Are you proposing that the test be standardised, or that there should be a different test for each applicant? But also bear in mind that we have to watch out that we don't discriminate too much against newly joined members, who might be good posters, but not have been around when the group was launched. I cannot for the life of me think what the test would consist of.
Anyway, enough negativity, awesome idea.
You could through in some math, or history...or science.
Are you proposing that the test be standardised, or that there should be a different test for each applicant? But also bear in mind that we have to watch out that we don't discriminate too much against newly joined members, who might be good posters, but not have been around when the group was launched. I cannot for the life of me think what the test would consist of.
Anyway, enough negativity, awesome idea.
Standardised test. I see no reason as to why we would differentiate the test for different members. I'd opt for a general Halo quiz, along with some questions about the site, when accepting members. That, and Zeth's list of requirements from the old topic.
No promotion for the guy who thought of closing the group?!
If we're just going for a reaction, then the only requirement for questions is that they be either impossible or hilarious. They can be made up on the spot like KoG said since they have no real bearing on whether the applicant is accepted or not.
If we want a serious quiz however, some standardized questions would be best along with a couple wild cards based on the applicant. Some sample questions for the more serious quiz would be "name the first poster in the original ammo topic" or "how many master chiefs are in drugs' personal comment"
A third option would to have an odd mix of the two quizzes; like a serious quiz with some obviously not-serious questions mixed in. We'd decide on whether the person could join by their reaction to the impossible/not serious questions like in the first type of quiz.
Another thing - I reckon all applications should be done via IM, not PMs. In PMs, the applicant could just go away, bribe someone or find the answers, reply back, and bob's your uncle, he/she's in. In IM, if they take too long to reply back, you know they're checking. And by that method, you can see whether or not they know the answer to the question.
If they check and then tell you, it doesn't stick with them. It stays for a day or two, then fades.
Also, about my comment earlier for making /--\ a priviledge, I say let's not accept any members now, build up some hype (Neo's recent topic may have helped) and then allow people to apply for a spot. Then it would feel like a priviledge to be in the club, and to get accepted, when there are hundreds of thousands of millions of billions of newbies wanting in.
What about a board they can submit to. ex the 3 highest ranking members. and then the President of the board
Again, they could find the answers, then take their time at posting them.
No info of the quiz should be revealed to the potential applicants, but rather when the applicant first wants to join. Via IM. Then and there they will receive the questions, and be forced to answer them quickly.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Give a man a gun, and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he can rob the world. Give a moose a cookie, and it will probably want a glass of milk. -Wisdom
Post
Reply
webworks, LLC
All Rights Reserved - 