- 13,903
- 5,404
- Thread starter
- #81
Adding the scaling values directly to the notes shouldn’t be against the rules it literally hurts nobody, even the people who think putting it in the AP section would be “too messy”
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Who? Because I can see a **** ton of people and mods who agrees with such a methodWe already disagreed on this, in case y'all just forgot.
Youre not stupid, you have understand what I meant. Writing a blog is the same shit as writing a page, both use the same model and site configurations.Not "blogs". Pages. We stopped doing the "blog" routine ages ago
Me, Damage3245, ElajRuengies and DarkDragonMedeus. Ant even agreed to the suggestion that Elaj proposed: Make an Optional Explanations section in the profiles somewhere, and as the name says, it's optional.Who? Because I can see a **** ton of people and mods who agrees with such a method
The hell was this for?Youre not stupid, you have understand what I meant.
Nor you or ElajRuengies are relevant, otherwise me, Ziller and SeijiSeto would as well countMe, Damage3245, ElajRuengies and DarkDragonMedeus
LMAO what? I'm staff, plus, a CGM, and this thing is about listing calc values, my vote absolutely counts here.Nor you or ElajRuengies are relevant for the count, otherwise me, Ziller and SeijiSeto would as well count
As an optional.Anyway, LordTracer,
Same thing, but said that more effort should be placed on elaborating it in the paragraph.Gyronutz,
Same as Tracer.Propellus
He's pretty much the only solid "Agree" here.and Adytrenom agrees with adding values to the justifications
Yeah, thats the whole premiseAs an optional
Calc members, Thread Mods and Content Mods are considered to be on the same footing in terms of rank and responsibility, only with different focuses.I don’t see how being a calc member means you get to give yourself voting power in a thread about profile formatting
Like I said, I don't see the point. Elaj's proposal does this way more justice if you're that insistent in not using a Scaling Chain Explanation page.Yeah, thats the whole premise
Calcs are technically involved in any crt about scaling, because everyone’s scaling to a calc value, yet that doesn’t mean you get voting rights thereCalc members, Thread Mods and Content Mods are considered to be on the same footing in terms of rank and responsibility, only with different focuses.
Plus, in this case of profile formatting, calcs are involved, so naturally, it becomes our part as well as that of an admin and content mods as well.
Nah, our coat buttons tight on a number of other duties as well, like knowing a fair bit amount about site policy and where and when those apply, in calcs or elsewhere, which is why we serve as such a fundamental cornerstone to the site's well-being.Calcs are technically involved in any crt about scaling, because everyone’s scaling to a calc value, yet that doesn’t mean you get voting rights there
I was under the impression that calc group authority doesn’t extend beyond evaluating if a calc is usable, and discussing things like calculation methods or the baselines of tiers being adjusted and such
yes, this is about where to put calc values, but it has nothing to do with the values themselves.
Elaj proposal is way too shitty imoLike I said, I don't see the point. Elaj's proposal does this way more justice if you're that insistent in not using a Scaling Chain Explanation page.
I'll take your word for it and count you as a disagree.Elaj proposal is way too shitty imo
One word: Consistency.But I don't see why both methods cannot be accepted as optional
We literally have three methods to write P&A (Normal, topics or in bolding)One word: Consistency.
Probably, but ask just in case.May the OP speak?
And a lot of parties already think it excessive.We literally have three methods to write P&A (Normal, topics or in bolding)
Nope, not anymore. It is now mandatory to include justifications, scans and references (ALL OF THEM) in ALL YOUR PROFILES.Even justifications and scans is something currently optional in our profiles
I agree with this.In my opinion, putting the numerical values in the stats sections breaks up the flow of reading with numbers and Prefix-atons.
Numerical values would be better put in the optional Explanations section that profiles can have.
That doesn’t mean I don’t solidly agree with the OP’s premise lol. If people want to list the values in the justification, they should be able to. If they don’t want to, then they don’t have to.As an optional.
Fair enough.That doesn’t mean I don’t solidly agree with the OP’s premise lol. If people want to list the values in the justification, they can. If they don’t want to, then they don’t have to.
I agree, but I'm not the one making new rules RN.OP not being able to speak on their own thread cause they're a blue name is crazy
Or just optional even for new profiles. Nothing stops our visitors from clicking the calculation and check the values.I'm fine with this, but don't make it something we need to implement to all the old ones, maybe "it's encouraged to do this for all the new profiles made"
Yes, in an ideal world I agree, but our member do not seem to know or understand how to do this, and keep using this format over and over for different verses, so it may be practically unfeasible.To be honest I don't like the appearance of having the AP values displayed like that inside the AP sections. Whether it be in reference notes, or a detailed scaling breakdown elsewhere seems like the better solution to me.
I think that the poster of a staff forum thread can continue to speak there, yes.OP not being able to speak on their own thread cause they're a blue name is crazy
I feel like this would be better along with placing any scaling chains in the explanations section as well just so it's all in one place.In my opinion, putting the numerical values in the stats sections breaks up the flow of reading with numbers and Prefix-atons.
Numerical values would be better put in the optional Explanations section that profiles can have.
I'm not a fan of that AP section to be honest. Putting four bolded AP values in the description of one AP rating is just cluttering it.Use this for a better reference of how a profile would look like
Should I add something to the rules to clarify that?I think that the poster of a staff forum thread can continue to speak there, yes.
It takes up a considerably lower amount of space compared to the AP justification, and for the little space it takes up it is convenient and quite helpful for vs threadsI'm not a fan of that AP section to be honest. Putting four bolded AP values in the description of one AP rating is just cluttering it.
I personally wouldn't mind.Should I add something to the rules to clarify that?
So what do you all think about this?Yes, in an ideal world I agree, but our member do not seem to know or understand how to do this, and keep using this format over and over for different verses, so it may be practically unfeasible.
Uh, ew. As I’ve said before, I think people should be allowed to index the value a character scales to in their justification if they want to, but not like that. It should just be something simple like this:Use this for a better reference of how a profile would look like
Tier (Justification [Value they scale to])