Redszone Hall of Fame

[Brutus]

I got to thinking, seeing today's thread on the ORG about the Hall of Fame vote (for players)... given the site setup, with the "call-up" like system we have here, why not institute a Hall of Fame for the best of the best?

Just thinking out loud, but it would be kind of cool to enshrine some of the best posters once a year.

Maybe after being a member for so many years and having 'x' number of posts, a person becomes eligible. Then we have nominations and a vote once a year to enshrine new members.

What say you? Seems like it would be kind of cool. I'm not normally much for making too big a deal out of who the best posters are, but if we're modeling a site a little after baseball and encourage recognition of better discussion, seems like a neat thing to try.

Anyone up for the idea?

[*BaseClogger*]

I'm game.

For our first ballot I nominate: The Baumer!

[BearcatShane]

That is an outstanding idea in my opinion.

[Ron Madden]

Originally Posted by Brutus the Pimp

I got to thinking, seeing today's thread on the ORG about the Hall of Fame vote (for players)... given the site setup, with the "call-up" like system we have here, why not institute a Hall of Fame for the best of the best?

Just thinking out loud, but it would be kind of cool to enshrine some of the best posters once a year.

Maybe after being a member for so many years and having 'x' number of posts, a person becomes eligible. Then we have nominations and a vote once a year to enshrine new members.

What say you? Seems like it would be kind of cool. I'm not normally much for making too big a deal out of who the best posters are, but if we're modeling a site a little after baseball and encourage recognition of better discussion, seems like a neat thing to try.

Anyone up for the idea?

Seems like a cool idea.

In my humble opinion # of post should NOT be a Qualifier.

I believe there are over a dozen members I'd vote in on the first ballot that just do not post very often. Sometimes Quality is better than Quantity.

[mth123]

I'd have a hard time keeping the initial list below 50 or so.

Founders, Mods, Humorists, Stat Gurus, Historians, Prospect Experts and plain old baseball fans all have their place. There are tons of good posters and its what makes the sight so compelling. I'm happy being the Juan Castro among such immortals (just don't call me Willy T). Unfortunately, many on my list rarely post anymore.

[RedFanAlways1966]

I appreciate the idea, but I am totally against it. Feelings may get hurt (great posters might vacate b/c of their feelings). If you are worthy of RZ HoF considerations, you already know it. The reputation system that was once used here showed anything that may be construed as a "popularity contest" is not a good thing.

[Boss-Hog]

Originally Posted by RedFanAlways1966

I appreciate the idea, but I am totally against it. Feelings may get hurt (great posters might vacate b/c of their feelings). If you are worthy of RZ HoF considerations, you already know it. The reputation system that was once used here showed anything that may be construed as a "popularity contest" is not a good thing.

That's kind of how I feel. I think it's a great idea but past history has indicated this very well could happen. If someone can come up with a way to avoid that situation, I'd certainly consider this idea because I think it's a good one.

[TRF]

How about we just do the year end awards like always? best poster, nicest poster, most handsome poster (The Raisor Award) etc. all tongue in cheek and light hearted.

[Boss-Hog]

Originally Posted by TRF

How about we just do the year end awards like always? best poster, nicest poster, most handsome poster (The Raisor Award) etc. all tongue in cheek and light hearted.

I'm perfectly fine with that if someone wants to organize it, as has been done in the past.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by Boss-Hog

That's kind of how I feel. I think it's a great idea but past history has indicated this very well could happen. If someone can come up with a way to avoid that situation, I'd certainly consider this idea because I think it's a good one.

Don't we kind of already hurt feelings anyhow? If someone applies for ORG membership and don't get in, do we worry about their feelings? It's basically a non-spoken way of saying they're not good enough.

I get what you're saying, and I'm not suggesting some of that couldn't happen. But if we limit the process to rather strict criteria, acknowledgment of some of the very best posters, would probably not hurt too many feelings in the process.

I do get some of those issues you are referring to. But unlike the old rep system, this is really just an honoring of the best folks, not necessarily a critique of each and every individual.

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by Brutus the Pimp

Don't we kind of already hurt feelings anyhow? If someone applies for ORG membership and don't get in, do we worry about their feelings? It's basically a non-spoken way of saying they're not good enough.

I get what you're saying, and I'm not suggesting some of that couldn't happen. But if we limit the process to rather strict criteria, acknowledgment of some of the very best posters, would probably not hurt too many feelings in the process.

I do get some of those issues you are referring to. But unlike the old rep system, this is really just an honoring of the best folks, not necessarily a critique of each and every individual.

I would tend to agree...if you limit it to "classes" of say 3-5 people per year, you might steer away from some of the potential controversy. The ORG voting has become almost ridiculous, this should have a much higher standard.

[Razor Shines]

Originally Posted by TRF

How about we just do the year end awards like always? best poster, nicest poster, most handsome poster (The Raisor Award) etc. all tongue in cheek and light hearted.

I miss those, they were funny.

[paintmered]

I enjoyed the SERPies. They were never to be taken seriously.

[TRF]

So let's use this thread to organize it by coming up with the questions. It could be posted in both the ORG and the SunDeck.

here are a few...

Most eloquent post
best sig
best one liner
nicest poster
ROY
MVP
Best post by TRF
best poster at diffusing a thread gone bad
best fan from another board (I say we call it the Swampturkey award, just cuz that is a great username)
Best bet made during the year.
Best predictor of future results.


Feel free to add more.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by Boss-Hog

That's kind of how I feel. I think it's a great idea but past history has indicated this very well could happen. If someone can come up with a way to avoid that situation, I'd certainly consider this idea because I think it's a good one.

I guess I would suggest the process as such:

Once a year, we have a nomination process. The moderators could field the nominations. The minimum criteria would be certain time in rank and maybe a threshold of number of posts (though I agree with Ron I wouldn't set the number too high, but I do think there should be a minimum as this is supposed to be not just about quality, but longevity and amount of quality).

Anyone fielding at least two nominations will go up for the ballot.

The moderators then propose the Hall of Fame ballot and I would propose that both Sun Deck and ORG members vote on it (though results are hidden). The reason I propose Sun Deck members vote too is because they often read the ORG and have an objective view about the best members.

My proposal is that we set the number at 75% of the votes for admission into the Hall of Fame.

We could have the first ballot be a little bigger to account for past members that aren't necessarily active anymore. Some of the past great posters could be included on that first ballot (or subsequent ballots if they're not voted in).

Though it seems counterintuitive, if we wanted to avoid hurt feelings, we could avoid a discussion thread on the topic except for nominations. This would somewhat lessen the chance it gets too sensitive.