Re^3: A request from level 21

Well, being an agnostic (not an atheist), I see the whole stuff pretty relaxed. Maybe the only sad thing is that I can't ever become god - I would enjoy seeing people pray to me ;-)

Joking aside, I had expected arguments against our religious levels coming rather from fundamental christs than from those fellow monks who are not so extremely inclined to Christianity (which comprises everyone from three-quarter--hearted Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, up to Agnostics and Atheists). I think the labels are entertaining, and it is just one of the things which makes the site so entertaining to use. So I vote for leaving things as they are...

--
Ronald Fischer <ynnor@mm.st>

Comment on Re^3: A request from level 21

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: A request from level 21 by Argel (Prior) on Jul 11, 2008 at 09:26 UTC
I think the labels are entertaining It was fine when it was just on one's homenode and e.g. Saints in our Book. But I do not want people influenced too much from seeing "Argel (Priest)" over and over again (). There really needs to be a way to opt-out completely -- i.e. where no one would see the title (besides the usual places before this change). I also find them distracting and dehumanizing. Without the titles there is just the user's nickname to go by which helps personalize it. But now I have already found myself focusing on just the title -- e.g. "oh, just an Acolyte, I'll skip reading that thread". The XP system is meant to encourage participation -- not forming cliques, elitist attitudes, etc. You might want to meditate on what some of the long-term ramifications of this change will likely be. () Yeah, I know -- I should stop posting! ;-)	[reply]
Re^5: A request from level 21 by rovf (Priest) on Jul 11, 2008 at 10:11 UTC
I also find them distracting and dehumanizing. ... But now I have already found myself focusing on just the title -- e.g. "oh, just an Acolyte, I'll skip reading that thread" Ah, I see. In this case, I agree with you! -- Ronald Fischer <ynnor@mm.st>	[reply]