1. I was never a fan of the over/under/flat thing, but I understand why it exists. Though if you ask to clarify and they don't respond, I think you should just assume it's flat and take the update, especially if the pc will have moved by more than 1m.
If you just blanket assume all unstated reports are flat, it might pose more conflicts but then you can just ask if it was flat to try and resolve the conflict. If they don't answer to that, just take the conflict and revert. It's not the biggest deal.
2. The titles had absolutely no down side for everyone who didn't manage them. Either people were motivated or they didn't care. I'd be happy for these to come back, but I accept it's a lot of work. Maybe if someone wants to take over this then we can pick new titles to go for too?
3. I don't think anything needs to change here. Just use the most recent you have at any point. If it's outdated, there's little you can do except wait for an update.
4. Reasonable, but there's not much that needs to be run day to day by higher ups. The stuff that does need to happen would have to wait for General access anyway. But it's never urgent.
5. I'm not a massive fan of ranks being easier to achieve. I already think they're too easy tbh. I certainly wouldn't want a quark style rank session. I really don't like their system. Maybe for the derank lists we should have more of an objective system, rather than the subjective forum lists every 3-4 months that we have at the moment.
This would mean setting actual criteria that is more strictly enforced. For example if you haven't PCed for x amount of time or posted on forum or anything then you drop a rank. Smileys could be only removed if they don't even appear on highscores anymore (not logged in for 6 months). There would likely be a lot of controversy over the exact details of this so it would have to be well-ironed out, but once it's in place it would remove the subjective nature of the current system.
03-Aug-2017 21:26:58