Not true you parse either AI the right information it will give you more or less the right answer.
Yes, we’re aware. Everything in the knowledgebase are things we do not care about “leaking.” Just a lot of notes and the such – things we’ve already said here.
8 Likes
Any update on introducing this service? It was originally slated for mid-late this year.
And I would absolutely love, love, love to have this:
I’ve bought more customs than I can count, so for me this would be the highest value service you could provide.
4 Likes
We are slowly making progress on Q-Pro, with some news possibly early next year.
13 Likes
I, embarrassingly, don’t know how to do this. I thought it’s solely based on how many posts you make in the forums. I do not do journaling on the forums because I have hangups with online privacy. So even though I have been running SC subs for over three years straight and have bought most of the titles and many customs, I figured I would never reach “Arch Alchemist” just because I do not journal in the forum.
It certainly would be nice to be a part of this even though I do not journal. SC and this community is EXTREMELY important to me. I don’t know what, if anything, can be done if I do not journal on the forums. Any advice would be appreciated.
1 Like
Journaling is not required. Posts are enough and you’ve already reached Initiate. Contact support by messaging of your change in rank.
4 Likes
I agreed with you that post counts shouldn’t be the sole criterion for Arch Alchemist. It should also be about quality and contribution towards SubClub. Having said that I understand for busy men like Saint and Fire it’s the simplest objective hurdle to implemented and fulfilled.
If your concern was whether you could take part in Quintessence Pro, I think sending an inquiry and/or request to support explaining your situation is the way to go. If you were asking whether you could upgrade to be Arch Alchemist without the required post counts then I’d think it’s unlikely.
Of course it’s just my understanding. At the end everything is subjected to Saint and/or Fire’s discretion.
3 Likes
That isn’t really my desire. Titles don’t mean much to me. Perks do though. 
2 Likes
If you go through this thread, you’ll notice that different modalities for QPro were discussed.
While the ranking (Aspirant to Arch Alchemist) is based on post quantity, QPro Services will probably take another route.
The discount ranks are a thank you for participation in the forum, since this is a reliable source of information how the subs work and they can increase product quality that way.
QPro Services on the other hand will (probably) not be available for everyone. But they will (probably) be available for users from all ranks as long as they fulfill certain criteria.
We have users with high quality posts that post rarely (like @Hoppa ) that have more than demonstrated that they are using subs responsibly, have wisdom, are polite and willing to help others.
I’d think that the criteria will be more like this, rather than pure numbers. IIRC Saint even stated that Hoppa would be one of those not super active users that are more than qualified for QPro.
Since I’ve joined SC, there were a few cases of users that rose fast in the ranks but proved to be unstable. Should they have reached Arch Alchemist level, I doubt they would have gained access to QPro.
So despite being low in post count, I wouldn’t worry to much.
6 Likes
Thank you!
Yes. Q-Pro access isn’t necessarily tied to forum contributions, though that will help a lot. We’re still determining those requirements, but it has to be more robust than just forum posts. The basic question is: “will this individual act in a responsible and ethical manner, protecting themselves and those around them from harm if we give them access?”
Q-Pro will obviously have an “experimentation” flair to it, its main purpose is to give those individuals unprecedented options and tools to REALLY fine-tune their customs. It’s about customer choice, as always.
21 Likes
Subscription based or pay per feature?
Pay per order, probably. I’m so tired of the subscription model. Every month, I have to go through my bank account and cancel stuff, lol.
18 Likes
Any chance it will have a private forum section? I’m sure I’m not alone in feeling like I’d rather not share certain results from experiments due to the fear of certain individuals trying it out and knee capping themselves because they haven’t learned their limits yet.
5 Likes
Which is why I don’t post much on my journal 
2 Likes
100%, the recent discussion regarding “masculine edge” is a great example of this. People reading it and determining a product is not for them or instantly jumping to conclusion. - Not that it happened there, but when I was thinking about it, definitly some user could interpret it in that way.
Everything shared is a potential liability. I think there is a need for a space where you can say some stuff without everyone jumping to conclusion. Ex. Someone running 15m regen and getting crazy recon, or writing something the best they can that can be interpreted in a way that was not intended.
3 Likes
I just got an idea.
What if we could change the way a specific core/cores excites in a custom.
For example I’m building a custom with cores A and B.
Core B elicits a lot of recon for me, but I want it in the custom as it supports the concept behind the custom.
I also don’t want to add MDFY: Freedom to the entire custom.
So instead, I add MDFY: Freedom to core B, so it largely regulates the way core B expresses, rather than the entire custom.
1 Like
I don’t know if this would be feasible.
We know that anything like a NSE core doesn’t only influence the custom it’s in, but also the whole stack, though to a lesser degree.
So if you put something like a mdfy core into a custom, I don’t know if it can be isolated to only work for one core instead of the whole stack.
But perhaps it would be possible to include like only the first quadrant of a core?
I get that It’s currently not feasible with the current modules and implementation in customs. But that’s with the way the current custom tech and build process works. And there’s no problem with that.
That’s why it’s still an idea for Q pro. If it’s supposed to be an advanced ground for experimentation by advanced users, why not suggest fresh ideas that push the limit beyond the current norm?
If it’s not feasible with the tech when Q pro launches, that’s also fine too.
Just imagine a similar argument about NSE, MDFY and Essence modules before they actually were made possible.