forum ranks

[#1]

Maybe we should lighten up a bit and accept that it is there and try and get it bashed into a shape that we find "acceptable" rather than are particularly fond of. And of course are happy with the individual ones we end up with, and suggest alternative names for those names we don't like.

[#2]

Me personally couldn't care less about 'ranks' , but I can see many people do.

The more important 'label', to me, is one which covers the contribution/expertise of the poster - for instance 'Bright Spark' for those who have made valid contributions.

You can call me what you like - it's only a 'name' anyway.

[#3]

---

@Townman wrote:

@Penny,

I can assure you it was not fun - I think that this issue caused a lot of soul searching debate ... and it looks like it will carry on.  Personally I just do not see the merit of it - what we had previously seemed adequate.

---

... didn't mean "fun" in the literal sense ; )  just meant it probably wasn't easy.  As I said before, I think most of the ranks work well;  however people have made a number of comments about the 'Veteran' tag (and a few about 'Grafter'), and 'hooked' clearly shouldn't stay, so these aspects probably need to be looked at, regardless.

I realise it's probably a bit galling when you guys have clearly put a lot of time and effort into making things as good as possible, but the 99% of us who weren't part of that elite group were never likely to agree with absolutely everything that had been decided : /

So, a few things have got flagged up (not just ranks, but other stuff also) but hopefully in a constructive way.  The fact that people here say what they think, is no reflection on anyone involved with the set-ups and it doesn't mean we don't appreciate what was done : ) 

[#4]

We did not agree with most of the Ranking stuff - what little detail we were told or could deduce from testing. Community Veteran was "accepted" by us as the best of the options that had been suggested.

[#5]

It could of course be argued is it even needed at all. "What's in a name" is a quote used many a time but to be honest I see no need for it. Simply by looking at the poster's details I see everything I need to know, how many posts they have made and how long they have been members, so is there really a need for categories?

[#6]

I was perhaps at one extreme with the beta testers in that I thought that the whole idea was childish and unnecessary

[#7]

@Oldjim  +1

[#8]

---

@Anotherone wrote:

We did not agree with most of the Ranking stuff - what little detail we were told or could deduce from testing. Community Veteran was "accepted" by us as the best of the options that had been suggested.

---

... well at the end of the day I guess it doesn't much matter whose idea each rank was.  Bob's already said (Veteran thread, I think) that he's happy for the CVs to be re-named, and I'm only asking for "hooked" to be re-named for the reasons given, so I hope that might be agreed also (obviously didn't realise you guys were in the dark about some aspects).

---

---

Mook wrote: Simply by looking at the poster's details I see everything I need to know, how many posts they have made and how long they have been members, so is there really a need for categories?

... yeah well of course few would disagree with that : )  but it's sort of traditional with forums, and I think it fits well here (just glad we don't use stuff like Pilgrim and Super Hero : D ).

[#9]

I think it's likely that all Community Veterans don't need to be renamed. There are some that may wish to be and some that ought to be. Some would be sensibly left as they are.

[#10]

I agree with you 100% @Anotherone I for one cannot and should not be described as a veteran based on my stats alone, and if the truth be told I'd rather not be labelled in that manner. I am not here for the stars, thanks or brownie points I am here to help and contribute if and when I can.

[#11]

We can see without labels or ranks if posters are new, long serving, or somewhere in between.

Mods and PN staff obviously should be labelled as such, and I'm in favour of something equivalent, or indeed returning to, the 'Bright Spark' designation.

[#12]

We wanted to keep Bright Sparks (for those that were and those that were peer recognised as should be).

[#13]

---

@Anotherone wrote:

We wanted to keep Bright Sparks (for those that were and those that were peer recognised as should be). 

---

... I had wondered if all the top sets of people had been bundled into a single "rank" because that was the only way that they could be incorporated into a system that ranks by algorithms, or some such [ie could not accommodate "awarded" ranks like Bright Spark, Legend or whatever else].

*however* have been looking at other Lithium set-ups intermittently, during today, and on the BlackBerry forum  https://supportforums.blackberry.com/t5/Community-Feedback-and-Ideas/Forum-Rankings-and-Custom-Avata... (third post down) it says that mods can "bump people up" if they see fit (didn't like to quote the relevant text on here, not sure if allowed). 

... so would it maybe be possible to create certain designations (Bright Spark, etc.) that were within the algorithm/s as something that could be progressed to, but which could *only* be activated by means of mod-intervention (ie not something that anyone could progress to by virtue of number-of-posts, number-of-thanks or whatever the other criteria might be).  I guess much would depend on whether mod-intervention is part of the current algorithm-parameters, but the BlackBerry page does seem to indicate that such a set-up is possible.

edited to try to get the (enclosed) link to work - *no* idea why it wouldn't - can write HTML in my sleep - have changed to just display the link, anyway.

[#14]

I've seen a Newbie with 1 post and a Dabbler with 12  that you can add to the mix from message #6 

[#15]

---

@Anotherone wrote:

I've seen a Newbie with 1 post and a Dabbler with 12  that you can add to the mix from message #6 

---

: )   maybe (if you'd like to) you could make a collective (new) post including all that have been seen so far, to be added to periodically?  You seem to be up to speed on everything that's happening across the Comm Site forum so (probably) you'd be best placed to encounter new variations and collate the list as things progress (?)