members and see how it goes.

[Quickseller]

There is already the donators sub-forum which is essentially dead and I can't see a Legendaries sub-forum going any different. What might be interesting is a sub-forum for default trust. There are often issues which require discussion about inclusion or exclusion and at the moment the only way to communicate is to PM 10 people and spam everyone's inboxes when anyone replies. A sub-forum may organise this differently.

I think thats a good idea. It should be read only to everyone though to keep things transparent.

There are pros and cons for it being public. For example discussing CiTM in the public before he was overthrown got you disavowed from DT and negative trusted. People can be unwilling to speak out at their own risk and also propagates people using smurfs.

Well CITM (and those in his trust list) would have been able to see threads about CITM, so having a private DT sub would not have changed this.

I think it would be bizarre to have a subforum dedicated for one user's (two if you include QS but he's not in DT) scheming.

Except that I have never left negative trust because someone was speaking out against me.

[Blazed]

Having a DT1 sub would be pretty useless as there are not very many of us. I suppose maybe a DT2 sub might be somewhat useful to discuss ratings, but then again not sure it would get used much.

[suchmoon]

I think it would be bizarre to have a subforum dedicated for one user's (two if you include QS but he's not in DT) scheming.

Except that I have never left negative trust because someone was speaking out against me.

I was referring to your attempts to remove people from DT and to re-add yourself.

[Vod]

Except that I have never left negative trust because someone was speaking out against me.

Except in my case of course.   

The negative feedback you left for me is such grasping at straws, it's obvious it's for speaking out against you.

I'm sure there are a dozen others who would post the same, if anyone cared what you thought anymore.

[dogie]

There is already the donators sub-forum which is essentially dead and I can't see a Legendaries sub-forum going any different. What might be interesting is a sub-forum for default trust. There are often issues which require discussion about inclusion or exclusion and at the moment the only way to communicate is to PM 10 people and spam everyone's inboxes when anyone replies. A sub-forum may organise this differently.

I think thats a good idea. It should be read only to everyone though to keep things transparent.

There are pros and cons for it being public. For example discussing CiTM in the public before he was overthrown got you disavowed from DT and negative trusted. People can be unwilling to speak out at their own risk and also propagates people using smurfs.

Well CITM (and those in his trust list) would have been able to see threads about CITM, so having a private DT sub would not have changed this.

That's true, maybe he wouldn't have tried to go out all guns blazing if he hadn't been called out publicly (several times).

[HostFat]

If someone will create a special sub-forum for Legendaries, please disable signatures and avatars on it, to me it even better.

[botany]

The signature restrictions for different members can be changed to give benefits to legendary members.
Right now hero and legendary are almost at par.

[Lauda]

If someone will create a special sub-forum for Legendaries, please disable signatures and avatars on it, to me it even better.

I disagree. Most of the signature spam comes from members with lower ranks. It is quite rare to see a legendary member with really useless posts.

Having a DT1 sub would be pretty useless as there are not very many of us. I suppose maybe a DT2 sub might be somewhat useful to discuss ratings, but then again not sure it would get used much.

I'm certain that it would not have much activity. I also disagree with this because it could feel like DT members are having "backroom deals" for the remaining members (since they technically "control" trust ratings).

[hilariousandco]

What benefits does this provide to anyone?

Currently, the forum is full of low quality posts. The same question is being answered by 10 or more people for signature payment. These things wont probably happen in Legendary forum. People will get to see more knowledgeable, in-depth conversation and will learn a thing or two about bitcoin.

But over time all those accounts will all become Legendary too. I have thought about a board where there's no signature shown or posts made in there don't apply towards post count. Maybe people could be whitelisted into it posting in it. Think it would probably be easier to just restrict signatures to higher ranks like Hero or Legendary or just get rid of them all together though to be honest. Something really needs to be done. Said it before but it wont be long before the only people posting here are those from the Philippines/Indonesia etc on their ten alt accounts regurgitating the same old shit over and over again.

[target]

They do have special advantage in their signature as far as i know. Dividing us from the Legendary won't help the community grow. Lets say the admin allows it, what do they have to talk about besides the ones in the open forum? would they have the advantage to which they'd be notify during the start of ICO?