New status

[allenb1963]

Plain and simple...senior member doesn't mean a thing anymore. The reason I say this is because it is related ONLY to post count which means any post whore can make senior status in no time flat. I propose a new status of "valued contributor" for members with at least 2 years ACTIVE membership in the community.

I'm posting this because to be honest, I don't feel that I deserve the status that I have, and I KNOW that there are others out there who certainly don't deserve to be counted in the upper echelon of the community's membership because they mostly post in cosmos or GCC. We need something to set the REAL contributors apart from the "kiddie-come-latelys".

[el-half]

I think that's a good idea, but being here for a long time and having a high post count still doesn't mean you're not only posting useless things. I agree with that, there are various senior members that aren't of any special value.

[pwaring]

Having been a member for more than two years myself, I suppose I'm a little biased. ;)

However, I think it'd be good to base ranks on more than just posts and take into account how long a member has been here as well. It's not too difficult to get to 1000 posts fairly quickly if you post 5 or more things a day (as some members seem to).

[Negative]

It indeed is true that senior member doesn't mean a thing anymore. Some people have been here for a couple of months and are already seniors. Others have been here for over two years, have contributed a lot of quality but no quantity, and still are juniors.

The problem with member-status is and always will be the objectiveness. Post-count is objective. Date joined is objective. AntiPoints are a little less objective... Members' opinions on who is a real contributor are far from objective...
The only possibility I see here is indeed basing member-status on date joined in stead of post-count. But then again, that doesn't say anything about your contributions.

There is another problem... once you set the rules for member-status, you'll have to live up to them. Back when everything was introduced (member-status, antipoints), no one could ever think they'd reach 1,000 posts, or 1,000 antipoints. My point: you can raise the number of posts required to gain a new member-status, or the number of antipoints, but basically that doesn't change a thing.
We could set up a system where "valued contributors" have to have 1,000 antipoints, 1,000 posts, and a 2-year membership, but in a couple of months everybody will meet those requirements.

[nebulus200]

I would on the surface agree that the title 'Senior Member' has lost alot of meaning and agree that the status should not be based soley on post count; however, I would have to disagree some on the requirement for two years...I have only been here a little over a year, but I feel I have made some very good contributions to AO over that time, and to me the time restraint denigrates those contributions...

Maybe there is some happy medium? 1000 posts, 1000 AP's, minimum year? Dunno...

/nebulus

EDIT: I do remember a discussion a long time ago about gold dots, blue dots, etc...maybe adding more teirs to the membership and boosting the Senior Member requirements way up, but giving something else in the middle would be a possible solution?

[fl34bit3]

Its a good idea. Longevity at the site as a rank would definitly seem to do the term "senior" good. But as you have stated there could be people that have been here forever and only posted once or twice so they would be seniors so that would mean antionline senior would mean absolutely nothing again. The only way to truly distinguish the senior from the post whore or whatever else you want to call them would be constant monitoring and even that could turn bias and turn into another florida election scandal.

PeacE
-BoB

[nihil]

Hi

Plain and simple...senior member doesn't mean a thing anymore. The reason I say this is because it is related ONLY to post count which means any post whore can make senior status in no time flat.

I would go further and say that it never had any great significance, being purely based on post count?

I think that one of the significant points that you make is that all the forums rank equal. Might it not be more sensible to exclude GCC, Ooops a Bug, Cosmos and Tech Humour. The same might be said for antipoints from those areas?

Just having your name on the register for a period of time isn't a solution either, as it takes no account of quality and quantity of contribution? It is just another arbitrary distinction, with all the attendant flaws.

At present, the only measure of "quality" we have are antipoints, but that system has it's weaknesses, as a well established member can give 40-50 at a time, whether they like it or not.

I have no idea what the "right" solution is, but I do not see how another level will resolve it. I would have thought that antipoints should be factored in somewhere, provided we are mature enough not to use them as weapons in flame wars?

Just a few thoughts...............it is a difficult problem, and no system will be perfect.

Cheers

[MemorY]

I think it should be based on Antipoints and that we more powerfull members should take AP assigment more seriously and only assign point to posts that have real value and NOT to someone who compliments you. I ain't saying i didn't give out a couple of assigments to meaningless posts but if the new rule applies we should be giving greenies to only contributing members, and with that it will be harder to get senior status and members will have to contribute more to get that status. just my idea.

[skiddieleet]

I don't know if anyone said this or not because I just skimmed over the thread. I don't think we need titles to say who is a senior member or who contributes the most. When you have been here long enough you get to know who is experienced, who you can trust and the people that know what they are talking about. You sort of develop your own list of the people you consider senior members regardless of whether their title is newbie or senior. I could elaborate more, but I think that pretty much sums it up, you know who you respect regardless of their title. Just my opinion.

[HTRegz]

I don't think it should be a time based thing. Not with a title such as "valued contributor"... I would take great offense to that. I agree that something has to be done about the number of people who reach senior status... but those of us, myself included, who haven't been here that long but contribute would be pushed into a "lower rank" if you will. I take great pride in the fact that the majority of my posts are helping people out or posting useful information. To say hey this person has been here for 2 years they must be a valued contributor is not fair at all. A lot of people who have been here for long periods of time are people that bitch frequently and have many needless posts. Yes there are a lot of new posts whores, but there are some old-timers who would fall into this category as well..

[Ennis]

Actually a new status system would be interesting. Lets face it, how long did it take to reach a 1,000 posts back at AO say two years ago. Now Ive seen people join and storm up posts very very quickly.

But I just want to point one thing out, do you remember when Antipoints were introduced, people all of sudden started helping people out a lot more and when the turorials forum came out a lot of people posted some damn good stuff in order to gain points including myself, I wanted to have lots of green dots.

There is no real incentive these days, I'll be honest I used to write tutorials a lot to get antipoints, as well as helping people there was that selfish going online and looking to see if anybody gave up AP's. I guess now most people would see me as a post whore and wouldnt be aware that Ive written many tutorials at all!

I guess what I am saying is that we should maybe give some incentive to work a little harder here at AO.

Anyway took a day of college so I'm off to check out all the threads. ;)

[Schrodinger]

I think h3r3tic has an important point - that those who are worthy of respect generally get that by their contributions, not by their title. With the antipoints system, those who simply come to post drivel ( as with one recent example in cosmos ) will not end up making the grade, because there will be those who will neg them until they are banned. So making it to senior level ( or even addict level ) indicates not that they have made great contributions, but that they have not wound up too many people. Those with great lines of green dots are either aliens or those who have received acknowledgment from the other members of the AO community. I tend to look as the green dots rather than the title.

As to ignoring posts in GCC, Humour, Cosmos etc. I understand why this is suggested, but I think these areas are important parts of the community on the boards, and so posting ( sensibly ) here should count. I think we need to acknowledge those who have sontributed to AO wider than just the security discussions, important ( central no less ) as they are to the boards. I would consider it strange for someone to get the senior status while never having posted on the serious boards, but I know there are those who contribute a lot to the community on the other boards.

Including antipoints as part of the equation would be a good idea, not because it is then perfect, but it would tend to rule out those who ONLY post in the non-security related forums.

[steve.milner]

Okay, I can't be on strike any longer - I have to add comment to this debate.

Firstly I consider I add value to this board, but I haven't been around very long.

I also don't consider I've been a post whore!

Having recently made addict status I enjoy the addicts forum a lot and would be sorry if my status was based on time alone - I would probably loose addicts.

Status based on time alone has its own problems. For example some of those people who post 1 or 2 posts, back in 2001 could be classed as seniors if they returned. I'd be suprised if that's what everyone wanted. Negative's point about objectivity is valid.

I feel that I've done the right thing here. Ask questions if I didn't know - Try to understand and fit in with the culture - Give advice and suggestions to those if I had knowledge.

I've had some good people encourage me to continue to be a member of this community & help me out during my time and I will name a few:

Mark Boyle
Negative
Ms Mittens
Phis

But thank you to everyone else - Even those I've disagreed with, since it is important to have your own views challenged on a regular basis.

I have a number of suggestions for member status.

1 Leave them as they are - I think they work okay, post whores aside
2 Leave them as they are, but invent a new category - 'Valued Senior Member' that required a proposer & a number of others to approve (3 or 4) To give the staus gravitas then how about proposer requires > 1000 AP, others to approve > 750APs?
3 Invent new catagories based on the number of posts you have made that have received +APs - Gets rid of post whores
4 Scrap the status altogether

Steve

[Schrodinger]

steve - I like you option #2. As a sort of honorary role, it would not alter the current levels as such ( so avoid the issues you raised ), but it would make it clear who was well regarded by others on the site.

[pwaring]

The honorary role sounds good to me, although the problem I see is how you actually get people to second the proposal. Not allowing people with less than say 750APs means that new members don't really get a say in who has the title, which isn't really a fair way to go about it (although admittedly they might not know who the most respected members are if they've only been around for a short time themselves). I also think it would lead to an elitist section of AO (not that this doesn't happen anyway) whereby all the senior members with lots of APs would propose/second each other, unless you made it that you couldn't second someone who had proposed you or something along those lines.

I've been here a while, have a reasonable number of posts (works out as just under 1 per day I think) and antipoints, but I doubt I'd be a 'valued senior member'. Other people who haven't been here as long might be more fitting of such a title.

[Shrekkie]

A new status system would be nice. I have to agree senior doesn't mean anything anymore, I even wouldn't mind giving back my seniorbelt.
We could set up a system where "valued contributors" have to have 1,000 antipoints, 1,000 posts, and a 2-year membership, but in a couple of months everybody will meet those requirements.

Neg, I don't think either one of them would work, all for its own reasons.

I would suggest a select group , to start of existing out Neg, MsM, Ennis, Souleman, Terr, JP and a few other could make a new belt, new group.

I know those people are always objective and always will be, so , they could accept new groupmembers, looking at their postcount but also evaluate if they would have been valuable enough.

Maybe lame, but it would give very decent respect, and maybe some people would see nor postcount nor antipoints would be important to get respect. Heck even those oldtimers which are newbie or Jr. could be accepted and get that belt.

It would IMO stimulate lots of people to really help instead of bitch , rtfm-ing, negging ....

well you got the point.

Right ? :p

**edit*** damn i just saw Steve.Milner gave a similar proposal, lol

[cheyenne1212]

I would suggest though adding a AP limit to the Addicts forum. Say you have to have at least 500 instead of 750 positive Antipoints to have access to the forum. Most people have this by the time they reach addict status, and this will help to keep the post whores from gaining acces to the forum by posting BS.

For example, theres one person who has posted mainly in Tech Humor and GCC, but has yet to contribute to the site. He doesn't even have a green dot yet and is already at 175 posts. Another mont and he'll be an addict and have access to that forum, but doesn't deserve the access.

But the thing that would allow the mods to invite people to the forum would work for me to.

[allenb1963]

Originally posted here (http://www.AntiOnline.com/showthread.php?threadid=#post) by MemorY
I think it should be based on Antipoints and that we more powerfull members should take AP assigment more seriously and only assign point to posts that have real value and NOT to someone who compliments you.

Memory, that mentality pretty well sums up why the AP system CAN'T be used. You're no more deserving of senior status than myself...especially when we consider that you've been here approx. one-third as long as me and you're already almost a hundred posts past me....and people call ME a POST WHORE...sheesh. "Powerful members"....are you really JRoc/JCHostingAdmin/Common_Exploit in yet another incarnation?? Thats about as shallow a statement as I've EVER seen on these boards.

Let's look at this logically....this status should be for members who make a REAL contribution to SECURITY. If more than 20 or 25 percent of your posts are in the GCC, Tech Humor or Cosmos forums you don't qualify...PERIOD. Admittedly that percentage may appear high, but the technically proficient (and I don't mean me) deserve some space to get political, witty or chatty if they so choose...after all, they have contributed to SECURITY/TECHNICAL aspect of the site 75 to 80 percent of the time.

BTW Mem...who the hell greened you for saying that this should be a popularity contest....one of your alter egos??

[VictorKaum]

Negative, about the constantly changing site... I think I wrote it somewhere here, referring to your AO microcosmos site, so I basicly agree with the whole concept of this 'moving' society. However this does not necesarily mean that status can't be 'moving' either. It's probably not realy fair to take away a status that was previously achieved, but there can be new a status.
So, in fact the old system can be easily renewed, and like Ennis said give an incentive to people.

Problem is that those are always objective rule sets, while people tend to like subjective treatements. SO for instance some refer to members who still have junior, but should have senior... I don't know about that, it takes a long time and effort to make 1000 or 2000 posts. at least if you don't post to much bullshit in one liners.

Back in 2001 you where the power user if you had 3 green dots and more than 300 posts or something similar. Lately I have seen members join gain a lot of post fast, but also go to 11 green dots in no time. This is very logic cause the whole antipoint system constantly decreases in value. I have posted this before too, there's a strong inflation in antipoints, cause they generate themself. If a national bank keeps printing money, then all things in the stores will be a lot more expensive. The only way to structural prevent antipoint inflation is to make that whenever you give out antipoints they also are credited from your account. So giving or recieving antipoints realy becomes sharing. Off course then you need control over the amount of antipoints you give away. This however raises a lot other questions, for instance some one with a lot of points will not give them away in order to keep that status. So you need something to keep the sharing alive, for instance for every move of antipoints you get 1 point, but you cannot make a move for less than 1, this means that you always recieve or loose more than you can gain by doing a move. hmmm... it seems to complex... argh don't mind it.

A new status? why not?

[valhallen]

This has been said many times before but I think it is relevant here as well - many people have mentioned how easy it is to gain ap's (as well as post count) but the ap system was introduced to reward those people who had contributed ell to the community - or had just been an ass to punish them.

But alot of aps are being given out in GCC, Tech humour etc
yes ok some of these posts may deserve it but 90% will not - i know i have gained alot from my posts in there as well - I dont think there are very many people who have not!

now we cannot remove the ap system from these forums for the simple reason that it would allow lamers to over-run those boards with no fear of getting neg'd - but what about a kind of middle ground? we have a report this thread button - why not a nominate this thread?

instead of being able to assign aps to a thread in one of the non computer related forums you could hit the nominate button and the request would go to a mod or something - they can view the thread and decide if
a) it does make a valuable contribution to the community
b) deserves negs

if they feel it does then a default amount can be given with some msg like "due to requests fro the community this post has been awarded pos/neg aps"

once a post has been found to meet the requirements to be given pos/neg then no-one else can request that it recive anymore - to stop the mod's inboxes beeing filled with requests

v_Ln