Rating Posting Members

[TomNPat]

Just read the members list. 

It seems odd to me to see so many excellect resource people listed as 'NEWBIES'.  When Gumpy, Fast Fred, Jack Conrad, George Meyers and a whole lot of my other heroes are listed as 'Newbies', then something really SUCKS!

Evaluating based on the number of posts rather than their readership is a real stupid way of evaluating a person's posting history.  Frankly, I see no way to do any evaluation at this point. 

If you want to reward jabber jaws who continually post with nothing to say, then I guess this system is valid.  One hundred doses of BS does mean something.  But after reading the MAK board for over 7 years, it seems that some people are being short changed.

We've lost many excellent sources over the years and I don't want to see any more fall by the wayside.  So remove the 'Newbie', 'Jrmember', etc., and the stars system.  If you read the posts, it is obvious that some people just post to get numbers.  They're the ones that I skip over quickly when reading posts. 

Calling my heroes 'Newbies' may offend them.  Calling Mallie Lennon a 'Newbie' when I avidly read every post he makes is a dis-service to him and your readers. 

If you want to chase off the real knowledgeable people, continue to give them meaningless ratings.  Then we'll have a board full of johnny come lately's that venture opinions to every request for fact! 

I, however, will limit my posts because I am saving myself for the important ones, the same as I did with my virginity!!!!!!!!!!!

TomNPat

[gumpy]

While I'm flattered by the compliment, I hardly qualify as a hero! The boards use of a star system or "Newbie" designation is nothing that I (or the others you mentioned) are going to even give a second thought. I think everyone understands it's just an indication of the quantity of posts that a member has made, and realize that it has no relevance on the quality or said posts. After a period of time, new members learn the names of those they wish to read, and those they wish to avoid. It's the learning curve we all have to go through.

The only other thing I could think of would be a rating system similar to Ebay where members are allowed to post feedback on other members. Can you imagine how that would turn out on these boards? 

[Nick Badame Refrig/ACC]

Tom & Pat,

At this time and until April 15th 2006, This board is in a learning stage!

Myself, and many others were invited by Phil, to work the bugs out!!

and we are glad to help. I personally don't care if Phil resets the stats after 4/15

I just feel mabe you are judging too soon.

Nick-

Just read the members list.

It seems odd to me to see so many excellect resource people listed as 'NEWBIES'. When Gumpy, Fast Fred, Jack Conrad, George Meyers and a whole lot of my other heroes are listed as 'Newbies', then something really SUCKS!

Evaluating based on the number of posts rather than their readership is a real stupid way of evaluating a person's posting history. Frankly, I see no way to do any evaluation at this point.

If you want to reward jabber jaws who continually post with nothing to say, then I guess this system is valid. One hundred doses of BS does mean something. But after reading the MAK board for over 7 years, it seems that some people are being short changed.

We've lost many excellent sources over the years and I don't want to see any more fall by the wayside. So remove the 'Newbie', 'Jrmember', etc., and the stars system. If you read the posts, it is obvious that some people just post to get numbers. They're the ones that I skip over quickly when reading posts.

Calling my heroes 'Newbies' may offend them. Calling Mallie Lennon a 'Newbie' when I avidly read every post he makes is a dis-service to him and your readers.

If you want to chase off the real knowledgeable people, continue to give them meaningless ratings. Then we'll have a board full of johnny come lately's that venture opinions to every request for fact!

I, however, will limit my posts because I am saving myself for the important ones, the same as I did with my virginity!!!!!!!!!!!

TomNPat

[orogle]

I belong to another forum using this same software.

No one takes the amount of posts as an indication of the quality of the person.  There is a rating system which also does not mean much of anything............  after about ten posts I believe you will be able to give a person a plus or a minus.  For instance I have over 1000 posts and a rating of 400 maybe........  ( it's just not important enough to even keep track of)

The thng is:  the post count means nothing....... at all
                   the ratings mean nothing.............. at all

people will know who makes quality post and who to turn to with a problem.

It all just kinda works itself out

ON THE OTHER HAND.............

I have elite status which is above most on the other board.......... and it is possible to have people with different titles.

also possibly to have jr moderators, senior moderators, global moderators,  staff.......

the old timers could easily be designated with whatever name that was chosen
that name would go above " newbie "

.. but if I am right the newbie status will stay till the required number of post to move to the next level.   way it is probably set up is........ newbie, jr member, full member


orogle

[JackConrad]

As one of those you mentioned, I am not concerned with how I am rated. It will probably take me awhile to move beyond "newbie" status because I post mostly from a "been there-done that" mode rather than what I read in a book or what someone once said, but that is OK with me.  Jack

[Ross]

Evaluating based on the number of posts rather than their readership is a real stupid way of evaluating a person's posting history.  Frankly, I see no way to do any evaluation at this point. 

If you want to reward jabber jaws who continually post with nothing to say, then I guess this system is valid.  One hundred doses of BS does mean something.  But after reading the MAK board for over 7 years, it seems that some people are being short changed.

I'd get rid of the title all together.  I've seen on the extreme sports boards that I read where 10-20 year vererans of a sport are titled as newbie just because they do not choose to spend thier lives on the internet...Then you get some 15 year old kid who learned everything he knows from magazines and the internet labeled an expert just becasue he posts dribble 100 times a day.  Unfortunately, software can't label a person objectively based on real world knowledge, so the best thing to do is not label people at all, but instead let thier posts speak for them. 

Ross