Jump to content

New pawn for influencers


Recommended Posts

  • Members
Posted (edited)

A lot of the opinions that I feel about this have already been discussed so I won't add further.

However there is one suggestion that I would like to include as an alternative to the creation of a new pawn entirely.

 

spacer.png

 

When a user hovers over the nickname of another user, this appears. This has been a thing as long as I can remember but there is no real use for it as admins very rarely login to their xat admin accounts, rather they have testing accounts like Tom2 and Tomflash to use instead.

 

This therefore makes them completely useless and I feel that the identification of these users would be much better suited if they were included here rather than having a pawn specifically made for them.

This will serve as a verification status without the need of them having a means to show off and exploit their status on the platform with a "special visual indicator".

Edited by iMartin
  • Award 2
  • Done! 5
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributors
4 minutes ago, iMartin said:

This will serve as a verification status without the need of them having a means to show off and exploit their status on the platform with a "special visual indicator".

 

5 minutes ago, iMartin said:

spacer.png

Admin told a lot of time that vols, wiki editors/translators and contributors are only simple members and don’t even need a kind of identification out of forum. 

I think he’s changing his mind. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Members
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, iMartin said:

A lot of the opinions that I feel about this have already been discussed so I won't add further.

However there is one suggestion that I would like to include as an alternative to the creation of a new pawn entirely.

 

spacer.png

 

When a user hovers over the pawn of another user, this appears. This has been a thing as long as I can remember but there is no real use for it as admins very rarely login to their xat admin accounts, rather they have testing accounts like Tom2 and Tomflash to use instead.

 

This therefore makes them completely useless and I feel that the identification of these users would be much better suited if they were included here rather than having a pawn specifically made for them.

This will serve as a verification status without the need of them having a means to show off and exploit their status on the platform with a "special visual indicator".

 

yeah this kind of ties in to what i was saying, a good way of identifying staff (including admins, admin test accounts, vols, resellers, contribs, wiki editors, smiley makers, etc.) would be to replace the "NOT xat staff" for these users with their respective roles

 

for admins it would say "Admin", for admin test accounts it would say "Admin Test Account", for volunteers it would say "Volunteer", etc for all the respective staffing areas

 

for someone who has multiple of these roles (for example reseller & volunteer) it could simply say "Reseller & Volunteer"

 

for anyone who does not fit into any of the staff categories, leaving it to say "Not xat staff" would suffice

 

having a universal pawn represent staff members is far more generalised and therefore inefficient for what it's trying to accomplish

Edited by Flake
  • Done! 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Volunteers
31 minutes ago, iMartin said:

A lot of the opinions that I feel about this have already been discussed so I won't add further.

However there is one suggestion that I would like to include as an alternative to the creation of a new pawn entirely.

 

spacer.png

 

When a user hovers over the nickname of another user, this appears. This has been a thing as long as I can remember but there is no real use for it as admins very rarely login to their xat admin accounts, rather they have testing accounts like Tom2 and Tomflash to use instead.

 

This therefore makes them completely useless and I feel that the identification of these users would be much better suited if they were included here rather than having a pawn specifically made for them.

This will serve as a verification status without the need of them having a means to show off and exploit their status on the platform with a "special visual indicator".

 

This is a good suggestion, but not good enough to use it as a verification system as it can be hard to notice to some people because actually many users don't know about xat volunteers or other groups of people. There are other suggestions such as badges next to our IDs when clicking on our names that would be better in my opinion. Maybe both can be implemented anyway.

 

I personally disagree with giving all xat groups badges, some groups of people simply don't need it. The only ones that need badges or ways to verify their identity are the ones that are often impersonated by scammers. I won't go into much detail as I don't want to go into a public debate anyway.

 

28 minutes ago, Page said:

Admin told a lot of time that vols, wiki editors/translators and contributors are only simple members and don’t even need a kind of identification out of forum. 

I think he’s changing his mind. 

 

That's not the reality.

 

I agree that every group of people that volunteers their time to help xat should be recognized and rewarded as much as possible. However, you cannot put all of us in the same box as we have different roles, permissions and powers.

 

Even before becoming a ticket volunteer, I always knew that being a ticket volunteer is one of the most important roles on xat. I'm sorry to say this, but volunteers and developers are NOT simple users as they have too much permissions and powers to be considered as "simple members". Therfore, both groups of people deserve a way to be verified and easily recognized on the chats. Smiley makers can also be considered a big part of the community, but not sure if they really need a way to be verified as such other than their forum badges. Not sure if they are often impersonated.

 

As I said in my previous reply, this was completely unexpected. This is a test and not something that will last forever. If issues arise, then changes will be pushed.

  • Award 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Game Makers
Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, Solange said:

Smiley makers can also be considered a big part of the community, but not sure if they really need a way to be verified as such other than their forum badges. Not sure if they are often impersonated.

This is the point I wanted to get to,

 

People here aren't worried about the users from what I'm seeing (not all), just if they're going to be able to judge who deserves it,

 

Wait, how can Smiley makers not be as important as volunteers on xat? They are the ones who make all the powers of xat, they are the ones who bring money to xat, they bring powers every week for the users. Some of them even studied for graphic design, but doesn't that matter? Why is someone replying to a ticket more important than them?


This kind of choice of who deserves the pawn must be taken by admins. Contributors/volunteers/wiki membsrs should not get involved in this such of decisions as they will never have impartiality.

 

I see a lot here just running into drama because of past ranks, as stated before TRY TO LIVE THE FUTURE, forget the past.

 

A lot asked for a new pawn, staff verification etc, well, there's it aren't you all happy?

 

Please stop this "I DESERVE, SOMEONE ELSE NO!"

 

Edited by xLaming
Typo.
  • Award 5
  • Done! 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Members

I was thinking more of a separate thing for smiley makers, like their own peon and also a flag in honor of their work specifically for xat com, but this is another matter and the peon would seem the same as the owner color, (the same goes for the volunteers)  with their pawn!

 

anyway the idea I like it, it is innovative and it seems ideal to start filling xat com with people like before!

  • Haha 1
  • Angry 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Volunteers
17 minutes ago, xLaming said:

This is the point I wanted to get to,

 

People here aren't worried about the users from what I'm seeing (not all), just if they're going to be able to judge who deserves it,

 

Wait, how can Smiley makers not be as important as volunteers on xat? They are the ones who make all the powers of xat, they are the ones who bring money to xat, they bring powers every week for the users. Some of them even studied for graphic design, but doesn't that matter? Why is someone replying to a ticket more important than them?


This kind of choice of who deserves the pawn must be taken by admins. Contributors/volunteers/wiki membsrs should not get involved in this such of decisions as they will never have impartiality.

 

I was talking about impersonators, not talking about what they do for xat which is a big job (that's why I said they're a big part of xat community). As far as I know, Smiley makers aren't impersonated. But yes, you're right.

 

Being a ticket volunteer is not about pressing the reply button, it implies much more than that. I think you know perfectly well the permissions xat volunteers have and what we have to deal with due to our role. Imagine if our only job would be to press the reply button and nothing else...

 

Volunteers, Contributors, etc... were not involved in the decision, it was a decision taken by the xat administrators without consulting other people. The decision still belongs to the xat administrators, Contributors and Volunteers can suggest, but the final decision must be taken by the admins as always.

  • Award 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributors
50 minutes ago, Solange said:

That's not the reality.

 

I agree that every group of people that volunteers their time to help xat should be recognized and rewarded as much as possible. However, you cannot put all of us in the same box as we have different roles, permissions and powers.

Wasn’t me, was the answer that we received after show a suggestion to have some way “like verified” to the vols.

Something like this 

spacer.png

or this 

spacer.png

Of corse the devs, vols and smiley makers are important but what I said was what I received. 

 

“these images are just a simple eg;”

  • Wow 1
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Game Makers
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, Solange said:

As far as I know, Smiley makers aren't impersonated.

There are people who are impersonating even bot owners, asking for passwords, emails and PINs.

 

Eg: "Helper (insert any bot provider name here) BOT" .

 

This doesn't mean that the group also needs a special pawn. But following this logic, they also deverse it, no?

 

20 minutes ago, Solange said:

Being a ticket volunteer is not about pressing the reply button, it implies much more than that. I think you know perfectly well the permissions xat volunteers have and what we have to deal with due to our role.

Yes I know it, but I also know only a few of the volunteers can really deal with accounts and other "internal stuff", basically the Help department is same than helping in help chats. Does only them deserve the pawn, or help chats staff also deverse it?

 

In general, the only thing I really care about is impartiality and transparency. It is normal, we will always defend our groups, but this type of decision must be made on a case-by-case basis.

 

20 minutes ago, Solange said:

Volunteers, Contributors, etc... were not involved in the decision, it was a decision taken by the xat administrators without consulting other people. The decision still belongs to the xat administrators, Contributors and Volunteers can suggest, but the final decision must be taken by the admins as always.

I know they're not involved, but in the future, I feel that both groups should just resend the applications with a brief summary (Pros and Cons) to the admins, not something like "he doesn't deserve it, i won't send / he deserves it, i'll send".

 

Do not take it personally, i'm not attacking any person and/or group. It's just my suggestion on how to maintain neutrality and prevent any possible drama.

Edited by xLaming
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Members

While the future is what is important to xat, you did not get here without the past.  It is not crying about past ranks.

People need to stop feeling viewing things as salty and start viewing it for what it is.

"Influencers" help to get you where you want to be. I can almost guarantee there is a small percentage of scams for impersonation

compared to that of the past. So yes...sometimes the past does matter. While xat does need to advance,  a special pawn with generic

classification,  is really not the way, Try a verification system and a red star next to the pawn or something not so generic.  If you want to

advance and move ahead, think of something new.  Not just a generic pawn and an old idea.

 

  • Award 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Members
Posted (edited)

this is what came to my mind,

for the two important parts of xat com, that is the smiley maker and the volunteer, it is just an idea where the peon has the planet logo and the pawn is colored like a classic pawn with the shade of the right, with a black glitter!

 

                smiley makers pawn: b8ab23 RING: grey                 and                     volunteers pawn: 234db8 RING: yellow!

                  gPjwS37.png                                                                                Kj5F3YO.png

 

alex.

Edited by ALEX
any drama king's...
  • No 1
  • Confused 1
  • Done! 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Members
Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, Solange said:

 

This is a good suggestion, but not good enough to use it as a verification system as it can be hard to notice to some people because actually many users don't know about xat volunteers or other groups of people. There are other suggestions such as badges next to our IDs when clicking on our names that would be better in my opinion. Maybe both can be implemented anyway.

 

True, both badges and the suggestion martin and i mentioned would be good

 

20 hours ago, Solange said:

I personally disagree with giving all xat groups badges, some groups of people simply don't need it. The only ones that need badges or ways to verify their identity are the ones that are often impersonated by scammers. I won't go into much detail as I don't want to go into a public debate anyway.

 

I agree that every group of people that volunteers their time to help xat should be recognized and rewarded as much as possible. However, you cannot put all of us in the same box as we have different roles, permissions and powers.

 

Even before becoming a ticket volunteer, I always knew that being a ticket volunteer is one of the most important roles on xat. I'm sorry to say this, but volunteers and developers are NOT simple users as they have too much permissions and powers to be considered as "simple members". Therfore, both groups of people deserve a way to be verified and easily recognized on the chats. Smiley makers can also be considered a big part of the community, but not sure if they really need a way to be verified as such other than their forum badges. Not sure if they are often impersonated.

 

Don't agree, for multiple reasons

 

For one, only certain groups getting a badge / pawn / whatever method of verification gives precedence to the idea that some groups are more important or require more effort than others, and while that may to an extent be true, and may even be obvious for some comparisons between certain staffing areas, it is often quite subjective and therefore potentially demotivating for groups who feel they deserve something for their efforts but get nothing, when other groups do get something. i.e. you're neglecting the reward aspect and only focusing on the utility aspect of verification

 

Secondly, it's very possible that, since the suggested methods of verification would provide some reward, it would motivate users more to work to try and get that reward, therefore being an overall benefit for xat in terms of work put in (this is especially true for certain groups where you are suggesting they do not need verification, such as contributors, wiki editors and smiley makers)

 

Conversely, there isn't much reason to not give all staff roles their own unique verification (i.e. only giving it to certain groups), other than implicitly saying 'these staff groups are more important than the other staff groups', which provides no overall benefit and arguably is demotivating for the groups on the short end of the stick, like I previously mentioned.

 

You mention that giving all staff groups a method of verification would 'put all of the staff groups in the same box', but I would say that's only true for generalised verification (e.g. giving all staff groups the same pawn). For unique verification between staff groups, there will be separate rewards (be that different badges, different text that appears when you hover over the name, etc), therefore not putting you in the same box; users can have their own subjective ideas of which staff groups are more important for the site, and unique verification will inherently feed into that

Edited by Flake
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Members

I, personally, am split on the topic of ticket volunteers and other oft-impersonated groups receiving some sort of verification. I think if it happens, a pawn is too 'flashy', and it should be something that shows when you click their profile as many have suggested.

 

If it happens, I agree with several of the volunteers who have said that a line must be drawn somewhere. Volunteers, especially those who have been working for years, put in a lot of time and work behind the scenes and are also frequently impersonated. Same with developers. When I look at it this way -- that verifying these users serves as an acknowledgement of their years of unpaid work while also protecting the community -- I become tempted to support this change. I understand that in the past these groups have not wanted verification, but I don't think that is a good enough reason on its own to block it. 

 

I become more hesitant for two reasons. First, a few select users who I would assume would receive some sort of verification have a history of shady activity. I cannot honestly say that I would trust every user to handle this verification responsibly. Further, xat's history is littered with trusted users who one day went rogue and took advantage of their status on their way out, to the surprise of many. Giving them a seal of approval on behalf of the admins would likely only give them more power to do damage should they one day choose to follow in the footsteps of their predecessors. It's not something that would be an issue on a day-to-day basis, but handing unpaid, largely-anonymous users even more power certainly introduces more risk.

 

The second reason I am hesitant is because I believe it may not serve its intended purpose very well at all. The primary reasoning behind this change, surely, is to prevent scams that occur when users impersonate 'important' personnel. These scammers are successful with accounts that obviously do not appear on the Volunteer wiki page. If people are falling for these (often very obviously fake) impersonators, are they really going to stop falling for their tricks just because they don't have a 'Volunteer' badge on their profile? The people who fall for these scams are not the most educated on the inner workings of xat, clearly, and I don't know that the existence of this verification system would suddenly wisen them up and prevent scams. 

 

As for the influencer portion of this announcement, it seems the intentions were not properly conveyed by the admins. I don't know how many real 'influencers' are on xat today just waiting to be verified, but if a few do exist, I think they should just get the cyan pawn. Let's be real, no real celebrities are joining xat any time soon. 

  • Award 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Members
Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, Steven said:

I become more hesitant for two reasons. First, a few select users who I would assume would receive some sort of verification have a history of shady activity. I cannot honestly say that I would trust every user to handle this verification responsibly. Further, xat's history is littered with trusted users who one day went rogue and took advantage of their status on their way out, to the surprise of many. Giving them a seal of approval on behalf of the admins would likely only give them more power to do damage should they one day choose to follow in the footsteps of their predecessors. It's not something that would be an issue on a day-to-day basis, but handing unpaid, largely-anonymous users even more power certainly introduces more risk.

 

i mean, that sounds less like an issue with the verification system itself, and more like the verification system is amplifying an already existing problem: the methodology for adding and removing staff is ineffective

 

if members of certain staff groups have a history of shady activity, why are they staff in the first place. if they can't be trusted to leave their position on good terms, why are they staff in the first place

 

15 hours ago, Steven said:

The second reason I am hesitant is because I believe it may not serve its intended purpose very well at all. The primary reasoning behind this change, surely, is to prevent scams that occur when users impersonate 'important' personnel. These scammers are successful with accounts that obviously do not appear on the Volunteer wiki page. If people are falling for these (often very obviously fake) impersonators, are they really going to stop falling for their tricks just because they don't have a 'Volunteer' badge on their profile? The people who fall for these scams are not the most educated on the inner workings of xat, clearly, and I don't know that the existence of this verification system would suddenly wisen them up and prevent scams. 

 

i both agree and disagree

 

while i agree that this verification system likely won't help too many of the users who are currently 'falling for tricks' as you put it, i do think being precautionary is better than not being precautionary, especially with regards to this issue. if the verification system will mitigate the issue to any extent, then that's better than not mitigating the issue at all. this isn't really a reason to not include it when not including it would be the worse outcome w/ respect to reducing scams and other similar issues

 

unless you're suggesting that we try to come up with a better verification system or try to come up with other ideas to prevent the issue at hand, then that's fair

 

Edited by Flake
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Members

Just wanted to way in on the subject about cyan/sky pawn. Haven't read all responses only the first few.

 

Over the years I have always flighted the corner of the cyan pawn being for celebrities only and even people like techrax I didn't agree with getting it as it seems anyone with a big following is counted as a celebrity these days. I see the cyan pawn for people who are actors, singers etc not just anyone that can pick up a camera and record anything and people will subscribe/follow. However in todays age of things celebrities aren't the most popular people with the world of social media platforms like TikTok, Instagram and YouTube and people becoming influencers daily and I do feel like this needs to be addressed on xat somehow.

 

If xat is serious about labelling these types of people now and making them stand out on live chats then I think the cyan pawn should really be the way these people are verified on xat. These are also going to be live accounts that people use to talk with on chats rather than someone looking for a influencers profile to follow such as twitter with the blue tick. xat doesn't have profile pages that allow users to follow them so I think this is the best way to label influencers when they enter a live chat room is with the cyan pawn. 

 

Sky pawn is a silly idea to make things more complicated than they need to be in terms of labelling between celebrities and influencers and even wanna be celebrities that may go power crazy and think they have authority because of certain status. 

 

Game makers, ticket volunteers and who ever else getting this pawn? absolutely unnecessarily to do this and defeats the idea of the influencers status., plus we have survived this long without special treatment on chats for these titles over 10+ years. Verified symbol for people in chat so they know who volunteers, smiley makers are etc? They are labelled on the wiki, special titles on the forum etc and lets be real xat community is small but loyal and everyone knows everyone's roles anyway so unless the community grows I think this is pointless.

 

Sky pawn given out influencers without any minimum following? - what makes them an influencer if they have a small following? 1k followers, 10k followers and even 100k followers means nothing these days unlike they did back in the day.  I understand each application will go through some sort of checklist but there needs to be some ground rules from some with pure talent with 100k followers vs a meme page, reaction youtube channel with the same following can't be compared if they have the same following. If people really wanted to they can get lots of followers easily with little effort and no talent and makes them an influencer? I just hope each case is looked at genuinely and how the influencer pawn/title will be used and not just for a popular contest. 

 

Main view points:

cyan pawn be rebranded to suit a new generation and be used as a verified tool to genuine accounts that can benefit from it.

sky pawn to be scrapped and not to be given out to the xat users with titles such smiley makers, vols, game makers and wanna be influencers that dont truly require a verified symbol. 

  • Award 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Wiki Translators

Hello 

 

I hope everything is fine with all of you, sorry if i'm wrong or i didn't understand well, i've some questions about this topic just to CLARIFY : 

 

1) " Influencers are users who have notable space on other social network communities (and some xat volunteers) " having notable space on social networks through what ? or which activities ? 

2) " They must be popular in their own area " you mean geographically ? where they live ? their city, neighborhood ... ?

3) " or mentioned xat during their presence on other sites " How ? 

4) " xat will look at each suggestion carefully to see if the person matches to our criteria " I don't know how could you choose the right person here, these criteria seem complicated.

 

Thanks 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Members
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Echo said:

Just wanted to way in on the subject about cyan/sky pawn. Haven't read all responses only the first few.

 

Over the years I have always flighted the corner of the cyan pawn being for celebrities only and even people like techrax I didn't agree with getting it as it seems anyone with a big following is counted as a celebrity these days. I see the cyan pawn for people who are actors, singers etc not just anyone that can pick up a camera and record anything and people will subscribe/follow. However in todays age of things celebrities aren't the most popular people with the world of social media platforms like TikTok, Instagram and YouTube and people becoming influencers daily and I do feel like this needs to be addressed on xat somehow.

 

If xat is serious about labelling these types of people now and making them stand out on live chats then I think the cyan pawn should really be the way these people are verified on xat. These are also going to be live accounts that people use to talk with on chats rather than someone looking for a influencers profile to follow such as twitter with the blue tick. xat doesn't have profile pages that allow users to follow them so I think this is the best way to label influencers when they enter a live chat room is with the cyan pawn. 

 

Sky pawn is a silly idea to make things more complicated than they need to be in terms of labelling between celebrities and influencers and even wanna be celebrities that may go power crazy and think they have authority because of certain status. 

 

Game makers, ticket volunteers and who ever else getting this pawn? absolutely unnecessarily to do this and defeats the idea of the influencers status., plus we have survived this long without special treatment on chats for these titles over 10+ years. Verified symbol for people in chat so they know who volunteers, smiley makers are etc? They are labelled on the wiki, special titles on the forum etc and lets be real xat community is small but loyal and everyone knows everyone's roles anyway so unless the community grows I think this is pointless.

 

Sky pawn given out influencers without any minimum following? - what makes them an influencer if they have a small following? 1k followers, 10k followers and even 100k followers means nothing these days unlike they did back in the day.  I understand each application will go through some sort of checklist but there needs to be some ground rules from some with pure talent with 100k followers vs a meme page, reaction youtube channel with the same following can't be compared if they have the same following. If people really wanted to they can get lots of followers easily with little effort and no talent and makes them an influencer? I just hope each case is looked at genuinely and how the influencer pawn/title will be used and not just for a popular contest. 

 

Main view points:

cyan pawn be rebranded to suit a new generation and be used as a verified tool to genuine accounts that can benefit from it.

sky pawn to be scrapped and not to be given out to the xat users with titles such smiley makers, vols, game makers and wanna be influencers that dont truly require a verified symbol. 

 

you're completely neglecting the positives that a verification system would be providing for staff purely on the premise that it isn't necessary, when you can be using the exact same reasoning to argue that the cyan pawn isn't necessary for celebrities

 

sure, it isn't absolutely necessary addition, but that isn't an argument for it not being a good addition. i've noticed on this site a lot of people including the devs have the mindset of 'if it's not necessary (or doesn't have clear cut monetary value in the case of devs), it shouldn't be an addition' with regards to the functionality and features of this site, which is probably why this site is currently incredibly stagnant and not nearly as popular as it used to be. before, it very much felt like a lot of things weren't being done out of necessity or clear cut monetary gain, but were done because it would be cool or have a positive impact in some way. just a thought

 

also, i would make an educated guess that a good majority of the users on xat don't use the forum and don't look at the xat wiki as much as you think they do. I've been an involved active user for 10+ years and even i dont know who the staff are a lot of the time, so i think you're heavily overestimating the userbase's knowledge in this regard, especially with respect to the people who would be affected by the issues that a verification system would be attempting to mitigate (victims of scams, power abuse, and other malicious things that can come about via staff impersonation)

 

what i do agree with though is that sky pawn being given to both influencers and xat staff would conflate the two things and unnecessarily make things more confusing than it needs to be; famous/influential people and xat staff should have their own separate forms of verification. and i also agree that there's no reason to not extend cyan pawn to "influencers", especially given how cyan pawn in it's current state is essentially redundant because the requirements for it are too stringent (there's only like 1 person who even somewhat uses the site who currently has it)

Edited by Flake
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Members
53 minutes ago, Flake said:

 

you're completely neglecting the positives that a verification system would be providing for staff purely on the premise that it isn't necessary, when you can be using the exact same reasoning to argue that the cyan pawn isn't necessary for celebrities

 

sure, it isn't absolutely necessary addition, but that isn't an argument for it not being a good addition. i've noticed on this site a lot of people including the devs have the mindset of 'if it's not necessary (or doesn't have clear cut monetary value in the case of devs), it shouldn't be an addition' with regards to the functionality and features of this site, which is probably why this site is currently incredibly stagnant and not nearly as popular as it used to be. before, it very much felt like a lot of things weren't being done out of necessity or clear cut monetary gain, but were done because it would be cool or have a positive impact in some way. just a thought

 

also, i would make an educated guess that a good majority of the users on xat don't use the forum and don't look at the xat wiki as much as you think they do. I've been an involved active user for 10+ years and even i dont know who the staff are a lot of the time, so i think you're heavily overestimating the userbase's knowledge in this regard, especially with respect to the people who would be affected by the issues that a verification system would be attempting to mitigate (victims of scams, power abuse, and other malicious things that can come about via staff impersonation)

 

what i do agree with though is that sky pawn being given to both influencers and xat staff would conflate the two things and unnecessarily make things more confusing than it needs to be; famous/influential people and xat staff should have their own separate forms of verification. and i also agree that there's no reason to not extend cyan pawn to "influencers", especially given how cyan pawn in it's current state is essentially redundant because the requirements for it are too stringent (there's only like 1 person who even somewhat uses the site who currently has it)

I am not against the idea of a verification system for volunteers for example but the way we have gone from one extreme of little suggestion for vols being "on xat volunteer" being denied to a fancy new pawn being announced is crazy. The skyblue pawn I don't think should be a thing and the cyan pawn being rebranded as a verified symbol for celebrates and influencers otherwise as you said its a dead pawn just sitting around waiting for something that wont happen which is new celebrities coming to xat.

 

There has been many suggestions over the years with a special pawn being used for volunteers such as the yellow pawn, tick next to their name and the "on xat volunteer" but I hear excuses that these weren't required and admins didnt want special treatment for volunteers on live chats. I personally think the "on xat volunteer" feature would work great and the best way to verify a volunteer without the needs for a exclusive pawn. I believe this is also why the volunteer emeriti title was removed for past volunteers a few years back as it was deemed unnecessarily.

 

while I am happy to see a verified system introduced for volunteers for sensitive matters and to prevent scams etc I dont think its necessarily to include smiley makers, game makers etc on this as the wiki and forum provide enough verification for these users and most requests and topics are often discussed on the forum anyway so dont think its useful to make this a thing on live chat. 

 

in terms of cyan pawn/sky pawn for game makers etc this was given to users who made the recent game for a short period of time when the power was first released and i defended the status of the cyan pawn back then along with others not agreeing the cyan pawn should be used in that way. its time for the cyan pawn to have purpose again as its been a standing around with no real value due no one being worthy of the celebrity title. 

 

I know you have been with the site for 10+ years from back in the ec2 days. i am glad you have raised your concerns and respect your views. I just hope all the views that people have made are taking into consideration before this new pawn is released into the community. 

  • Award 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
On 6/5/2021 at 6:16 AM, iMartin said:

A lot of the opinions that I feel about this have already been discussed so I won't add further.

However there is one suggestion that I would like to include as an alternative to the creation of a new pawn entirely.

 

spacer.png

 

When a user hovers over the nickname of another user, this appears. This has been a thing as long as I can remember but there is no real use for it as admins very rarely login to their xat admin accounts, rather they have testing accounts like Tom2 and Tomflash to use instead.

 

This therefore makes them completely useless and I feel that the identification of these users would be much better suited if they were included here rather than having a pawn specifically made for them.

This will serve as a verification status without the need of them having a means to show off and exploit their status on the platform with a "special visual indicator".

This is a great idea! Instead of creating an Influencer Pawn it would be innovative to see this feature used more regularly, I.E instead of "NOT xat staff" Seeing a different label being used for example "Volunteer of xat" or "Official xat reseller".

It's 2021 anyone with an instagram, snapchat, or tiktok claims to be an "influencer" We already have cyan pawn for "celebrities" which were the equivalent of influencers in the 2000's. Maybe applications for Cyan pawn should be made available to influencers, Celebrities or people who would like to promote xat on external platforms & see the feature Martin shows be used to highlight different rolls on xat itself.

  • Award 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Members

Hello, I appreciate everything that is added by the administrator and for the community that represents xat.com, I agree that those who make an effort to be rewarded in the end should not be treated as selfishness, why do they have united rights, why don't they all because no one knows what it's like to help or support! There are many users who have helped and are helping because we are a family not a simple chat and please respect that! Thank you!(hug)(hug)

  • Wow 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Members
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, Echo said:

while I am happy to see a verified system introduced for volunteers for sensitive matters and to prevent scams etc I dont think its necessarily to include smiley makers, game makers etc on this as the wiki and forum provide enough verification for these users and most requests and topics are often discussed on the forum anyway so dont think its useful to make this a thing on live chat.

 

i mean, feels like what i just said went through one ear and out the other, but ok, agree to disagree

Edited by Flake
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.