|
Post by valpo04 on Jan 23, 2006 3:04:19 GMT -5
If anyone has wondered what "New Recruit" under your username means, here is the breakdown:
# Posts, Rank 0-24 New Recruit 25-49 Bench Warmer 50-99 Solid Contributer 100-199 Brown All-Star 200-399 Gold All-Star 400-799 Crusader 800 + Golden Crusader
|
|
|
Post by valpotentate on Jan 23, 2006 8:21:48 GMT -5
As if "insider status" wasn't enough of an issue on this board, now we're adding posting counts?
|
|
|
Post by hite on Jan 23, 2006 11:00:17 GMT -5
I think I will stop posting at 24 so I dont have to be one of those! ;D You should make it Redshirt or something . . .
|
|
|
Post by jmill on Jan 23, 2006 15:41:47 GMT -5
What does the "reputation" designation mean on our profile. I have a 1 by mine and just was curious what that means. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by valpo04 on Jan 23, 2006 16:16:19 GMT -5
Your Reputation is the number of "Approve" or "Disapprove" you have. If someone approves of a post, they can click that and it gives you a point. Likewise, disapprove gives you negative points.
|
|
|
Post by valpo04 on Jan 23, 2006 16:18:35 GMT -5
I think I will stop posting at 24 so I dont have to be one of those! ;D You should make it Redshirt or something . . . I changed it to "Bench Warmer"
|
|
|
Post by crusaderfan07 on Jan 23, 2006 16:37:24 GMT -5
I can't believe there is ranking by amounts of posts
|
|
|
Post by valpo04 on Jan 23, 2006 16:46:18 GMT -5
Would you rather not have it? I haven't been on a message board that doesn't have some sort of ranking based on posts. These boards came with generic rankings and allow you to create custom titles. I always looked at board rankings as something to strive for, not something that would create a rift. If people think it will cause problems, then we can get rid of it.
|
|
|
Post by hite on Jan 23, 2006 16:57:40 GMT -5
On a lot of forums it is a way to tell who posts here alot and therefore more often then not a quality poster than someone who just signs up to troll and cause problems. I don't think its really a ranking it just shows how much time you spend thinking about Valpo sports than compared to working!
|
|
|
Post by CMO on Jan 23, 2006 17:11:48 GMT -5
I like the rankings personally....gives it a nice touch
|
|
|
Post by rick on Jan 23, 2006 17:47:37 GMT -5
Would you rather not have it? I haven't been on a message board that doesn't have some sort of ranking based on posts. These boards came with generic rankings and allow you to create custom titles. I always looked at board rankings as something to strive for, not something that would create a rift. If people think it will cause problems, then we can get rid of it. I don't mind the rankings based on the number of posts. But the reputation thing can become a popularity contest and a way to make someone you don't like look bad and therefore is more of a personal judgment. I don't think this should be done. If someone has a problem with someone else, they have the option on this board to face the person man-to-man with private messages. And it's a coward's way of sitting in the peanut gallery and throwing mud without the person being attacked knowing who is doing it; and, the gallery thrower never has to speak up on an issue and have the courage to have his/her own views subject to the scrutiny/logic/arguments of others. I think it should be removed. Of course I'm not one to be outspoken or opinionated and would probably get nothing but approvals.
|
|
TD
Recruit
Posts: 42
|
Post by TD on Jan 23, 2006 20:45:33 GMT -5
And Martin Luther said "Of course I'm not one to be outspoken or opinionated and would probably get nothing but approvals." Or was that Rick?
|
|
|
Post by rlh on Jan 24, 2006 11:01:42 GMT -5
I too am against the Approve/Disapprove section. Seems to be a quagmire that can lead to only bad things...
|
|
|
Post by valpotentate on Jan 25, 2006 10:55:27 GMT -5
I like the reputation addition as long as people use it responsibly. On the other hand, who really cares what the number is one way or another?
|
|