Suggestion:20090202 Show How Long People Have Been In Their Group

	Closed
	This suggestion has finished voting and has been moved to Peer Rejected.

20090202 Show How Long People Have Been In Their Group

A Big F'ing Dog 16:23, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion type
Improvement

Suggestion scope
Profile display

Suggestion description
I suggest that profiles show not only a person's group, but when they last switched their profile to that group. Wouldn't it be pretty neat to see that someone has been a member for two solid years?

The way to display it would be to have a second box far to the right your group name in the unused space, like so:

Group: Ninjapirates of Malton                       Member since 7/15/08

Switching groups would reset the start date, so if you want to temporarily switch your group you'd have to be ok with losing your original displayed date.

Since there's probably no record of when people joined groups for everyone currently in a group would it say "Member since before" rather than "Member since" and it would display the date this suggestion is implemented.

P.S. As a side note, this would also allow info to be added to the stats page showing the average length of membership of a group.

Voting Section

Voting Rules

Votes must be numbered, justified, signed, and timestamped. # justification ~~~~ Votes that do not conform to the above may be struck by any user.

The only valid votes are Keep, Kill, Spam or Dupe. If you wish to abstain from voting, do not vote.

Keep Votes

1. Keep This change shouldn't harm anyone, including PKers as was suggested in development. There's little tactical advantage to faking group affiliation - most survivors will aid any other survivor regardless of group. And to go uncover they could still just remove all group affiliation. As for the logic of seeing when they joined a group - profile data like this is more of a game stats thing than a roleplaying thing anyway, but even so it's no more farfetched than knowing someone's date of joining the game, times killed, skills, or for that matter what group they're in to begin with. --A Big F'ing Dog 16:25, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
2. Keep - Wouldn't hurt. --Blake Firedancer ^{T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T.} 21:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
3. Keep - I like it anyways.--'BP^Tmz 21:57, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Kill Votes

1. Kill Could theoreticaly mess with tactics used by some groups. Not particuarly needed. Not sure I want to see more bragging. I just don't like the flavour of it. I don't want even more spammish stuff when I check out someone's profile--Seventythree^Talk 19:09, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
2. Kill - Pointless --dgw 22:16, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
3. Kill - As 73 and Mid. Linkthewindow  Talk  00:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
4. Kill - Really is just for stupid bragging rights, so it's unneeded. It would also be very inaccurate at times.--SirArgo ^Talk 00:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
5. Kill - I've heard worse ideas, but there are so many griefers out there falsely claiming membership in various groups...I'd hate for a membership date function to wind up giving them the appearance of legitimacy. "It must be OK to revive MrRape843, he's been a Dribbling Beaver since 2007!"--Jiangyingzi 01:59, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
   • Re But how is that any different than current? You don't need to fake membership to get revived. Just list no group and put "Please revive" in your profile. Most people don't only help their group members, and any group that only helps members is so tightly organized they'd know an impostor. --A Big F'ing Dog 04:02, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
6. This is just going to turn into Nexus War, with groups fighting each other instead of dealing with zombies.--Pesatyel 02:53, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
   • Re What would it give groups to battle each other over? Even if a group wants to compete for longest membership, what could it do other than passively keep the same group listed? This doesn't give any incentive for survivors to attack another. It isn't as if you can shoot the group affiliation out of people. --A Big F'ing Dog 04:04, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
     • Anytime anything new is added to the game, everyone spends a month (give or take) playing around with it. What other use could it be when the game is about players killing each other. Players would spend a lot of time trying to deal with other groups (because this suggestion EMPHASIZES THE GROUPS) instead of dealing with zombies. And because of zombie anonymity, the empahasis is placed more on survivors. And if me and my buddies keep killing you BECAUSE of your affiliation, you might decide to change it. There are already "turf wars" for various groups, the game does NOT need that kind of emphasis.-Pesatyel 09:12, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
7. Kill - Screws with certain tactics, and it doesn't seem so useful or fun. --ZsL 03:43, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

   Kill - Would encourage griefers to keep harassing the same group forever. --Explodey_{Timestampless vote struck Linkthewindow  Talk  22:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)}

   • Re That's already the case. PKers already have groups they target. Knowing the duration of membership of individuals shouldn't make them a more appealing target. How would this hurt the victim? --A Big F'ing Dog 15:24, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

8. Kill - Makes undercover work next to impossible, I'm afraid, and every major group has some unsavory characters that have "been in the group" for years at a time. --Private Mark 04:04, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

   Kill - No. This will result in yet another reason for senseless bragging and really serves no purpose.--Lois ^{talk 10MFH} 21:59, 17 February 2009 (UTC) Late vote struck. --Midianian^{¦T¦DS¦SP¦} 08:32, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam - Makes no sense flavour-wise and hurts legitimate tactics. Keep your e-penis in your pants, thank you very much. --Midianian^|T|DS|C:RCS| 18:11, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
   • Re What tactics could it hurt? Also, this isn't to brag. "I win at Internet! I have played UD the longest" doesn't really bring much glory. This is more about establishing data on group continuity. --A Big F'ing Dog 18:30, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
     • Legitimate tactics ;). Groups have e-penes as well and there's just as little need to compare their length as individual players'. I just find this a rather pointless statistic, non-sensical from the flavour perspective and it hurts tactics that are in use (even if it isn't a big effect). There's simply no redeeming value here for me. --Midianian^|T|DS|C:RCS| 22:28, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
2. Spam - As Midianian. This will only ever become a viable option when group membership can be restricted or controlled as it is in Travian or Nexus War. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 02:31, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
3. Spam - Yep. I like impersonating groups on my PKer.-- Adward  18:09, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
4. Spam - As I said in Talk:Suggestions, this is just a stealth PKer nerf -- because those are the only players whom this would affect. IMNSHO, impersonating group membership is a downright fucking sleazy tactic -- but it's not against any rules. Additionally, there's no reason or point to this: it's not important, useful or even interesting information. All this warrants a Spam vote. --WanYao 22:41, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
5. LOLWUT - Nerfs PKers, and seems absolutely useless. -- T^HEL^ORDG^UNS^LINGER 03:40, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
6. Spam - Get this shit out of here. Unneeded PKer nerf --Ocular ^Druuuuu 04:17, 12 February 2009 (UTC)