Forum:Regarding lieutenants

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Regarding lieutenants
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 11 January 2013 by Liquidhelium.

This is a clan chat-related thread. For those of you who are unaware, in the clan chat, users can request the lieutenant rank on RS:RFR. The main difference in rights is that users ranked lieutenant or higher are allowed to kick guests (admin or higher is required to kick clanmates). The silver version of the lieutenant, captain, is reserved for events team menbers, and the gold version is for grandfathered forumadmins.

The main problem with the lieutenant rank is that it is largely obsolete now. Our guests are mostly well-behaved, and even when kicking guests is required, it has been done by an admin for the last year or so. Most of our current lieutenants have never even been in a situation where they would need to kick someone, let alone actually do so. This is mostly caused by the fact that we have a lot more admins now than we did before. When original intended purpose for the lieutenant rank is gone, the rank becomes used for other purposes. Recently, it has been used more or less as a trophy, if you look at some RfRs of late.

Therefore, requests for the lieutenant rank should be closed until further notice. Something, then, must be done about the current lieutenants. I do not believe it's a good idea to have a mass of users with an unobtainable star. (The general's gold star is currently defunct, but due to the dearth of forumadmins and their inactivity, is not nearly as big an issue.) The easiest way to deal with this would be to grandfather in the current lieutenants as sergeants, so that there is some distinguishing factor, but it doesn't leave a mass of bronze stars in the clan chat.

Requests for lieutenant can be reopened in the future if the community decides that the situation warrants it. Also, users can still request the clan admin rank.

Too long; didn't read: Close RfLs and grandfather in current lieutenants as sergeants.

Cheers, --LiquidTalk 01:46, January 3, 2013 (UTC)


Support - I assume sergeant ranks will retain their current kicking abilities for guests. If so, I completely support the TL;DR statement. RSN: Warthog Rhys Talk Completionist's cape... Coming soon. 02:02, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

Suport - Honestly I don't know what a Corporal rank does except for show. I suppose the three-banana sergeant rank would also be for show, but will keep their original properties of the lieutenant rank. Also I have never seen a person with the three-banana rank. -- Recent uploads SpineTalkGuest book 02:43, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

That's because we have no sergeants. The only point of changing it to three bananas is to just have some kind of differentiating factor in the event RfLs are opened in the future. --LiquidTalk 02:45, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
Corporals can invite people to the clan. No one is currently a three banana rank because the clan doesn't use it. I believe it was originally used in the Friends Chat, but everyone who was three bananas in the FC was given lieutenant rank in the Clan. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 02:45, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
It was used for several months in the Clan Chat as well. Ronan Talk 18:17, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

Support closing RfLs, oppose messing with current ranks - Cause everybody wants a shiny star. Because it's no big deal for them to have such a rank. I do not deny that admins have always done the kicking or that it is only on rare occasion that we have an uncivil guest. However, it does not hurt to be prepared. There is absolutely nothing wrong with giving a star to people who have community consensus. We can simply close the requests for a time (even for a long time). If we need more one day, we can re-open them. Nice and simple. The basic point-it's not broken, no need to fix it. HaloTalk 02:51, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

So... you basically support the proposal, then? The main proposal is to close RfLs. What to do with the current lieutenants is a side issue. --LiquidTalk 02:58, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
Would the closing of RfL's be temporary then? As Halo said, should we need them some day (though, frankly, I don't know why), could they be re-opened, even if temporarily (for whatever reason)? User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 12:22, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
Nothing is permanent. At most, it can be closed "indefinitely" because anyone can make a thread to discuss reopening them. 222 talk 12:23, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
What Aaron said. Even if RfLs are closed, if someone really wants to, he can still make a thread about giving him the lieutenant rank (albeit it'd be extremely unlikely to pass). The main point to this proposal is to close RfLs without a set time frame for reopening them (so we're not going to reopen them in April for example). That's why it's indefinite. But if we decide at a future time that we need lieutenants we can open them up again then.
Yeah, all right, just wanted to make that sure. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 06:22, January 4, 2013 (UTC)

Support - Requests can always be reopened in the future should the rank become more useful, at which point more may be needed.  Until then, there's no real point in requesting a rank that's mostly cosmetic. -- Ms Zuzu Jpaddon (talk) 03:18, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

Support - Also, change the name to 'rightenant'. Get it? RIGHTenant? Left... right... no..? *slowly leaves stage, being fired at with tomatoes and other trouts* User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 05:41, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

... sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 05:42, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
^ -- Recent uploads SpineTalkGuest book 05:48, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
please leave forever --Iiii I I I 07:10, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
Question - Is there something I'm missing here? Where did left and right come in? Michagogo (talk) 12:11, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
palm to the face. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 12:16, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
What? I get that it's supposed to be a pun, but I don't understand it. Where does "left" come in? Michagogo (talk) 12:18, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
Lieutenant. Now... *throws self off bridge* User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 12:19, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
There's no "left" in Lieutenant..... Michagogo (talk) 12:29, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
I say, sah. What the ballyhoo kind of world is this, where blighters don't know the right and proper way to say Lieutenant as any proper English gentleman should. Jolly bad show, I must say. Good day to you, sah. Small recharge gem.png AnselaJonla Slayer-icon.png 12:24, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
Uhhh. What do you mean? Still not sure what you're talking about... Michagogo (talk) 12:29, January 3, 2013 (UTC) HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 12:31, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
Ah. Well, you learn something new every day. Michagogo (talk) 12:32, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
It's a joke on the differences between British English (left-tennant) and American English (loo-tennant) for those who don't want to use Wikipedia What I've done Ciphrius Kane Talk 12:34, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
I pronounce it le-tenant Smile, but I'm Australian and apparently we're retarded. 222 talk 12:36, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
I see. Ronan Talk 12:58, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
Gah, the day has arrived that jokes must be explained. And here I was thinking it would be better than "Per all". Well, there's only one thing left to do. *turns to Australia* Wabbit season! User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 06:22, January 4, 2013 (UTC)
Duck season fire! HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 10:47, January 4, 2013 (UTC)

Are you not the one who spontaneously decided to turn all of our sergeants into lieutenants in the first place? Ronan Talk 12:58, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

*hides* How does one still remember that? Regardless, this proposal is mostly about closing RfLs. If you want to do something different with the current lieutenants I don't care. --LiquidTalk 14:29, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
I do not forgive, I do not forget. Setting your derpiness aside, however, I agree that they should be (re-)converted into sergeants. Ronan Talk 18:00, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

Support - Regardless of how this all came to be, the proposal is sensible. Ronan Talk 13:51, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

Support - Lieutenants have become a popularity badge, rather than a useful tool. They do very little to help the clan, due to the abundance of admins. I do think they should be differentiated from regular uses/corporals via the sergeant rank, and requests for further sergeants should be closed.--Cheers, Off-hand ascension crossbow.pngYodaAscension crossbow.png 21:33, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

Support - This is basically undoing what Liquid originally did, as he didn't like the way 3 banana's stacked upon each other (>_>), but besides that, why not? I got the job to help out, so it doesn't really matter if it's a star or a fruit. -- Golden warpriest of Zamorak helm.png Wingcap Firemaking master cape.png 21:41, January 4, 2013 (UTC)

That's not true. :( The point is to close RfLs. What to do with the lieutenants is a side issue. --LiquidTalk 22:51, January 4, 2013 (UTC)
My point is that lieutenants had no use before, and will have no use again. What is happening, as I see it, is that the sergeant rank will become the lieutenant rank in all but name, and the lieutenant rank will shift back to being unused. Is the point to stop people becoming sergeants if this passes? Because then you just have another unobtainable rank that around 20 people have. What I'm having trouble understanding is whether the issue is with the star, or the rank (as in the particular set if powers lieutenants have right now). -- Golden warpriest of Zamorak helm.png Wingcap Firemaking master cape.png 15:10, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
I don't think the issue is with the star. I've seen instances of people wanting that third banana as some sort of trophy too. If this passes, sergeants will effectively be an obtainable rank. Personally I think it would have been easier to just have everyone as a corporal (but in the course of preliminary discussions for this proposal some people preferred a different rank for grandfathered lieutenants). --LiquidTalk 15:24, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
Well, If all you are doing is undoing the thing that you did (seeing as people will still be able to become sergeants), then why in Zamorak's name does this need formal discussion?-- Golden warpriest of Zamorak helm.png Wingcap Firemaking master cape.png 17:59, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
Cause we're doing it in Guthix's name, not Zamorak's What I've done Ciphrius Kane Talk 18:02, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
Guthix is such a drag... -- Golden warpriest of Zamorak helm.png Wingcap Firemaking master cape.png 00:07, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
Because people can't request sergeants. If it was just a rank shift I'd have done it already. --LiquidTalk 03:15, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Question - As the current system for requesting cc admin is either through RfA or using RFR, would closing RfLs not effectively shut off RfCCA? I have yet to see anyone apply for cc admin through RfR without being lieutenant already. Even the somewhat unusual RfR for Exor currently underway observed this 'rule'. Or would the proposal allow cc members to essentially skip this apparently unnecessary rank? cqm 09:44, 5 Jan 2013 (UTC) (UTC)

This would not effectively shut off RfCCAs. Not counting the people who skip the lieutenant rank via RfA, Relaera (in archive 5) requested clan adminship as a corporal. I probably should have nominated Exor for admin directly but there are some who don't like to skip ranks. There is nothing stopping clan chat members from going directly to admin except perhaps the perception of the people. --LiquidTalk 14:25, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
Support, per Liquid's response. cqm 17:40, 5 Jan 2013 (UTC) (UTC)

Support - Bring on the bananas. I agree with Yoda. Too many people have applied for lieutenant solely for bragging rights and not for helping out the clan chat. Close off the requests for now and give them those additional chevrons. User:Exor Solieve 22:25, January 5, 2013 (UTC)

Support - Per Exor :o S T Y G 04:01, January 9, 2013 (UTC)

Dealing with the current ranks

As it seems apparent that the closure of RfLs is going to pass through consensus, we need to make a decision on what will happen to our current lieutenants. Looking at the thread, irc and ingame, there seems to be a few main suggestions thrown about.

1. Move the lieutenants to sergeant ranks, and allow them to keep their tools through the grandfather clause - This would likely be the most non-controversial decision that can be made. The rank change allows the rank to be less distinguishable, hindering the trophy aspect of the rank.

2. Move the lieutenants to corporals, remove their tools - I can imagine that this will cause absolute mayhem. Taking away about 20 or so ranks that was gained through consensus isn't going to go down too well with the people thrown at a detriment. This however, isn't a bad thing, as the tools are not a necessity within the clan chat, as we have enough active admins as things stand to remove trouble causers.

3. Move the lieutenants to corporals, give this rank the ability to kick guests - This is a bad idea, in my personal opinion, however I saw it mentioned somewhere, so I figured I would throw this in. This will allow the corporal rank to kick trouble causing guests, and this will allow the rank to be given out on a trust basis (Just like it is now, however this will be much more scarce). Move current corporal ranks to privates, and then allow the clan chat owners (Gareth and Liquid) to pick and choose people for this rank.

4. Move the lieutenants to sergeant ranks, treat this rank as we do for corporals - I can also imagine this will become a bad idea, along with option three, but it's a plausible idea. This will allow the sergeant rank to be given out by the clan chat owners through discretion, just like the corporal ranks which have the ability to invite people, this rank will be allowed to kick guests. This could turn out to be a popularity contest if the choice is given to the clan administration, hence why I would restrict this discretion to Gareth and Liquid.

Support 1 - Oppose 2 - Strong oppose 3 - Neutral 4 - Personally, as I stated earlier, option one is the easiest option, which should avoid controversy, whilst allowing the usefulness of the current lieutenants to be retained. I've opposed option two on the grounds that it will cause a heavy amount of dispute among the ranks that we have previously declared trustworthy for the tools. Option three is a silly idea, and I can imagine this will hinder the clan chat if anything, removing the usefulness of corporals being able to invite new members. Option four is a more sensible alternative of option three, and would be a good replacement for RfLs. Perhaps it could be a good stepping stone in the RfCCAs to have the sergeant rank at the time before submitting an application. RSN: Warthog Rhys Talk Completionist's cape... Coming soon. 07:33, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - Why are we suggesting to move lieutenants to another rank, but let them keep the ability to kick guests? Isn't that going to be exactly the same as before (well, besides the rank ofc) and do nothing? Seriously, the only thing I would support is number 2. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 08:57, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

If we want to deter people from thinking the rank as a trophy and applying for it as if it is one (especially since [some] other clans do run with higher ranks considered better than others, and people may be leaving them for us), bumping down without changing tools helps that - as well as the bump down changing from a star to three chevrons so the difference is less noticeable. Whether or not that is truly valid is different, but I'm not sure there's a solid way of really telling that. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 00:56, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

Support 1 - Neutral 4 - Oppose 2&3 - I don't see why we need to remove the tools from these ranks. I mean, they certainly aren't doing any harm, they all did pass consensus. We have enough unused ranks as is, making space for more is just pointless. -- Golden warpriest of Zamorak helm.png Wingcap Firemaking master cape.png 12:14, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - There is an option 5, which is to leave the lieutenants as lieutenants. --LiquidTalk 12:57, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

That's what I would do.  Those who've already attained the rank should be able to maintain it, and all the responsibilities that go along with it.  We may not need any more lieutenants at the moment, or for the forseeable future, but I don't see a problem with keeping the ones we already have.  They've earned it. -- Ms ZuZu Jpaddon (talk) 13:49, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Support 1 - Oppose 2/3 - Slight Oppose 4 - Only thing that seems logical to me seeing a lot less people would most likely want to RfR due to the loss of bragging rights. Neutral Changed to Support for the hidden 5th option of leaving the star. or just close Lieutenant off and have RfR for Sergeants instead </joke> WgvxeSr.png - frouZAC.png 16:51, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Leave the ranks alone - Removing their tools is just flat out stupid. They've passed consensus, why cause an unnecessary argument, why cause additional things to deal with? So then, I ask, what is the point of modifying their rank at all if the tools aren't going to change? Unless someone is abusing their rank as a position of power, then I see no reason to bother changing them at all. HaloTalk 17:11, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Support 1 - svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 17:40, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Support 1, Oppose Rest - As fun as it would be to have all-powerful admins, there's really no reason to remove what little power the current ranks have.--Cheers, Off-hand ascension crossbow.pngYodaAscension crossbow.png 18:53, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Comment on 3 and 4 - There is no way to actually restrict what admins can edit - they will always be able to change the ranks of those below them. This is forced by the system, nothing we can do. So the idea of letting myself and Liquid (or any other subset of all the clan admins) be the only ones to choose the ranks may be nice on paper, but in practice any admin could change the rank anyway, be that in a rule-subverting way, or - a far more likely case - the admin is on infrequently and didn't know of the discussion and so follows the old rules. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 00:56, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

Another comment - By the way, these are done with the understanding that if the community decides in a future thread to reopen RfLs, then the grandfathered sergeants will be ranked back up to lieutenant. --LiquidTalk 02:48, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

(Re-)Convert current lieutenants into sergeants, close RfRs indefinitely - I think we're starting to lose track of why we're supporting things amongst all of these comments. What is clear from the above is that RfRs should be closed, and I'm all for that. However, some of the above options make no sense to me as a logically thought out solution to the apparent problem of "trophy ranks". The users in the Clan Chat who currently have the lieutenant rank have it because people wanted them to, not because they somehow cheated the system. No reason to treat them like rightsgrabbers because of the poor actions of certain past (unsuccessful) candidates. The wiki's in-game chat media have always managed perfectly fine with the three chevrons of the sergeant rank, whether people remember it or not. Just get rid of the lieutenant rank (as I wanted to do at the time it was introduced) and you'll also remove any "trophy" aspect that came with it. Ronan Talk 16:11, January 9, 2013 (UTC)

There were a lot of people who wanted the sergeant rank as a trophy too. I personally would prefer to just make them corporals and call it a day. By the way, Flaysian's point about being nice to current lieutenants is an excellent one, as all of them are excellent users. --LiquidTalk 23:03, January 9, 2013 (UTC)

Support 1, oppose rest - Per Scimitar77/Yoda.-- Recent uploads SpineTalkGuest book 23:07, January 9, 2013 (UTC)

Closed - Requests for the lieutenant rank will be closed indefinitely, until reopened by further discussion. The community seems to prefer that the current lieutenants be converted to sergeants that retain the kicking ability. Should RfLs be reopened in the future, these sergeants will be converted back to lieutenants. Requests for lieutenant that are currently in progress will continue. --LiquidTalk 00:49, January 11, 2013 (UTC)