Junior Member title
- Thread starter Sunstone
- Start date
G'day Sunstone,
Since the forum is so new, we are still considering "titles" - there was some discussion a day or two back, but with the push to get the new forum "online", this was one of those things that was set aside.
The "junior" title (by default on the v-bulletin board) signifies someone who has posted less then 10 times. I don't remember the various details, and we had started to discuss more appropriate "titles" .... It is a grading that came as part and parcel of this forum style.
Since you've raised it, and since we can administer these things, do you have some ideas about what "titles" we could use in this forum? And that's not just a question to you, Sunstone, but to anyone else reading this.
Some ideas that were kicked around were tags like newbie, guru, etc. My thoughts are "who needs them" as the very act of "tagging" can give an improper idea of a poster. It could be somewhat misleading to see Rolf or Dale as "junior posters" or "newbies" - conversely, someone just starting out in Property, if they posted asking lots of questions, might be given a "guru" title because they have posted 100 times asking questions. A bit incongruous, don't you think?
So, I tend to agree such posting "titles" should simply be a bit of fun - with titles that match "number of posts" rather than anything signifying a level of competence. In that way, new people won't be misled by titles that may otherwise give a false impression of who the poster is.
What do you think? Suggestions?
Regards,
Since the forum is so new, we are still considering "titles" - there was some discussion a day or two back, but with the push to get the new forum "online", this was one of those things that was set aside.
The "junior" title (by default on the v-bulletin board) signifies someone who has posted less then 10 times. I don't remember the various details, and we had started to discuss more appropriate "titles" .... It is a grading that came as part and parcel of this forum style.
Since you've raised it, and since we can administer these things, do you have some ideas about what "titles" we could use in this forum? And that's not just a question to you, Sunstone, but to anyone else reading this.
Some ideas that were kicked around were tags like newbie, guru, etc. My thoughts are "who needs them" as the very act of "tagging" can give an improper idea of a poster. It could be somewhat misleading to see Rolf or Dale as "junior posters" or "newbies" - conversely, someone just starting out in Property, if they posted asking lots of questions, might be given a "guru" title because they have posted 100 times asking questions. A bit incongruous, don't you think?
So, I tend to agree such posting "titles" should simply be a bit of fun - with titles that match "number of posts" rather than anything signifying a level of competence. In that way, new people won't be misled by titles that may otherwise give a false impression of who the poster is.
What do you think? Suggestions?
Regards,
Les,
Good thought on the benefits of the titles.
Personally I have two trains of thought.
Firstly you could remove them.
If they are removed then it could be perceived to be more "democratic" or equal.
This would not send anyone on an ego trip.
The other way is does it create loyalty to a forum? Can it create some sort of perceived benefit that will be worthwhile for the group?
Personally I think having a fun title according to how many posts have been placed on the forum can be healthy.
I remember the congratulations given to Rolf when he got past 1,000 posts and this was certainly deserved with the great help he has given so many people.
Names ideas.
I'm not the one to be asking for names but a shot in the dark.
????
Little honcho
Medium honcho
Big honcho
Humungous honcho
But I'm always open minded to other names. Maybe it's more of a chat room item?
Cheers,
Sunstone.
Good thought on the benefits of the titles.
Personally I have two trains of thought.
Firstly you could remove them.
If they are removed then it could be perceived to be more "democratic" or equal.
This would not send anyone on an ego trip.
The other way is does it create loyalty to a forum? Can it create some sort of perceived benefit that will be worthwhile for the group?
Personally I think having a fun title according to how many posts have been placed on the forum can be healthy.
I remember the congratulations given to Rolf when he got past 1,000 posts and this was certainly deserved with the great help he has given so many people.
Names ideas.
I'm not the one to be asking for names but a shot in the dark.
????
Little honcho
Medium honcho
Big honcho
Humungous honcho
But I'm always open minded to other names. Maybe it's more of a chat room item?
Cheers,
Sunstone.
Sim
Administrator
Actually the current system (slightly modified from the default) is:
Junior Member (Minimum Posts: 0)
Member (Minimum Posts: 30)
Senior Member (Minimum Posts: 100)
Addicted Member
(Minimum Posts: 250)I do intend to change this at some stage.
The major benefit of titles - other than a bit of fun - is so that you can instantly identify how much someone has "contributed" to the community - the more times they have posted the more they are deemed to have contributed.
As Les said, there is nothing implied in the way of skill or knowledge in investing or otherwise. It is merely a "contribution" measure.
Which is why we started a new forum and had everyone's counts reset to zero - Rolf was getting a big head ! (kidding !!!
)When we were playing with the new software in testing, I was using a scheme that started with "Lurker" meaning someone who hangs around the forum, but never posts ! I reconsidered just before we went live, since that did tend to give negaitve connotations. Similarly "newbie" and "hasn't posted a darn thing" were also declared unsuitable.
My current train of thought is to replace the text with some sort of graphic representation - something like a star rating identifying someone's contribution level. eg...
no stars = minimum 0 posts
1 star = minimum 25 posts
2 star = minimum 50 posts
3 star = minimum 100 posts
4 star = minimum 250 posts
5 star = minimum 500 posts
or something like that. The benefits of this is that there is nothing implied by the words we use - we avoid the problems of word like "guru" and "expert", and we can simply say "this person is a 3 star contributor to the forum community".
Sim,
Thanks for the additional feedback.
The stars method sounds good and fair.
On the lurker side I was guilty of that. A symptom of bookmarking the site when you were already in guest mode. Takes something like changing the site to get a positive change.
Recommend all "lurkers" out there to look at getting more active and participating in the chat and posting some messages. Use the new site as the excuse you were looking for. You definitely create more positive energy which benefits not only the group but yourself as well.
Cheers,
Sunstone.
Thanks for the additional feedback.
The stars method sounds good and fair.
On the lurker side I was guilty of that. A symptom of bookmarking the site when you were already in guest mode. Takes something like changing the site to get a positive change.
Recommend all "lurkers" out there to look at getting more active and participating in the chat and posting some messages. Use the new site as the excuse you were looking for. You definitely create more positive energy which benefits not only the group but yourself as well.
Cheers,
Sunstone.
Another thought is to have some sort of recognition given to people who are recognised as having achieved a certain level of expertise.
On stockcentral ( sorry to keep bringing that site up sim ) they had one level for new posters and once you had posted a certain number of posts you became a "normal member ".
People who were recognised as acheiving a high level of knowledge were "Senior Members" . An initial list of senior members was "appointed" by the forum owner and subsequent senior members were appointed by a vote of existing members.
Depends on whther people want any system , a system that recognises involvement/ activity or knowledge.
see change
On stockcentral ( sorry to keep bringing that site up sim ) they had one level for new posters and once you had posted a certain number of posts you became a "normal member ".
People who were recognised as acheiving a high level of knowledge were "Senior Members" . An initial list of senior members was "appointed" by the forum owner and subsequent senior members were appointed by a vote of existing members.
Depends on whther people want any system , a system that recognises involvement/ activity or knowledge.
see change
Sim
Administrator
No, that's a good suggestion see change... if there are good sites out there that seem to have a good system, it's worth investigating how they do it and seeing if you can incorporate some of their ideas into our own system.
From your description it seems like StockCentral do something similar to what the Motley Fool forums do - and I think it's a good idea. Have some basic mechanism based on number of messages posted, and then have "higher" levels which are awarded based on some type of merit system - which may be voted by the community or the community leaders.
From your description it seems like StockCentral do something similar to what the Motley Fool forums do - and I think it's a good idea. Have some basic mechanism based on number of messages posted, and then have "higher" levels which are awarded based on some type of merit system - which may be voted by the community or the community leaders.
is that what it is
a junior member
a junior member
sounds like a points system from Foumula 1 or V8 racing
I must put my hand up for being a so called 'lurker'. I am a newbie as you say and I enjoy reading most of the stuff in the forum to gain the experience factor. Reading books is also a good method but they seldom produce real life experiences.
I rarely posted on the old forum as I felt intimidated by the experienced people reading the post. I also was put off by the flame grilling that some newbie posters received by asking a dumb question. (e.g. Has anyone ever heard of Henry Kaye? etc) I feel that the grilling these people got was uncalled for. A simple message back to them would have be sufficient, indicating that the subject was available through the search method. You need to keep in mind that some people are computer illiterate and new to the forum scene. I am not condeming or pointing the finger at people for this, but I feel a tack hammer was a more approriate tool than a 25lb sledge hammer.
As to the tags question, I feel that the star system sounds fair to indicate involvement. Another thought is that just plain 'member', 'Administrator' and 'Moderator' would also be appropriate. 'Junior Member' makes me feel like I am under 18 again.
Cheers
Grant
'Education is what you get by reading the fine print.
Experience is what you get when you don't.'
I rarely posted on the old forum as I felt intimidated by the experienced people reading the post. I also was put off by the flame grilling that some newbie posters received by asking a dumb question. (e.g. Has anyone ever heard of Henry Kaye? etc) I feel that the grilling these people got was uncalled for. A simple message back to them would have be sufficient, indicating that the subject was available through the search method. You need to keep in mind that some people are computer illiterate and new to the forum scene. I am not condeming or pointing the finger at people for this, but I feel a tack hammer was a more approriate tool than a 25lb sledge hammer.
As to the tags question, I feel that the star system sounds fair to indicate involvement. Another thought is that just plain 'member', 'Administrator' and 'Moderator' would also be appropriate. 'Junior Member' makes me feel like I am under 18 again.
Cheers
Grant
'Education is what you get by reading the fine print.
Experience is what you get when you don't.'
oh well how about we have a point system like F1 SIM
I like the idea of readers being able to rate the quality of others posts. Judging a person by the by the number of times they have posted just means that the loudest people have the most credibility. There are plenty of people who post just for the sake of it, without really contributing to the knowledge base. Judge people on what they say, not how often they open their mouths.
PT_Bear
PT_Bear
Well said PT.
Your words are evidenced by the preceeding post to yours.
I think that the people who have been inducted into the hall of fame should be recognised as such in their posts.
But then I also like the star system to applaud frequent posters.
I think the plethora of silly posts will settle down shortly, it is just the novelty of it all.
asy
Your words are evidenced by the preceeding post to yours.
I think that the people who have been inducted into the hall of fame should be recognised as such in their posts.
But then I also like the star system to applaud frequent posters.
I think the plethora of silly posts will settle down shortly, it is just the novelty of it all.
asy
Sim
Administrator
Yup... right on asy - recognition for contribution - people who don't post are not contributing ! Even people who post questions are contributing.
Then also, recognition for people who have shared their knowledge and experience as well.
And as for silly posts... they belong in the Coffee Lounge and we just can't get enough of them in there !
Then also, recognition for people who have shared their knowledge and experience as well.
And as for silly posts... they belong in the Coffee Lounge and we just can't get enough of them in there !
"classics" thread?
I post on another forum where users can re-post anything that is a really super-duper post to a "classics" thread.
Only the best/most informative posts get "classicked".
It's a great starting place for newbies looking to get the "feel" of the information and people on the forum.
The classics thread has become inspirational.. maybe 3 or 4 posts per week get "classicked" on the other board I frequent.
(This is a HUGE board, there are currently over 54,000 posts, and threads get deleted after 2000 posts to keep the space in check!)
How is the "Hall of fame" going to work?
Cheers
Cornflower
I post on another forum where users can re-post anything that is a really super-duper post to a "classics" thread.
Only the best/most informative posts get "classicked".
It's a great starting place for newbies looking to get the "feel" of the information and people on the forum.
The classics thread has become inspirational.. maybe 3 or 4 posts per week get "classicked" on the other board I frequent.
(This is a HUGE board, there are currently over 54,000 posts, and threads get deleted after 2000 posts to keep the space in check!)
How is the "Hall of fame" going to work?
Cheers
Cornflower
I know I am a bit late to this thread (okay real late and everyone has already gone home)
Though I would just like to say that I agree with the idea of not having a post count as I have only seen this encourage a lot of needless posts when people first start out, just so that they can get their post count up. (on most other boards at least anyway)
A better system would be a way to rate individual posts and thereby affect each users rating as a contributor that way.
For example: there is a a "rate this thread" link at the bottom of the page. If that was available on each post then you could choose which indiviual post you thought really contributed to the community and to what degree. This would work just as well for questions or answers so even new users could be considered valued community members.
More votes by different users would give a user a higher rating and provide positive feedback to the poster that they are considered a valued member and their contributions worthwile.
This would also help to make the community develop in a way that the community sees beneficial as only posters who provide the type of posts that everyone likes would be rated highly and this would encourage the type of posts that the community wants.
Sorry for the long rant - just wanted to put in my 2c
Though I would just like to say that I agree with the idea of not having a post count as I have only seen this encourage a lot of needless posts when people first start out, just so that they can get their post count up. (on most other boards at least anyway)
A better system would be a way to rate individual posts and thereby affect each users rating as a contributor that way.
For example: there is a a "rate this thread" link at the bottom of the page. If that was available on each post then you could choose which indiviual post you thought really contributed to the community and to what degree. This would work just as well for questions or answers so even new users could be considered valued community members.
More votes by different users would give a user a higher rating and provide positive feedback to the poster that they are considered a valued member and their contributions worthwile.
This would also help to make the community develop in a way that the community sees beneficial as only posters who provide the type of posts that everyone likes would be rated highly and this would encourage the type of posts that the community wants.
Sorry for the long rant - just wanted to put in my 2c
Adam,
I'm on a board where the post counts contribute to ratings as well.
But the post count of contributors does not really contribute to their rating.
A person may have lots of posts. And have a title which sounds slightly impressive.
But, on that forum, the only title which really carries value is the "MVP"status. For people who have been rated by moderators as having made a valuable contribution- rather than just contributed a lot of posts.
I'm in the second category
I believe Sim had a similar idea in mind.
I'm on a board where the post counts contribute to ratings as well.
But the post count of contributors does not really contribute to their rating.
A person may have lots of posts. And have a title which sounds slightly impressive.
But, on that forum, the only title which really carries value is the "MVP"status. For people who have been rated by moderators as having made a valuable contribution- rather than just contributed a lot of posts.
I'm in the second category
I believe Sim had a similar idea in mind.
