UPSB v3
Board Comments / About teams
-
Date: Fri, Feb 13 2009 02:45:12
this came up a lot lately..thanks to gazillion teams that were made in the last couple of months
i personally think there are way too many useless/inactive teams nowadays
not that they arent any good or anything but i think they should be a separate category
maybe like mini teams
because when i think of teams... its usually teams like genesis, ASF, HoT, and encore and serious teams like that -
Date: Fri, Feb 13 2009 02:46:34
lol yeah, it kind of bothers me that alot of people said shit when HoT came out, about how there were too many stupid teams
when we'd been planning the thing for a year
yeah idk, sometimes people just make stupid teams....
but stupid teams aside, i think the inactive teams should be seperated
or how about two team categories for competitive and non competitive? -
Date: Fri, Feb 13 2009 03:27:24
Agreed.
I think the reason why there are quite a few number of teams is because when people, relatively new to this board, saw teams such as well--known Genesis, they decided to try to copy them. Doing so, many teams were formed exactly like Genesis, Encore,and ASF, with a limited number of people and closing the option to let others join just because they want to look "epic" when they're just being plain noobs. -
Date: Fri, Feb 13 2009 04:00:07
the team feature is very basic
there is no distinction possible.
we can try to clean really old inactive teams though. -
Date: Sat, Feb 14 2009 03:21:26
How about groups and teams?
There's a huge differentiation between Chinese Pen Spinners and HoT.
A lot of people make teams just so they can be the captain of a team, which I think is stupid. I mean, your team should have a purpose, not a copycat of another team. If you're just making one because you aren't invited into another team, that's dumb. Like Encore and Genesis and ASF are really awesome teams, no doubt, but then their are teams like Catharsis which really seem aimless.
Yes I'm on one of the teams that are very controversial...
Edit: Or maybe a merge teams option? Btw, how did RMX merge with Genesis? -
Date: Sat, Feb 14 2009 04:40:11
its difficult to judge active teams by their importance, seems arrogant and pretentious to judge someone else's business
-
Date: Sat, Feb 14 2009 23:16:46
I like the 'groups' and 'teams' idea.
There are teams like Fingerless Magazine, Australian News, PSO:BB Team, The Flying Circus, StepMania, XKCD, Team bwahaha that aren't even PSing related for the most part, and could be characterized under 'group' rather than 'team'. -
Date: Sun, Feb 15 2009 02:28:19
we cant seperate the two
the teams feature is not only for real teams, but for anything that requires some private organization.
we cannot seperate the two the functionality is limited -
Date: Sun, Feb 15 2009 16:05:37
so what's wrong with having so many teams anyway? Can't you just ignore the ones that don't matter to you? It's not like their thread section shows up on UPSB whenever you go on. This kinda reminds me of the discussion to get rid of the off-topic section, and I hope it ends the same way.
-
Date: Sun, Feb 15 2009 20:35:24
Or you could just have a topic that lists the active and real penspinning TEAMS, with links to the team member list for each.
-
Date: Sun, Feb 15 2009 20:44:50QUOTE (Sfsr @ Feb 15 2009, 03:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Or you could just have a topic that lists the active and real penspinning TEAMS, with links to the team member list for each.
theres a team info thread -
Date: Mon, Feb 16 2009 02:32:55
ugh -
Date: Mon, Feb 16 2009 05:16:34
Ok, thats just spamming teams.
-
Date: Mon, Feb 16 2009 06:07:10
i dont even get how those requests got approved
-
Date: Tue, Feb 17 2009 23:33:18
Note: I'm using "group" and "team" interchangeably in the following.
For once I actually agree with Z-bo in that it's presumptuous to decide the importance of groups because each team is supposedly important to the founder(s) and everyone who joins it. At the same time, perhaps the group should have a sensible purpose before approval is granted, otherwise it looks like it's created frivolously. There are several teams I consider dubious since they have no information, either in the team description or the team info page. I think redundancies can be removed as well. There is a lot of overlap between teams like "Nemesis" and "PPP Team". And a better distinction can be made between competitive and non-competitive teams, maybe using "©" in competitive team names or something. My $0.02. -
Date: Sun, May 9 2010 08:13:14
well, I want create a new team, but I have a problem and question.
there is requirement to reach 100 posting before I can create a new team, mine is 65 so I couldn't..
So, is there another way to create a new team?
and how many minimum number of members on a team? -
Date: Sun, May 9 2010 16:05:26QUOTE (GLAND @ May 9 2010, 04:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>well, I want create a new team, but I have a problem and question.
there is requirement to reach 100 posting before I can create a new team, mine is 65 so I couldn't..
So, is there another way to create a new team?
and how many minimum number of members on a team?
there is no other way other than asking someone with 100+
minimum number of members is 2 -
Date: Tue, May 11 2010 02:18:46QUOTE (SJ @ Feb 15 2009, 07:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Spoiler:
ugh
when was this screenshot taken? 0_0 -
Date: Tue, May 11 2010 17:39:01QUOTE (blahblahting @ May 10 2010, 07:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>when was this screenshot taken? 0_0
prolly 2/15/09... -
Date: Wed, May 12 2010 01:26:36QUOTE (G.lanz @ Feb 15 2009, 06:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>so what's wrong with having so many teams anyway? Can't you just ignore the ones that don't matter to you? It's not like their thread section shows up on UPSB whenever you go on. This kinda reminds me of the discussion to get rid of the off-topic section, and I hope it ends the same way.
yea.. where is the problem.. does it bother you...