Difference between revisions of "Talk:Hall of Fame:SAR"

From RealCTY
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 25: Line 25:
 
"If you are adding something to a Hall of Fame, please do not do so unless it actually is memorable for years to come or had particular significance during your session"
 
"If you are adding something to a Hall of Fame, please do not do so unless it actually is memorable for years to come or had particular significance during your session"
 
Seriously, you don't know what goes on there, so stop dicking around with it. --[[User:Pants|Pants]] 02:35, 18 August 2010 (PDT)
 
Seriously, you don't know what goes on there, so stop dicking around with it. --[[User:Pants|Pants]] 02:35, 18 August 2010 (PDT)
 +
 +
----
 +
 +
Sorry about that quote; I missed that while updating the editing policy to clarify HoF criteria.  The criteria for deciding whether or not something should be in the Hall of Fame boils down to whether (1) it had a lasting effect that was noticed more than a year or two later, or (2) it was a large-scale and positive rules change, protest, or breakage.  This is why the glowstringing records are perfectly acceptable as HoF content (they span many years, but should be rewritten to avoid being false), but that the Chen entry is more questionable.  According to my (admittedly few) friends from Saratoga, Jon Good is still a part of the site's lore.  Was Chen really so well-known that people two or three years from now will be screaming his name?  Or was he just another of the many people who get randomly Chuck-Norrified?  Maybe he answer is somewhere in-between, but unless it was clear to everybody that the individual was /just that amazing/, he probably fits better in Memories.  At Lancaster, for instance, the Trinities of both sessions tend to have big impacts on the site and tend to have pretty good amounts of fame and/or notoriety.  None of them, however crazy their stories are, get HoF entries unless they /do/ something that falls under the HoF criterion (i.e., importing a tradition that lasts 15 years; preventing the Afterdance-banning).
 +
 +
Also, attending Saratoga doesn't make you automatically justified to decide what is HoF-worthy and what isn't.  Plenty of people who attended their own sites have, in the past, tried to make themselves a little bit more legendary by HoF-ing themselves.  That doesn't mean they're right.  Either the entry should be clearly significant in the aforementioned ways, or there should be some sort of clear consensus from people in different halls and social groups or something, which is hard to determine.  As a final note, you probably shouldn't accuse site admins of reckless editing or "dicking around."

Revision as of 17:00, 18 August 2010

Rickroll

I have found myself in a bit of a predicament: it seems obvious that the Rickrolling of all of CTY at the final dance of 09.1 should be immortalized on RealCTY in some way, but I'm not sure whether it belongs in the Hall of Fame or the Hall of Shame. Personally, I'm inclined to put it in the Hall of Fame, but I knew some people were more than a little annoyed, especially at the song that was chosen to be Rickrolled. Opinions? -- Kakofonous 20:33, 20 July 2009 (PDT)

I'm not a Saratogan so I don't know how big of an impact it had, but it doesn't seem really large scale enough for any of them. (We got rick rolled too at a dance.) I think it should go in the Memories section. -Zoe M.

We don't have a memories page as of yet... I say hall of shame if either. It was funny, but I wasn't exactly happy with which song they did it during. --PHS Philip 14:44, 23 July 2009 (PDT)

Messing with the hall of fame

Dutchman, don't randomly move everything to memories. For instance, you moved the current record for the Jonsson tower run, but not the old one... Please, if you're going to do anything, actually read it first, or let someone who was actually there do it. I changed it to make it slightly better, considering I agree there was too much stuff that should have been in memories. --Pants 09:56, 16 August 2010 (PDT)

Things were moved with respect to notability guidelines, not "randomly" moved. As specified in the HoF page, notability generally depends on something either having a lifespan of multiple years, or being a particularly large-scale and positive rule change, protest, or breakage. For example, the old Jonsson Tower run was notable and HoFworthy not because they made it up to the top of the tower in rapid time, but because their exploit involved sneaking out in the middle of the night- something which requires a fair amount of planning and guts as well as carrying a sizeable risk. The second run happened after breakfast on the last day, when there was really no risk taken since the administration could not have punished the participants in any meaningful way. A "record" it may be, but legends are not made climbing molehills.

However, as Saratogans seem fond of records, I've left it there this time. I have been informed that triple and quadruple glowsticking had been done at another site(or sites) before '08 and '09 and those have therefore been deleted. Quintuple glowsticking still appears to fall under Memories rather than HoF.

Prank Wars not only seems confined(fortunately) to two halls, it's also an example of an activity that probably should not be encouraged via HoF inclusion.

Looking at the entries for the 90s and early 00s, it seems safe to say that not every session had something HoFworthy. While this can be in part attributed to the lack of a wiki back then, one must remember that while CTY tends to be memorable for everybody, it takes a truly remarkable event to gain site-wide and/or multi-year notoriety. Dutchman 23:04, 16 August 2010 (PDT)

Well then, at that, you're contradicting yourself considering you moved Chen. "If you are adding something to a Hall of Fame, please do not do so unless it actually is memorable for years to come or had particular significance during your session" Seriously, you don't know what goes on there, so stop dicking around with it. --Pants 02:35, 18 August 2010 (PDT)


Sorry about that quote; I missed that while updating the editing policy to clarify HoF criteria. The criteria for deciding whether or not something should be in the Hall of Fame boils down to whether (1) it had a lasting effect that was noticed more than a year or two later, or (2) it was a large-scale and positive rules change, protest, or breakage. This is why the glowstringing records are perfectly acceptable as HoF content (they span many years, but should be rewritten to avoid being false), but that the Chen entry is more questionable. According to my (admittedly few) friends from Saratoga, Jon Good is still a part of the site's lore. Was Chen really so well-known that people two or three years from now will be screaming his name? Or was he just another of the many people who get randomly Chuck-Norrified? Maybe he answer is somewhere in-between, but unless it was clear to everybody that the individual was /just that amazing/, he probably fits better in Memories. At Lancaster, for instance, the Trinities of both sessions tend to have big impacts on the site and tend to have pretty good amounts of fame and/or notoriety. None of them, however crazy their stories are, get HoF entries unless they /do/ something that falls under the HoF criterion (i.e., importing a tradition that lasts 15 years; preventing the Afterdance-banning).

Also, attending Saratoga doesn't make you automatically justified to decide what is HoF-worthy and what isn't. Plenty of people who attended their own sites have, in the past, tried to make themselves a little bit more legendary by HoF-ing themselves. That doesn't mean they're right. Either the entry should be clearly significant in the aforementioned ways, or there should be some sort of clear consensus from people in different halls and social groups or something, which is hard to determine. As a final note, you probably shouldn't accuse site admins of reckless editing or "dicking around."