Proposed Guild Ranking Change

[Grond]

Currently there are four ranks within the Guild of Tolkienology. The ranks and their requirements are as follows:

1) Apprentice - No requirements
2) Journeyman - Must have read The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings and the Silmarillion and pass a test administered by forum leaders.
3) Expert - Must meet Journeyman requirements plus have read Unfinished Tales and pass a test administered by forum leaders.
4) Master - Must meet Expert requirements plus have read all of HoMe and the Letters and pass a test administered by forum leaders.

Proposed changes in the ranking system.
1) Apprentice - No requirements
2) Journeyman - Must have read The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings and pass a test administered by forum leaders.
3) Tolkienologist - Must meet Journeyman requirements, have read the Silmarillion and pass a test administered by forum leaders.
4) Expert - Requirements are unchanged.
5) Master - Requirements are unchanged.

The revised plan will remove Tolkienologist from the title, except for someone who has reached the rank of Tolkienologist.

So, one would no longer be an Expert Tolkienologist... they would be an Expert - Guild of Tolkienology. This would prevent some confusion as I have had complaints from people who think I'm vain for having Master Tolkieinologist in my title. :) Instead, my title would have
Master - Guild of Tolkienology (http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6012)

Let me know your thoughts and your votes.

[Nóm]

I don't see why we can't just remove the "Tolkienologist" from our title anyhow.


Also, about the new rank...whats the function of this?
If there is one, then go for it. I do not see it though. I thought the ranking were for reasons of setting up debates. Honestly, I don't even think they are the most accurate way of doing that.
As some peole know the books backwards and forwards (could name every person, place, weapon, and give alternate names, and meanings of wordds) yet couldn't read between any lines in the book.
Now I think our current system is alright, but you think this new idea will be an improvement, you might want to tell us why, because I can't see it.

[Húrin Thalion]

I am behind this idea all the way! Seems great to have a step between no requirements and the Sil for that one is not easy to get started with!

E.C

[Eledhwen]

I get emails from a company whose signature includes "This is to acknowledge that your email message has been displayed on the screen of the recipient. It is no guarantee that it has been read or understood."

It seems strange to me that someone can obtain a 'rank' in the guild by just claiming they have read the books, maybe 25 years ago when too young to understand them. The only fair way is to test this in a timed test (anyone can look the answers up in an untimed test - Tolkien's works are fairly well indexed).

All the same, I think "Tolkienologist - Guild of Tolkienology" is a bit of a mouthful.

[gate7ole]

This seemingly minor change may have a great advantage:
There are many Journeymans and it would be better if this rank was split in two (for any reason the ranks are used e.g. debates). So, I'm in for the new ranking system.
Now, as for the name -Tolkienologist- if it causes problems, we can use another.

[Nóm]

I understand how you could think it's a mouthful. I wouldn't even want to have the title "Expert" (not that I have read UT anyhow). In fact I don't think anyone in this guild is a master, though as Grond has said before, it doesn't really mean Master, it just does within this guild. I dislike the title all the same. I don't think it would hurt to remove the "Tolkienologist" from our titles.
I know that Grond also asked when we read the books, not just which or how many times. He may have taken into consideration that someone who read The Silmarillion once 25 years ago, may not know it as well as those who've read it within the last year.
Also, if someone lies (such as if I were to claim to have read UT) it would end up coming back at me, as I would look like a fool for not knowing the book when the time comes that I am required to post about it.
I think testing is the best simple way to determine ranks.
The Ranking's purpose is for setting up teams in debates so I think the test should be more than merely trivia but that would only make things more complicated so however Grond wants to do it is fine with me.
I know people who'd be considered experts who I would kill in a debate, no question about it, then I know people who haven't read The Silmarillion or ANY HoMe who'd kill me.
I also consider that those who set up debate teams know us well enough to judge our skills and can therefore make it as fair as they know how to.
Eledhwen, you for example could debate against the experts I think.
So there is no perfect system that I can imagine, not one simple enough to use.


gate7ole,
If we do add a rank, I agree that it should be one which divives the journeyman.
This plan of Grond's owuld only divide the apprentices though.

[Mrs. Maggott]

As someone VERY new to all this, I will not express an opinion about the above except to say that you flatter me greatly by giving me the title of "expert". I am sure there are others who do NOT bear that title who are far more worthy of it than I.

As far as the point about "knowledge" is concerned - that is, knowing all the minutiae without really grasping the point of the work - that IS a problem. A computer "knows" everything factual about things without being capable of grasping the MEANING of those facts (providing, of course, we aren't speaking mathematically). But I don't know if that makes the person who does know all of the "facts" any less an expert than someone who can't recite chapter and verse, but understands the point that the author is making.

Also, when one gets on in years, one "forgets" things even though one has read them. (I have my name on a sign over the medicine cabinet mirror so that in the morning, I know WHO I am. Disappointing, of course, but useful!) Therefore, if there is going to be a "debate" about an issue, that person may not be able to "recall" what once was known and has to go back to the source to "refresh" the memory. I don't think that is "cheating" in the sense of crib notes at a school exam. A debate is an attempt to ferret out and express the IDEAS surrounding an issue from both sides - pro and con. Returning to source material is vital, ESPECIALLY in Tolkien for his works are like an "onion", layer upon layer of meaning which sometimes is discovered only after the fifth, sixth or later reading of the text. This is especially true when the works are read when one is young. Maturity is a great teacher in many things, Tolkien not the least!

As for "titles", I confess that it is pleasant to see members expressing their involvement with various Guilds and their ranks therein. It isn't being "vain" to indicate the rank one has reached and especially in a debate on a thread, it gives credence to the point being made by the Guildsman. After all, very few of us would want to have surgery performed by someone who didn't have "Dr." in THEIR signature! ;)

[Húrin Thalion]

I still maintain that the greatest step is between LotR and the Silmarillion.
This is because: Firstly it is reading something entirely new, UT and HoME only adds to Silmarillion. Secondly you get knowledge about the first two ages of the world which are extremely important in debates that are not based on LotR of which I have only seen one so far.

I would personally never take the rank expert wheter in or out of the guild. I may have read the books many times but that does not guarantee
anything. I have never particpated in a debate though I hopefully will do that soon and I am still under 100 posts which means that most of you are more experienced than me. In the end I would not see myself fit to judge someones rank but my opinion is that the test should be a debate from which the masters will decide which rank he belongs to. This would eliminate all cheating though there is a risk that people like me could get a lower rank than necessary.

E.C

[Nóm]

Originally posted by Mrs. Maggott

...Therefore, if there is going to be a "debate" about an issue, that person may not be able to "recall" what once was known and has to go back to the source to "refresh" the memory. I don't think that is "cheating" in the sense of crib notes at a school exam.

Mrs. Maggott,
When debating, we are allowed to do research. No cheating about it.

[Mrs. Maggott]

I'm glad about being able to do research in debates because, well, memory is NOT one of my better gifts (except, of course, for useless esoterica that I can't get out of my head!). I have been having "senior moments" since age 7 - so you can imagine where I am now!

It's very much like the story of the man who goes to his doctor and says, "Doc, I'm having SO much trouble with my short term memory!".

The Doctor looks at him kindly and says, "How long have you been having this problem?"

To which he replies, "What problem?" :D

[Grond]

I have added a third option to the poll. Do we even need a ranking system?

The ranking system was set up as an incentive to guild members, to encourage them to read more and to delve deeper into Tolkien's world. Motivation is most often found when an incentive is offerred. If we don't need this, then it can simply be done away with.

I agree, if we do keep the ranking system, the biggest gap is between the reading of the Hob - LotR and The Silmarillion, which is why I put the gap there.

And maybe Master is too ambitious a title for any of us to attain, maybe our highest rank should be Expert. Please help me here. We need to come up with five ranks (if we decide to keep the ranking system at all).

We now **if we do away with the Tolkienologist (too cumbersome) and Master (no one really qualifies)** only have three titles. Expert, Journeyman and Apprentice.

[Nóm]

Well this may seem a bit dry, but we could keep the word "Tolkienologist" in our title if we ranked as follows:
1
2
3
4
5
This way there is no claim that level 5 (our masters) are Masters.

So I would be 'Level 2 Tolkienologist'
Grond would be 'Level 5 Tolkienologist'...and so forth.


PS: If we do away with titles rankings, maybe Grond could just add a number next to our name on the member list that will be used for debates or whatever a ranking is needed for.

As for the rank, I mistakening thought :confused: that it's purpose was debate placement. :confused:

[Húrin Thalion]

What about these titles:

1 Perian Tolkienologist

2 Naugrim Tolkienologist

3 Atani Tolkienologist

4 Moriquendi

5 Laiquendi

These are the words for all the good peoples of middle earth. We will claim no titles that we are not worthy of, except possibly Ainur which may be changed to to Eldar or Laiquendi. I do not think we could call anyone Eru or Ainur. Correct me if it's wrong languages.

By the way is there any courses in quenya and Sindar?

Elen

[Elennainie]

By the way is there any courses in quenya and Sindar? Elen, try these sites: ardalambion.com and www.uib.no/People/hnohf/qlist.htm

I like the idea of tests for ranking, because it's fair and if you read the Sil. 3 years ago it's not the same as if you've just read it, like Nom said. Also, I like the incentive of having ranks within the guild.

5 Ainur Tolkienologist (Laiquendi) I must protest against this being a rank. :( The Ainur are sacred.

[Húrin Thalion]

And that is why I proposed the Laiquendi.

I understand and accept your protest and I will change it immediately.

Elen

[Elennainie]

Thanks..."protest" is really too strong, I should have used a milder word. ;) If you want to learn QUenya, I would love to learn it with you. I tried to study it on my own, but didn't have the discipline. We could PM in it or something. Does anybody else want to learn too? There was this great talk at DragonCon in Atlanta this year on the Tolkien Track called Elvish 101, but it was all full even though I waited in line a half hour, so I couldn't get in. :(

Oh, and I like taking out the "Tolkienologist" bit from the ranks.

[Húrin Thalion]

Ok I'll PM you! Protest is the right word, only afterwards you get a feeling it isn't but it is. Would love to learn Quenya with you Star friend!

Elen

[Lhunithiliel]

1/ I DO wish we keep on having ranks. I see it as an incentive of improving one's knowledge.
2/ The names of the Ranks - I LIKE ELEN'S IDEA VERY MUCH! I was just going to suggest sth. similar.
3/ We should keep the word "Tolkienologist"
Ex: Atani Tolkienologist
Sounds great and looks great!
4/ Number of ranks - according to the new-offered system.

[gate7ole]

1. Saying Laiquendi do you mean the Light-Elves? Because Laiquendi are the Green-Elves and the Light Elves are called Calaquendi.
2. Why are the Perian at the first Level of the ranking system (or the Atani lower than the Moriquenti)? I disagree that the elves are a higher race and we shouldn’t give such an impression by giving these rank titles.
3. I’m more fond of the numeric titles (Level 1, 2…). It is less impressive, but more straightforward and without any feeling of vanity.
4. The proposed ranking system by Grond uses the Apprentice title for those who have not even read Lotr. I don’t think that anyone who hasn’t read that book will enter this forum. So, this rank will be useless. Instead, in order to have 5 ranks (as Grond proposed), I would suggest:
Level 1: Have read Lotr/Hobbit
Level 2: Have also read Silmarillion
Level 3: Have also read UT
Level 4: Have also experience of over 2 years
Level 5: Have also read HOME/Letters
This will spread most people to categories 2,3 and the older one to 4.

[Nóm]

I also agree with what you say about those who have not read any of the books.
One thing though, what is if someone has read The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, The Silmarillion, some of HoME, and UT, but hasn't been reading for 2 years yet?
I'm about to read UT, and I have read portions of Home (probably around 500 pages), but have only been reading Tolkien for several months is why I ask. So I think I'll have read all of HoME before my 2 year point.

I am strongly against naming ranks after races or divisions of races for the exact reasons that gate7ole is.

[Lhunithiliel]

Originally posted by gate7ole
Why are the Perian at the first Level of the ranking system (or the Atani lower than the Moriquenti)? I disagree that the elves are a higher race and we shouldn’t give such an impression by giving these rank titles.
It is not a matter of inferior or superior race, gate7ole. It is a matter of knowledge. I think you will agree that the Hobbits had least knowledge about the lore of the world they were living in. They were a close society and only a few even among them knew well the history of their own people. That's why I think a former Apprentice would be nicely called a "Perian" withaout any hint of humiliation whatsoever!

I’m more fond of the numeric titles (Level 1, 2…). It is less impressive, but more straightforward and without any feeling of vanity.
I only strongly hope that this would NOT be accepted! I am so disgusted of being under all types of numbers in real life that I sincerely expect to have more personality at least here! :)
The proposed ranking system by Grond uses the Apprentice title for those who have not even read Lotr. I don’t think that anyone who hasn’t read that book will enter this forum. So, this rank will be useless. Instead, in order to have 5 ranks (as Grond proposed), I would suggest:
Level 1: Have read Lotr/Hobbit
Level 2: Have also read Silmarillion
Level 3: Have also read UT
Level 4: Have also experience of over 2 years
Level 5: Have also read HOME/Letters
This will spread most people to categories 2,3 and the older one to 4.
I fully agree about Level 1 = PERIAN ;)
I however can't agree with level 4. What does TIME have to do with knowledge? Suppose a person has been hanging around most Tolkien-related sites for 2 years mostly participating in RPG-s or in sections where non-books topics are discussed. How then can someone like that acquire Level 4 ? !

A question: What if someone has read the H, the S and the LOTR, has also read the UT, is working on a UT-project, has read a few things from HoME and a few Letters, BUT if you ask him/her a "trivia" question (especially names!) he/she would find it difficult to answer without checking? What rank a person like that should have? (can you guess who I'm talking about? ;) :D)

[Nóm]

If you guys decide on this race/(divisions of races) ranking, I wont rebel/start a revolt over it. But I do think this, in addition to what gate7ole said:
Because I wouldn't want to be ranked as human myself ;), I guess I can understand that some people wouldn't want to be ranked as simply "level 1" or "lever 2".

This race ranking thing also, to me, doesn't seem to hold together as a system. It's like taking an artistic approach to something that has already been figured down to a science: neglecting to see that it is a system, and deciding to treat it like pieces of a puzzle.

I agree that hobbits had less knowledge than other races, though I also think that is because they were plain not interested, or dare I say....Intelligent enough? Hobbits are plain and simply fools.
Incase you didn't catch the implication, I mean that I don't agree with naming a rank after a race who was ignorant because they were simple minded.

Also:
Why base a step upon how long we've been reading? When you've passed the test you've passed the test.

[Mrs. Maggott]

Oh dear! If we're going to have ranks according to who can remember names, I must claim the lowest possible since I have trouble remember the names of REAL people (wait till you guys get older!). Not only that, after one does a bit of reading of Tolkien, sometimes all those strange and unusual names can begin to sound alike or at least become confusing (after all, besides Sam, Rosie, Ted, Bill and Tom - to name a few - Tolkien doesn't exactly take his names from the "What to Name the Baby" book!). And then the author has the facility for giving different names to the same person (Gandalf is a good example as he has different names according to different races).

Furthermore, Tolkien has created not a book, but a WORLD. That means that one must remember a whole HISTORY of names. Try that with the Kings and Queens of England - and at least their names are rather ordinary! So unless one were to devote one's whole life to Professor Tolkien, the kind of knowledge that is possible to acquire about one tale, however long, is not really possible with ALL the tales (and especially with the new things published the include changes and modifications of what has already BEEN printed! - Trotter indeed!).

The facility to pull up factual knowledge (sometimes called "factoids") is something that many truly ignorant people have. It's similar to those people who have perfect recall - whatever they read they can remember whether they understand it or not. Therefore simply being able to "recall" a particular name or fact should not necessarily be considered evidence of "knowledge" if that word means some sort of comprehension of what has been written about.

If it were up to me, I would let all enter and participate in the various threads. As with the forum as a whole, very soon it becomes obvious who is knowledgeable and who is not. Those who are knowledgeable do not NEED "rankings" to "prove" their expertise and those who are not should be helped by those who are to improve their grasp of Tolkien's great works. Most people don't like or want to be seen as ignorant and yet we ALL start out that way. As in any "guild" the idea is to build each participant up to be the very best that he or she CAN be. Then that person becomes part of our collective "pride" (GOOD pride, not bad!).

But, of course, as I am VERY new at this, I will leave it to my betters as to what they wish to do and I will wholeheartedly support the amicable concensus that is reached by all. :)

[Nóm]

I agree Mrs. Maggott.
As I said earlier, I do not think trivia is a good way to test one's understanding on a book. I've met a couple guys who can give every name of places and things in the book but when you ask them a question about the book, like "why did this person do this?" or "what caused this?" They say "uuuh duh..uh..I don't know!" ;)
I think ranks should be based on our underdstanding of the more abstract things too.


Your "betters"? No.

[Grond]

Well, it would appear I have stirred up a hornet's nest. Mrs. Maggott, the ranking system was something I devised to:
1) Give people an incentive to delve deeper into the works. A reward is always a great incentive.
2) Give the guild a means for determing who and how many should be involved in debates and the like.
3) Allow for mentoring and training.
4) Advertise the guild by the display of guild affiliation and rank in a member's signature.

Finally, our guild is an open one. The only threads in which participation is limited is the debates. Those are not limited to guild members or to forum members. They are limited to the participants.

I thank everyone who has expressed an opinion thus far. I don't like the 1 - 5 ranking system. The reason I picked Apprentice and Journeyman is because they represent actual ranks in medieval guilds. If we choose races to rank, we will have ceaseless arguments on which is better than the other and before long we'll be accused of Middle-earth racism. :rolleyes: ;)

Let continue this discussion and come up with some more ideas.

[Lhunithiliel]

M.M, Nym, I was speaking about the "Trivia"-questions for I was wondering what the ranking tests would be and if they would include Trivia-questions! :)

[Mrs. Maggott]

I frankly LIKE a "ratings" system for the reason that Grond mentioned. I also like the medieval Guild reference to one's rank within the Guild. But in that case, perhaps EVERYONE should "come in" at the lowest rank and those who prove themselves more knowlegeable will simply progress upward more rapidly than those who need to learn more. This way, no one "starts at the top".

As in real Guilds, there could be "tests" that progress in difficulty and comprehension at each level and the Guildsman could chose when to take each test to progress to the next level. If he or she does not pass the test or if the individual is able to see that the level test is still too difficult, then that person may remain where he or she is until he or she is able to take the test and pass. Such tests would not have to be long; short simple answers (names, places etc. to prove that the material has been read) at the lowest levels and perhaps essays involving more comprehensive understanding of a particular point (a choice of what one wishes to comment upon would be good) at the upper levels. That way there is a mix: factual knowledge together with comprehension. Also, each person may remain where he or she feels comfortable since no one would be "forced" to go any higher up the ranks than desired.

I don't know if this would work, but certainly it would allow for all levels of knowledge and understanding. Of course, those members who have been members from the beginning or at least for more than, say, two months(?) would stay at their present level and not have to go back to "square one" although they could rise if they desired by taking the applicable test. I certainly would be willing to start at "square one" (and probably SHOULD!).

But I certainly don't believe in this business of not having levels of achievement because someone might "feel bad" if he or she isn't as "good" as someone else. That reminds me of the fellow who said that what is going on today is not equality of opportunity, but equality of results! That would be the same as if Albert Einstein and I applied for a job as a mathematician and his brilliance (and my stupidity) could not be considered as a criteria because it wouldn't be FAIR! Give me a break! Effort and perseverence SHOULD be rewarded - and the simple fact is that we are NOT all "born equal" except under the law! I have no problem with another Tolkienologist being rated "higher" than I. It only serves as a spur to attempt excellence - and that's a good thing! Go for it! :D

[Nóm]

Originally posted by Nóm
Oh Lhunithiliel, I didn't mean to take anything you said out of context. I was reply to Mrs. Maggott and reffering to an early post of mine in this thread.

I asked Anamatar what type of questions Grond asked him for his test.
They seemed absolutely Trivia to me. Though I could be wrong because Anamatar did not tell me every question Grond asked, so maybe not all questions where of the trivia type.
He also told me that Maedhros questions where more "vague"..and that I like to hear. Because it sounds to me that Maedhros was testing comprehension and not trivial little facts.
So, I hope that Meadhros will be involved in everyone else's testing too.

[gate7ole]

Originally posted by Nóm
One thing though, what is if someone has read The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, The Silmarillion, some of HoME, and UT, but hasn't been reading for 2 years yet?

I asked myself the same question. I belong to this category as do others who had read most books but are “new” readers. The reason I put a 4th rank with a time requirement, is simply because it may be indicative of somebody’s experience. I think you will agree that it is not the same thing to have read all books the last year for the first time, and to have been reading Tolkien for more than, say, 3 years. The ranking system I proposed requires for the first 3 ranks only to have read the appropriate books. The 4th is for those who also are “older” readers. I think it is fair. We shouldn’t think those criteria as completely objective. The amount of knowledge and understanding of Tolkien’s world cannot be easily measured. We only propose possible divisions that will be correct with the greatest possible percentage. If someone is unjustly put in a lesser rank, it is not that important.

Since, the numeric and race titles are not accepted, we can stick to Grond’s existing titles that served their role very well until now. Or someone else with better imagination can propose new ones.

Originally posted by Lhunithiliel
What if someone has read the H, the S and the LOTR, has also read the UT, is working on a UT-project, has read a few things from HoME and a few Letters, BUT if you ask him/her a "trivia" question (especially names!) he/she would find it difficult to answer without checking?
No one said that experience is based on how many trivia questions one can answer. Any kind of test for the definition of one’s rank should be consisted of more complex questions. (Although it is easy to say it and difficult to do. Grond, if you need any help with such tests, I’m willing to help you).

And Lhunithiliel, what’s this project you’re working on? Is it a secret? Can you tell us something about it?

[Elenaelin]

This is basically how I see the ranking issue
A-" Should we eliminate the ranking system?"- I see no problem with having a ranking system for the guild. As it has been previously discussed, the ranking system allows general assignments for debates ( I certainly would be hesitant in going against Grond or other tolkien masters/experts, for example, for a first debate in this guild) I know it has been an incentive to me in reading more of Tolkien's works (I didn't even know about UT or HOME until joining this guild! :eek:) Having a system of ranks, in my opinion, is a positive thing for the forum, as long as all are treated with respect.
B- "Should levels of the ranking system change"- I support this, at least in the proposal to split the Journeyman ranking so requirements to read the Sil form a new level. The writting styles of LOTR and the Sil are completely different- the Sil is written in a much more formal style in comparison to LOTR and the Hobbit. To some younger readers switching directly from "Return of the King" to the Sil is comparable to running straight into a brick wall (I know this from experience :rolleyes: ) As for Expert/Master qualifications, I can't be talking....
C- "Changing titles of the rank"- Personally I think that a rank's title should describe the rank. Please remember when choosing titles that they shouldn't be too confusing (Think of dim people ilke myself with pity please -" Tolkienologist of Tolkienology" is a bit...much:rolleyes: ) As to ranks assigned to races, I personally have no issue, but some people might be offended if thier fav. race wasn't "on top".
D. "Ranks should be assigned according to experience"- I am against this. My mom read the Hobbit to me when I was three, (I've been reading them since!) so therefore I would have more tolkien "experience", than others per se, but that certainly doesn't make me a superior Toliken scholar. I'm sure there are many who have just started reading the books, but have understanding, etc. Like Nom said,
When you've passed the test you've passed the test.

And for those that feel that ranks are a bit on the pompous side, may I remind you that this is one of best guilds in the forum?:D

[Mrs. Maggott]

I think the point about the difference between Hobbit/LOTR and Silmarillion is well taken. I was in my 20s when I first read H&LOTR. When the Silmarillion came out, I grabbed it up anxious to continue my forays into Tolkien's world. WOW! What a difference! I did not expect a "story", of course, but what I got was The Bible, pure and simple - and like the Bible, I found it VERY DEPRESSING in some places. Just when you think the good guys were winning - BANG! Furthermore, there were some places in Silmarillion where I got more than a little angry at those who were supposed to BE "the good guys"!

Anyway, to make a long point much shorter, there simply cannot be a "literary connection" between Tolkien's most famous M.E. works and the rest. The first are presented as "tales" with the main characters developed over the whole of the work and a definite "climax and ending" whereas the others are no different, really, from any other history. There isn't time to develop the characters since there is just too much ground to cover. I would say that the difference between the TYPES of literature could be summed up as the difference between Shakespeare's "Julius Ceasar" and Gibbon's account of the same man. You really cannot equate the two although the subject matter is the same.

[Húrin Thalion]

What do you think?

1: Avari

2: Nandor

3: Sindar

4: Eldar (Calaquendi)

5: Calaquendi (?)

The problem is that both Sindar, Nandor and Claquendi are part of the Eldar so if anyone could replace the Eldar and/or Calaquendi it'd be great. I would still like to see names of this kind. About testing I have not got an opinion in the matter.

E.C

(I know I'm persistent but hope it's ok)

[Grond]

The problem I have had with the first testing that was done, was that I wanted it to occur in "real time". That is why I did it on messenger with no time for looking up the answers. I agree fully that a greater comprehension of the works needs to be understood before passing on to the higher levels of the Tolkienology ranks.

In contemplating a way to make this both fair and comprehensive I have decided that all new members will be tested before joining (excepting Apprentices who need not have read anything). All currently ranked members will be tested before any further advancement will occur.

The test will be twofold. An online, realtime (as Nom refers to it) "trivia" test which will count for 1/2 the grade and an open book subjective test which will be on a selected topic or topics. I will appoint a committee to design and administer the subjective tests. I will personally continue to administer the objective online test.

BTW, the test I gave anamatar was objective but delved into one's retention of the works. It was much more than a trivia test. The questions were not of the easy variety at all and I was most impressed by anamatar's comprehension and understanding of the subject.

[pohuist]

I like the step b/w Journeyman and Expert, but Tolkienologist sounds too cumbersome maybe divide one of 4 existing ranks into 2 categories (like in junior expert and senior expert).

I don't think we should delete "Tolkienologist" from our signatures. If people are confused, let'm join the guild and stop being confused :p

[Mrs. Maggott]

And speaking of confusion: I hope our good Pohuist changes his/her "loremaster" identification from "ignorant" since he/she is a Master in our Guild. It speaks not well for a Guildmaster to be an "ignorant" loremaster!

Humility is a beautiful quality, but the Guildmember's rank must disabuse ANYONE from considering him/her to be "ignorant" and as such, that determination by the individual might be considered as "false" modesty - which, of course, it isn't. Perhaps "aspiring" or "student" (aren't we all?!) would be a better choice under the circumstances.

And as such, I must agree with the good Pohuist and say that I would NOT change the name. Like Tolkien himself, we must avoid pandering to the lowest common denominator and encourage forum members to "aspire" to higher things. :)

[Maedhros]

I asked Anamatar what type of questions Grond asked him for his test.
They seemed absolutely Trivia to me. Though I could be wrong because Anamatar did not tell me every question Grond asked, so maybe not all questions where of the trivia type.
He also told me that Maedhros questions where more "vague"..and that I like to hear. Because it sounds to me that Maedhros was testing comprehension and not trivial little facts.
So, I hope that Meadhros will be involved in everyone else's testing too.
I need to make something clear. I took part in the testing of Anamatar, unfortunately, I was only able to participate in a limited amount of time, because I had to leave for dinner. I saw some of the questions that Grond asked, and I would not characterize them as trivia. They were specific and to a point.
Unfortunately, to meet certain standards, you need to know certain facts about the book. The questions that I saw were not that specific and were to the point.
I tried and ask more "general" questions, because Grond had already covered that part, and I wanted to know how did Anamatar feel about certain parts of the book in general, and what were his impresions on certain things of the book.
I have to say that I was absolutely impressed with the way that Anamatar answered the questions. Wow.
Something else, you would never find someone who cares as much or is a better guildmaster than Grond. He really cares.

[Gil-Galad]

I like the idea that the journeymen should be divided in two groups,because we are too much.

[Lhunithiliel]

Originally posted by gate7ole
Since, the numeric and race titles are not accepted, we can stick to Grond’s existing titles that served their role very well until now. Or someone else with better imagination can propose new ones.
Who said that the "race"-ranking has been rejected? :mad:

I surely think that a rank should be won!
Here is something for all of you to think about ;)
“…to that brotherhood were joined all the hardiest and most eager mariners, and young men sought admission to it even from the inland regions of Númenor, and Aldarion they called the Great Captain.”
From UT, Aldarion and Erendis

And Lhunithiliel, what’s this project you’re working on? Is it a secret? Can you tell us something about it?
:D :D Look here:
my Wiki-project (http://www.tolkienwiki.org/wiki.cgi?Unfinished__Tales)

[Nóm]

I like rank titles we have now, apprentice - master. I think that if we do remove the "Tolkienologist" from our title, having master or expert would not look bad in any way.
The thing is...
Grond, and others would like to add another rank, giving us 5. Therefore we'd have to find a title with fits in with the ones we use now.

According to Grond's opening post it looks that he wants to split the apprentices, whereas gate7ole, Gil-galad and perhaps others wish to split the journeymen.

I think it would be efficient to get to the bottum of why exactly it is that the journeymen should be slip. And also, why it is the the apprentices should be split.
If a case is made for each of these views I think everyone could better offer their opinion.

gate7ole, I agree with you that it is not super important if someone is ranked lower than they should be.
But thinking in this way means that it doesn't seem to be too important that the rank of journeymen be divided. Is this reasoning not correct?

My case: removing the "Tolkienologist" could avoid anyone feeling or being acussed of being 'vain' or any other descriptive word that they do not like! :D
After all the reasons are put forth for the splitting of the journeyman, and for the splitting of the apprentices we will conclude which (if any) will be split.
After determining where the slip will be we will know the description of the level for which we must come up with a title.

[gate7ole]

I think the case here is to distribute evenly the guild members. Splitting journeymans or apprentices, may not be the perfect solution, since then the experts will become more numerous than the others. So, I give my final proposal, because we have to reach to a conclusion sometime.
Level 1 - Apprentice: have read Lotr/Hobbit
Level 2 - Journeyman: have read the basics (Silmarillion and/or UT) with little xp
Level 3 - (some title): have read the basics (Silmarillion and/or UT) with much xp
Level 4 - Expert: have read a few of the advanced (HOME, Letters)
Level 5 - Master: have read all the advanced (HOME, Letters)

The amount of experience (for Levels 2 and 3) of course is difficult to be measured. We can use the time criterion if nothing better is found.
By comparing with the existing ranking system, it distributes -I believe- more evenly the people to Levels 2-4, while Level 1 is for the newcomers and Level 5 for Grond and Maedhros (and whoever else is qualified).

[Eledhwen]

Nothing would need splitting if a level-by-level test were set and a whole new set of ranks installed. The problems would only arise when a rank has been split (eg: journeyman) and the word journeyman is kept for one of the splits. If journeyman became the higher rank of the two, the ones seemingly demoted might get miffed and take their bat home. It could work if journeyman were the lower rank, but better still would be two completely different names.

[Mrs. Maggott]

If a particular level is bifurcated, perhaps the appellations "Junior" and "Senior" can be applied as they denote lesser-greater/younger-older versions of the same thing rather than something entirely separate. We do it with schools (jr. high, sr. high, jr. college etc.) it might be an appropriate way to distinguish between two progressions within the same "guild level".

Anyway, it's a thought. :)

[Grond]

How about this.
Level 1) Novice - entry level with no test or requirements
Level 2) Apprentice - basic first level rank requiring knowledge of The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings (Test required)
Level 3) Journeyman - Requires reading of the Silmarillion (Test required)
Level 4) Sr. Journeyman - Requires reading of the Unfinished Tales (Test required)
Level 5) Expert - Requires reading Letters and some HoMe (Test required)
Level 6) Master - Requires extensive knowledge of all of Tolkien's works. (Extensive test required)

I propose that every member be tested immediately in their current rank. Future promotions will be tested by 1/2 objective online exam and 1/2 subjective open book exam.

Thoughts everyone??

[Mrs. Maggott]

Sounds good to me. My only problem is the tests (not the essay, but the quick answer type). I'm very much like Winston Churchill - I DON'T test well. I remember my name and, if lucky, the date. Other than that, I stink! I used to get high 90s when I was in school - till I took the damned tests. However, in my senior year in high school when I knew there was no money for college and didn't give a darn except to get a diploma and get OUT, THEN I scored in the high 90s on my tests! Damn and blast!!!!!!!!!!! Oh, well.....

Nonetheless, I will be happy to take them even if I forever stay at a low level because of my lack of "testability". :mad:

[gate7ole]

I like it. It includes most things that we have discussed. But all this testing will be very difficult for you. As I said before, if you need any help...

[Grond]

I will be depending on some of the Sr. Membership to help me formulate and administer the tests. As I said, I would like the Objective portion of the test to be in real time. The Essay can be done over a period of 1 or 2 days.

Any member interested in assisting me in conducting testing, please email me at rpope123@bellsouth.net

Also.... any members who want to help me administer the testing will be the first ones tested by me. ;)

[Mrs. Maggott]

Thank you for your most kind offer.

However, all that I ask you to remember is this, if you get an answer like "Bilbo was a dancer in the harem of the Corsair Lord" - just dismiss it as "testavitis". :rolleyes:

[Eledhwen]

I think Grond's proposal sounds good. I am concerned, though, for Mrs Maggott and others who have shown themselves to be able in debate but get a mental block when in a timed test. If a glass of brandy doesn't help, perhaps some sort of on-line interview would establish someone's knowledge in these cases (I know it's more work for someone; but I'm just trying to be helpful.)

[Mrs. Maggott]

Thank all of you kind and caring Tolkienopaths for your concern about my mental block (no WONDER they used to call me a "blockhead"!). I shall do my best and take whatever comes. After all, EVERYONE has to put up with something.

I shall, however, try the glass of brandy - but please, if a bunch of silly letters start showing up at your end, that just means that I have fallen asleep on the keyboard!

Age...and not even a "little ring" to help!

Again, thanks! :D

[Nenya Evenstar]

Please forgive me for taking my sweet time to show up... I was unable to post. I have one question: I really like the ranking system that Grond came up with last only if we do not use the numbers. I detest the idea of using numbers for ranking. So, my question is: would we be using Level 1, Level 2, etc; or would we be using Novice, Apprentice, Journeyman, etc? I sincerely hope it will be the latter....

[Grond]

My last proposal was Novice, Apprentice, Journeyman, Sr. Journeyman, Expert and Master. :)

[Nenya Evenstar]

Good! I was a little unsure which exactly you were using.... I support it fully. :)

[Ithrynluin]

Originally posted by Nóm
I don't see why we can't just remove the "Tolkienologist" from our title anyhow.


Also, about the new rank...whats the function of this?
If there is one, then go for it. I do not see it though. I thought the ranking were for reasons of setting up debates. Honestly, I don't even think they are the most accurate way of doing that.
As some peole know the books backwards and forwards (could name every person, place, weapon, and give alternate names, and meanings of wordds) yet couldn't read between any lines in the book.
Now I think our current system is alright, but you think this new idea will be an improvement, you might want to tell us why, because I can't see it.

I completely agree with you, especially the "read between the lines" part.

[Gil-Galad]

Originally posted by Grond
My last proposal was Novice, Apprentice, Journeyman, Sr. Journeyman, Expert and Master. :)
Master,I think that was the best idea so far.
And also I agree with Nym about the"read between the lines",because not only reading ,but also understandig is important.There is so much philosophy in Tolkien's works that I believe understanig should be ome of the most important components of ranking.

[Anduril]

I agree with Nom...I think we all don't want "quotemaniacs" into the Guild, insted of that, I'd like fellows who can't asimilate, understand and debate in others levels...

[Eöl]

Just to throw my 2 cents in, I really like Gronds idea of half open book and half real time testing. Also the ranks he proposed are nice to...

[Ciryaher]

Essays would be the best examination of a person's knowledge and understanding of Tolkien.

I would prefer non-racial names, because from all the examples given, you have to be an elf (except the Naugrim one, somewhere up there) and not all of us would want to be an elf, so ptpp! :p ;)

[Melian]

I agree with you that one's creativeness is much demonstrative of his or her knowledge and contemplations.(don't think I say that because I post poems here and stuff--I really mean it).
As far as the ranking system is concerned,I think there's been a little discriminative policy about it (no offense,Grond)--and especially the Journeymen.
But I don't think that the ranks really matter.I am an Expert--so what?I'm just happy to be here,post and discuss.I should say as well that many of the so called Apprentices,Journeymen etc. (having a lower rank) often show more knowledge and understanding than myself.
I know people who have read much of Tolkien's works but still they remain untouched by the magic.I have friends who have read "The Hobbit" only and already
feel Middle-Earth.Do you see that the amount of reading is not essential to show one's ability to post profound and meaningful replies?

[Eöl]

Do you see that the amount of reading is not essential to show one's ability to post profound and meaningful replies?
That's a good, point all though it would certainly help if you had read more than The Hobbit when taking the Expert test. Still, that's why essays would be important. They are made more of a person's creativity, not of their knowledge of Tolkien's works.

[Mrs. Maggott]

I disagree that the essays would be a test of "creativity" rather than comprehension. True, certain people "write" better than others, but the idea in any essay question is to express - in language plain or fancy - the individual's understanding of the matter under examination. And while it is true that a "good writer" can make nonsense and nothingness sound better than a less creative one, in the end, content cannot be disguised and I am certain that our wise and knowing Guildmasters will be able to separate the wheat from the chaff! :)

[Húrin Thalion]

Of course a good writer can "fool" the reader! The trick is to as a reader see through the narrative style and look at the real comprehension. In the case of reading we would have to depend on those who think they can see that to test. I love to write and would therefore like to see my test as an essay but I am sure that opinion is not shared by all. If there were enough people conducting tests all could choose his/her way to be tested.

Húrin Thalion