Extreme poster

[Jas]

Ditto Lily, Ani & Acey (but then, you knew that Sim).

Go back to:
Lurker (Minimum Posts: 0)
Infrequent Poster (Minimum Posts: 1)
Regular Poster (Minimum Posts: 25)
Frequent Poster (Minimum Posts: 100)
Habitual Poster (Minimum Posts: 250)
Busy Poster (Minimum Posts: 1000)
Extreme Poster (Minimum Posts: 2500)
Addicted Poster (Minimum Posts: 5000)

There was nothing wrong with it. The reputation thing will cover what Lily etc is talking about.

Jas

 

[geoffw]

Ditto Jas

The trouble with a comparative ranking is that a newcomer will find it very hard to get higher. And for someone starting out in a forum, the rise in rank which comes after not too many posts is quite a buzz, and helps to keep people interested.

If people don't get something like that early on, they may feel lass encouraged to continue. That was my point (though not well explained) earlier, about a rating based on daily posts after a qualifying period. That was just a suggestion aimed at making people fell they were making a good contribution early on, rather than having to wait a long time to catch up with people who have been on the board for a long time.

 

[quoll]

I agree with geoffw, I've gone from having a label to being a '-'. I think I liked having the label even though it wasn't a great label.

Another post.
Quoll

 

[Sim]

I've taken it from being an arbitrary rank which implies something that perhaps it shouldn't to being a purely statistical measure. There is no implied meaning in the statistics beyond what individuals may take it to be. They are just numbers, it is not a reward system, it is not a measure of quality. Just statistics.

It is rather meaningless either way - but I think the statistics are more interesting (even if not any more useful).

If it is meaning you yearn for, then spend more time rating individual threads, and wait until we go to vBulletin v3, then we will have a system that means something (although it may still not show what you expect it to).

If you can't wait, then perhaps someone would care to spend more time on the Hall of Fame as started by Mike ? That is a more true measure of contribution - being elevated to the hall of fame.

 

[Jas]

"but I think the statistics are more interesting (even if not any more useful)."

That's becuase you like stats. You have stats on anything and everything...

Put both words and stats in maybe? (thou I still don't like 'top').

Jas