I dont know how you guys, but I always look at the new builds posted. If you remove that name "Event Build: ..." it would be nice if the builder writed that it is part of Event at the beginning of his build. For example:

"Event: Crossworlds"

"Frost Nymph."

Tagging those build as event is good idea, but I think people would like to know right at the beginning that they are reading Event build.

We could let builds keep their "Event" title for a month after the event has finished and then change it to "Character".

I can't wait for the. Jiggler. When is Sir Billy Maize going to grace us with this awesome product?

I agree with Teccam on most points, and feel this should be up for discussion rather than just talked over with the hosts (there are only three of you, and what percentage of the CB group is that exactly? :P)

I like the "Event Build" title, as it immediately lets me know that a build is part of an event. Most likely, the current one. I like Event Builds exactly how I like normal ones; if I don't like it, I don't 'like' it, no unfair or wanton liking. I would like them to have rank tags, but I can understand the arguments against that, and frankly Teccam sells it really well. Mason started these, and had a lot of this discussed with the entire group beforehand, and the general populace said no rank tags, right? And I certainly wouldn't want to be the one who fucked up Mason's revolutionary idea.

Also, I never understood Event Builds always being qualified for HoF. Why set standards for normal builds then break them for event ones? But that would be difficult to change now, and since I wasn't here when HoF started I wasn't able to voice a complaint in the discussions about it (there were discussions, right?). However, it would keep the polls simpler and easier on the eye if we didn't have random event builds with <10 likes clogging up things. If I'm like most people, I don't actually go through the nominated builds and decide the ones I like best, just vote the ones I know of or ones that sound cool.

What I'm trying to say is, keep things the way they are, or make changes the majority of the community want when necessary.

You misunderstand. When I say hosts, I mean all of the blog's hosts. Ok then. If you guys are so against this, we'll make a poll in the upcoming weekend. 

Should Event Builds have Rank Tags?

A) Yes

B) No

If the majority chooses B), we'll drop the entire thing and never speak of it again.

Wait, how are standards lowered for event builds? They need the same things as any other build.

He means that an event build with 10 likes can enter the Hall of Fame. I don't know about you guys, but most event builds are the most badass chaarcters ever brought to the blog. 

I think some kind of tag would be good theses are event builds so they should have some kind of tag i vote A

I'm concerned with a poll too. I don't think enough people will truly consider all potential ramifications of this decision when voting ... It sounds like even the hosts overlooked possible consequences, and those are people who have been around a long time, seen how the site operates, and contributed a fair bit to it. Simply asking readers to vote is not necessarily going to lead to the result that's in the group's best interest.

There was a push for ranking event builds before, and Mason basically gave the readers an ultimatum: "If you guys want to rank Event Builds, then they must lose all special privileges associated with the ranking (the tag, the title, the event page, the HOF exceptions, etc.). If you still want to rank them then, then we'll consider it."

This is exactly why I'm urging you guys to discuss this with him before you make the decision. Putting it in the hands of the voters without requiring everyone to be fully aware of the issues this could cause may lead to more problems....

If you do want to put the decision to a general vote, please at least consider what I've said about only putting the changes in effect for future events, and leaving current ones as is. I've already made my case for why I believe retroactively applying these changes is a bad idea. And while I'd love for everyone to read it and reflect on it,  realistically that's not going to happen. The vast majority of voters will not have read my argument, and will be voting "blindly".

It's great that people want to give event builds a leg up, I have nothing wrong with that as I've reiterated several times now ... as long as it doesn't harm existing non-event builds. If you put a poll, up, please ensure that any/all options will avoid negative consequences to non-event builds, or you haven't actually avoided the issue at all, you've just put the blame for any problems in the hands of the masses.

Sometimes it should be the hosts who make the final decision; they should just make it after considering the interests and opinions of any concerned members of the group. That's how Mason handled this, and with his blessing, I think it's how you guys should too. Just please err on the side of caution where all changes are concerned.... I hope I've made a good case with my own interests here because I still firmly believe that retroactively applying these changes would cause more harm than good.

But didn't he step down as a Host for builds and such ? Just looked it up he did just as with anything else when someone new takes over we re going to want to hold onto the old stuff. But if we don't let the new guys share there vision for the group we wont know if its good or not.If what there doing doesn't work  then it doesn't and we find a new way but we wont know till we try