Letsbeef Hall Of Fame

[Charan]

I honestly think what EtH’s hold up is is that he has TO effect.

He’s great in the eyes of some, but also a person who’s made many enemies over the years by his constant and unrelenting bullying, trolling, and overall demeanor of talking shit.

Clearly, there are less “talented” HOF’ers, but, how you treat people matters...and karma’s a bitch when it comes back to bite you in the ass like it is here. Since nobody else wants to say it, I will. Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, EtH (and probly Godbody) are the two most negative members in Letsbeef history, and the only difference between the two is God doesn’t bully and troll people on a nonstop basis like EtH does.

We might be fooling ourselves in saying his contributions aren’t HOF worthy, but if you think his way of treating people over the years is HOF worthy, then you’re fooling yourselves too.

[Charan]

I honestly think what EtH’s hold up is is that he has TO effect.

He’s great in the eyes of some, but also a person who’s made many enemies over the years by his constant and unrelenting bullying, trolling, and overall demeanor of talking shit.

Clearly, there are less “talented” HOF’ers, but, how you treat people matters...and karma’s a bitch when it comes back to bite you in the ass like it is here. Since nobody else wants to say it, I will. Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, EtH (and probly Godbody) are the two most negative members in Letsbeef history, and the only difference between the two is God doesn’t bully and troll people on a nonstop basis like EtH does.

We might be fooling ourselves in saying his contributions aren’t HOF worthy, but if you think his way of treating people over the years is HOF worthy, then you’re fooling yourselves too.

[NOBLE]

Originally Posted by Kiwi Peewee

There's recently been a lot of talk around the Hall of Fame on Letsbeef, and it seems to me that a lot of users feel it needs some sort of change or overhaul. To that end I am writing this thread with some ideas I have had. Since the only thing that makes the HOF worth anything is whether the users respect it, I want to get everybody's thoughts before changing anything, and to make sure that there is site-wide consensus and understanding. Please feel free to share whatever ideas or thoughts you have too.

I've tagged in the thread users who I think may be invested in the topic.

1. Updates

A lot of the HOF induction pages are out of date, for instance battlers have come back, won titles, and had major accomplishments since their induction (i.e. All-Boro). This could either be remedied by editing the existing content of their induction pages to include it, or by adding a new section at the end of every HOF page which gave an account of the battler's activity and accomplishments since being inducted.

2. "Impact" Hall of Fame

A few people, most recently @EtH and Dono, have been nominated to the Hall Of Fame despite there not really being a category that fits them. Would it be worth creating another branch of the hall of fame, that functioned essentially as a "miscellaneous HOF", for users whose legacy didn't fit into just specifically text battling, audio battling or track making? Other plausible candidates could include @NOBLE and @Godbody. I'm particularly interested to know people's thoughts on this, and whether anyone can come up with a more fitting name.

3. Nominations

There seems to be a great deal of confusion over the nomination process itself. There is actually a relatively straightforward, if not-at-all-transparent, mechanism outlined here, however it requires @RULE to be active to process every nomination which unfortunately can't be the case forever. I think it might be time to come up with a better process to handle nominations. Purely having it down to a poll is not workable because of the extent that cheating and trolling often affect those polls, and because HOF is not a popularity contest. However, I think it's very important that the users have ultimate power over the inductions because it is their respect which makes the HOF valid.

I've always felt that the HoF process could be more systematic. I've never liked the fact that it seemed to be led primarily by nomination threads. Nomination threads should be a part of it, but should not be the primary basis of it. The issue with nomination threads is that, not only is it a popularity contest, it is skewed in favor of what is freshest in people's minds, and a lot of people's memories don't go back as far as is sometimes necessary to ensure that the right people make it into the Hall of Fame at the right time. What we need is a way of weighing HoF nominations against other HoF nominations. We should keep it only for battle related accomplishments. There are plenty of other ways to acknowledge people who have made an impact over the years. There are the LetsBeef Promoter, Forum Top Poster, Great Thinker, and Donor awards. We can even create a new award if we don't think some people quite fit into these. But battling is the site's core activity, and the Hall of Fame should reflect that.
If I were to overhaul the HoF process, I would first start by reducing it to either one or two per year for each category (text, audio, tracks) instead of one each month as the current schedule indicates.
We only have two grand championships each year but a new Hall of Famer is inducted each month? That basically makes it easier to get into the Hall of Fame than to win a grand championship in certain regards. It shouldn't be like that. The whole point of the HoF is that it is something to be coveted, so inductions should be a lot more rare.
How long candidates have been members and how long they were active should be a factor. I've seen some people inducted where, even though they deserved it or would've deserved it eventually, were inducted way before others who had accomplished similar things but who aren't fresh in the site's memory.
There should be a points system similar to the "Greatest of Champions" thread where points are given for each factor (battle accomplishments, length of membership, site impact, or whatever other factor we decide to add). Nomination threads can also earn someone points, but it shouldn't weigh more than those other factors. Then when it's time to induct the one or two people for that category that year, everyone who was nominated in the category should have their points weighed against each other before we decide who to nominate that year.

[NOBLE]

Originally Posted by Kiwi Peewee

There's recently been a lot of talk around the Hall of Fame on Letsbeef, and it seems to me that a lot of users feel it needs some sort of change or overhaul. To that end I am writing this thread with some ideas I have had. Since the only thing that makes the HOF worth anything is whether the users respect it, I want to get everybody's thoughts before changing anything, and to make sure that there is site-wide consensus and understanding. Please feel free to share whatever ideas or thoughts you have too.

I've tagged in the thread users who I think may be invested in the topic.

1. Updates

A lot of the HOF induction pages are out of date, for instance battlers have come back, won titles, and had major accomplishments since their induction (i.e. All-Boro). This could either be remedied by editing the existing content of their induction pages to include it, or by adding a new section at the end of every HOF page which gave an account of the battler's activity and accomplishments since being inducted.

2. "Impact" Hall of Fame

A few people, most recently @EtH and Dono, have been nominated to the Hall Of Fame despite there not really being a category that fits them. Would it be worth creating another branch of the hall of fame, that functioned essentially as a "miscellaneous HOF", for users whose legacy didn't fit into just specifically text battling, audio battling or track making? Other plausible candidates could include @NOBLE and @Godbody. I'm particularly interested to know people's thoughts on this, and whether anyone can come up with a more fitting name.

3. Nominations

There seems to be a great deal of confusion over the nomination process itself. There is actually a relatively straightforward, if not-at-all-transparent, mechanism outlined here, however it requires @RULE to be active to process every nomination which unfortunately can't be the case forever. I think it might be time to come up with a better process to handle nominations. Purely having it down to a poll is not workable because of the extent that cheating and trolling often affect those polls, and because HOF is not a popularity contest. However, I think it's very important that the users have ultimate power over the inductions because it is their respect which makes the HOF valid.

I've always felt that the HoF process could be more systematic. I've never liked the fact that it seemed to be led primarily by nomination threads. Nomination threads should be a part of it, but should not be the primary basis of it. The issue with nomination threads is that, not only is it a popularity contest, it is skewed in favor of what is freshest in people's minds, and a lot of people's memories don't go back as far as is sometimes necessary to ensure that the right people make it into the Hall of Fame at the right time. What we need is a way of weighing HoF nominations against other HoF nominations. We should keep it only for battle related accomplishments. There are plenty of other ways to acknowledge people who have made an impact over the years. There are the LetsBeef Promoter, Forum Top Poster, Great Thinker, and Donor awards. We can even create a new award if we don't think some people quite fit into these. But battling is the site's core activity, and the Hall of Fame should reflect that.
If I were to overhaul the HoF process, I would first start by reducing it to either one or two per year for each category (text, audio, tracks) instead of one each month as the current schedule indicates.
We only have two grand championships each year but a new Hall of Famer is inducted each month? That basically makes it easier to get into the Hall of Fame than to win a grand championship in certain regards. It shouldn't be like that. The whole point of the HoF is that it is something to be coveted, so inductions should be a lot more rare.
How long candidates have been members and how long they were active should be a factor. I've seen some people inducted where, even though they deserved it or would've deserved it eventually, were inducted way before others who had accomplished similar things but who aren't fresh in the site's memory.
There should be a points system similar to the "Greatest of Champions" thread where points are given for each factor (battle accomplishments, length of membership, site impact, or whatever other factor we decide to add). Nomination threads can also earn someone points, but it shouldn't weigh more than those other factors. Then when it's time to induct the one or two people for that category that year, everyone who was nominated in the category should have their points weighed against each other before we decide who to nominate that year.

[Rowdy]

Originally Posted by NOBLE

I've always felt that the HoF process could be more systematic. I've never liked the fact that it seemed to be led primarily by nomination threads. Nomination threads should be a part of it, but should not be the primary basis of it. The issue with nomination threads is that, not only is it a popularity contest, it is skewed in favor of what is freshest in people's minds, and a lot of people's memories don't go back as far as is sometimes necessary to ensure that the right people make it into the Hall of Fame at the right time. What we need is a way of weighing HoF nominations against other HoF nominations. We should keep it only for battle related accomplishments. There are plenty of other ways to acknowledge people who have made an impact over the years. There are the LetsBeef Promoter, Forum Top Poster, Great Thinker, and Donor awards. We can even create a new award if we don't think some people quite fit into these. But battling is the site's core activity, and the Hall of Fame should reflect that.
If I were to overhaul the HoF process, I would first start by reducing it to either one or two per year for each category (text, audio, tracks) instead of one each month as the current schedule indicates.
We only have two grand championships each year but a new Hall of Famer is inducted each month? That basically makes it easier to get into the Hall of Fame than to win a grand championship in certain regards. It shouldn't be like that. The whole point of the HoF is that it is something to be coveted, so inductions should be a lot more rare.
How long candidates have been members and how long they were active should be a factor. I've seen some people inducted where, even though they deserved it or would've deserved it eventually, were inducted way before others who had accomplished similar things but who aren't fresh in the site's memory.
There should be a points system similar to the "Greatest of Champions" thread where points are given for each factor (battle accomplishments, length of membership, site impact, or whatever other factor we decide to add). Nomination threads can also earn someone points, but it shouldn't weigh more than those other factors. Then when it's time to induct the one or two people for that category that year, everyone who was nominated in the category should have their points weighed against each other before we decide who to nominate that year.

The 2020 HOF schedule is more "catching up on overdue HOF inductees" it legit ends in May.

A new HOFer isn't inducted each month lol.

[Rowdy]

Originally Posted by NOBLE

I've always felt that the HoF process could be more systematic. I've never liked the fact that it seemed to be led primarily by nomination threads. Nomination threads should be a part of it, but should not be the primary basis of it. The issue with nomination threads is that, not only is it a popularity contest, it is skewed in favor of what is freshest in people's minds, and a lot of people's memories don't go back as far as is sometimes necessary to ensure that the right people make it into the Hall of Fame at the right time. What we need is a way of weighing HoF nominations against other HoF nominations. We should keep it only for battle related accomplishments. There are plenty of other ways to acknowledge people who have made an impact over the years. There are the LetsBeef Promoter, Forum Top Poster, Great Thinker, and Donor awards. We can even create a new award if we don't think some people quite fit into these. But battling is the site's core activity, and the Hall of Fame should reflect that.
If I were to overhaul the HoF process, I would first start by reducing it to either one or two per year for each category (text, audio, tracks) instead of one each month as the current schedule indicates.
We only have two grand championships each year but a new Hall of Famer is inducted each month? That basically makes it easier to get into the Hall of Fame than to win a grand championship in certain regards. It shouldn't be like that. The whole point of the HoF is that it is something to be coveted, so inductions should be a lot more rare.
How long candidates have been members and how long they were active should be a factor. I've seen some people inducted where, even though they deserved it or would've deserved it eventually, were inducted way before others who had accomplished similar things but who aren't fresh in the site's memory.
There should be a points system similar to the "Greatest of Champions" thread where points are given for each factor (battle accomplishments, length of membership, site impact, or whatever other factor we decide to add). Nomination threads can also earn someone points, but it shouldn't weigh more than those other factors. Then when it's time to induct the one or two people for that category that year, everyone who was nominated in the category should have their points weighed against each other before we decide who to nominate that year.

The 2020 HOF schedule is more "catching up on overdue HOF inductees" it legit ends in May.

A new HOFer isn't inducted each month lol.

[Charan]

Originally Posted by NOBLE

I've always felt that the HoF process could be more systematic. I've never liked the fact that it seemed to be led primarily by nomination threads. Nomination threads should be a part of it, but should not be the primary basis of it. The issue with nomination threads is that, not only is it a popularity contest, it is skewed in favor of what is freshest in people's minds, and a lot of people's memories don't go back as far as is sometimes necessary to ensure that the right people make it into the Hall of Fame at the right time. What we need is a way of weighing HoF nominations against other HoF nominations. We should keep it only for battle related accomplishments. There are plenty of other ways to acknowledge people who have made an impact over the years. There are the LetsBeef Promoter, Forum Top Poster, Great Thinker, and Donor awards. We can even create a new award if we don't think some people quite fit into these. But battling is the site's core activity, and the Hall of Fame should reflect that.
If I were to overhaul the HoF process, I would first start by reducing it to either one or two per year for each category (text, audio, tracks) instead of one each month as the current schedule indicates.
We only have two grand championships each year but a new Hall of Famer is inducted each month? That basically makes it easier to get into the Hall of Fame than to win a grand championship in certain regards. It shouldn't be like that. The whole point of the HoF is that it is something to be coveted, so inductions should be a lot more rare.
How long candidates have been members and how long they were active should be a factor. I've seen some people inducted where, even though they deserved it or would've deserved it eventually, were inducted way before others who had accomplished similar things but who aren't fresh in the site's memory.
There should be a points system similar to the "Greatest of Champions" thread where points are given for each factor (battle accomplishments, length of membership, site impact, or whatever other factor we decide to add). Nomination threads can also earn someone points, but it shouldn't weigh more than those other factors. Then when it's time to induct the one or two people for that category that year, everyone who was nominated in the category should have their points weighed against each other before we decide who to nominate that year.

Perfectly stated.

[Charan]

Originally Posted by NOBLE

I've always felt that the HoF process could be more systematic. I've never liked the fact that it seemed to be led primarily by nomination threads. Nomination threads should be a part of it, but should not be the primary basis of it. The issue with nomination threads is that, not only is it a popularity contest, it is skewed in favor of what is freshest in people's minds, and a lot of people's memories don't go back as far as is sometimes necessary to ensure that the right people make it into the Hall of Fame at the right time. What we need is a way of weighing HoF nominations against other HoF nominations. We should keep it only for battle related accomplishments. There are plenty of other ways to acknowledge people who have made an impact over the years. There are the LetsBeef Promoter, Forum Top Poster, Great Thinker, and Donor awards. We can even create a new award if we don't think some people quite fit into these. But battling is the site's core activity, and the Hall of Fame should reflect that.
If I were to overhaul the HoF process, I would first start by reducing it to either one or two per year for each category (text, audio, tracks) instead of one each month as the current schedule indicates.
We only have two grand championships each year but a new Hall of Famer is inducted each month? That basically makes it easier to get into the Hall of Fame than to win a grand championship in certain regards. It shouldn't be like that. The whole point of the HoF is that it is something to be coveted, so inductions should be a lot more rare.
How long candidates have been members and how long they were active should be a factor. I've seen some people inducted where, even though they deserved it or would've deserved it eventually, were inducted way before others who had accomplished similar things but who aren't fresh in the site's memory.
There should be a points system similar to the "Greatest of Champions" thread where points are given for each factor (battle accomplishments, length of membership, site impact, or whatever other factor we decide to add). Nomination threads can also earn someone points, but it shouldn't weigh more than those other factors. Then when it's time to induct the one or two people for that category that year, everyone who was nominated in the category should have their points weighed against each other before we decide who to nominate that year.

Perfectly stated.

[NOBLE]

Originally Posted by Rowdy Punk

The 2020 HOF schedule is more "catching up on overdue HOF inductees" it legit ends in May.

A new HOFer isn't inducted each month lol.

I see. I had assumed "TBC" for June, August , October, and December indicates they intend to induct people in those months but hadn't decided who yet.

[NOBLE]

Originally Posted by Rowdy Punk

The 2020 HOF schedule is more "catching up on overdue HOF inductees" it legit ends in May.

A new HOFer isn't inducted each month lol.

I see. I had assumed "TBC" for June, August , October, and December indicates they intend to induct people in those months but hadn't decided who yet.

noble said it best. nominations threads are a popularity contest. eth has friends now. let's look at what's he done since he been around in the past few years.

1. beat a washed up rai who wrote a pretty bad verse, and eths verse wasn't crazy either
2. tagged with lock and lost to a rule and rant verse that wasn't that strong.
3. make 100 threads trying to fuck with staff members and the owner of the site
4. start illmania 5 just to bail on it
5. deleted his account two or three times
6. posted personal information of other users 3 times.

i mean there's more but, this kind of spells it out for me. in general the spam of hof nominations is cool in some ways like, hey we appreciate you, and some deserved it like manny (if we lookin past the skizz drama) but it's also degrading the worth of the hof.

"dont take it serious, who cares, it's just a site"

ok so give me a gc title please. no biggie. i been trying hard as fuck for two years to elevate and y'all seen it so might as well just throw me a bone right? what? you won't? oh geez. stop taking it so serious nerds.

noble said it best. nominations threads are a popularity contest. eth has friends now. let's look at what's he done since he been around in the past few years.

1. beat a washed up rai who wrote a pretty bad verse, and eths verse wasn't crazy either
2. tagged with lock and lost to a rule and rant verse that wasn't that strong.
3. make 100 threads trying to fuck with staff members and the owner of the site
4. start illmania 5 just to bail on it
5. deleted his account two or three times
6. posted personal information of other users 3 times.

i mean there's more but, this kind of spells it out for me. in general the spam of hof nominations is cool in some ways like, hey we appreciate you, and some deserved it like manny (if we lookin past the skizz drama) but it's also degrading the worth of the hof.

"dont take it serious, who cares, it's just a site"

ok so give me a gc title please. no biggie. i been trying hard as fuck for two years to elevate and y'all seen it so might as well just throw me a bone right? what? you won't? oh geez. stop taking it so serious nerds.

[Esso]

How you treat people should have nothing to do with getting into the Hall of Fame. It’s not the Hall of Respectable Gentlemen.

[Esso]

How you treat people should have nothing to do with getting into the Hall of Fame. It’s not the Hall of Respectable Gentlemen.

[Charan]

Originally Posted by Esso

How you treat people should have nothing to do with getting into the Hall of Fame. It’s not the Hall of Respectable Gentlemen.

No. A Hall of Fame inductee is viewed based on his or her TOTAL body of work in all aspects. You know that.

With that being said, and while Guts made some very valid points I didn't wanna outline EtH's resume because this isn't a "Shame EtH thread." It's a healthy dialogue thread about the state of the HOF induction process.

It's just that EtH is the most recent and obviously controversial name to be brought up for consideration.

[Charan]

Originally Posted by Esso

How you treat people should have nothing to do with getting into the Hall of Fame. It’s not the Hall of Respectable Gentlemen.

No. A Hall of Fame inductee is viewed based on his or her TOTAL body of work in all aspects. You know that.

With that being said, and while Guts made some very valid points I didn't wanna outline EtH's resume because this isn't a "Shame EtH thread." It's a healthy dialogue thread about the state of the HOF induction process.

It's just that EtH is the most recent and obviously controversial name to be brought up for consideration.

[Rowdy]

Guts didn't make a single valid point. He posted eths bully resume.

He completely left out anything dude has done to impact that site that's how you know this is personal.

Guts you're talking about what he's done for the past year but forgetting that you aint BEEN here for the past years. I think you started using in like 2018?

[Rowdy]

Guts didn't make a single valid point. He posted eths bully resume.

He completely left out anything dude has done to impact that site that's how you know this is personal.

Guts you're talking about what he's done for the past year but forgetting that you aint BEEN here for the past years. I think you started using in like 2018?

[Shodan]

I agree with everything @NOBLE said.

[Shodan]

I agree with everything @NOBLE said.