The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to geneven For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2009-04-08
, 22:53
|
|
Posts: 5,478 |
Thanked: 5,222 times |
Joined on Jan 2006
@ St. Petersburg, FL
|
#32
|
Forbidding the option of "no change" is an instance of those presently in power controlling the choices of those not in power.
![]() |
2009-04-08
, 22:55
|
|
Posts: 3,096 |
Thanked: 1,525 times |
Joined on Jan 2006
@ Michigan, USA
|
#33
|
Perhaps I should have made it more explicit: 100 posts or 1000, post counts don't tell you much about a user or their experience, so attaching meaningful ranking systems to a meaningless number is pointless.
I don't know, do you?
EVERYONE on this page should be TOP level , with NO higher levels
So to me around 1000 posts would indicate a Senior level.
![]() |
2009-04-09
, 00:17
|
|
Posts: 2,869 |
Thanked: 1,784 times |
Joined on Feb 2007
@ Po' Bo'. PA
|
#34
|
How does the current system not lead to this? We already have member levels, karma, and post counts to whore for. A new member level system wont change that.
The reasoning behind which I still can't fathom.
URLs are generally abbreviated with fullstops. So you're looking for "m.o".
What's the advantage here? More post-count whoring? If new members are abusing avatars, that's something to deal with on a case-by-case basis.
An idea that's been proposed a couple times. I'd like to see it myself, but I'm not sure how high general support is. We may need a plugin for it.
Random is just spam (much like the tag system as it currently stands).
Again, haven't we reviewed this fact previously? Reggie is still in charge of Talk. . . .
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to YoDude For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2009-04-09
, 00:24
|
|
Posts: 5,478 |
Thanked: 5,222 times |
Joined on Jan 2006
@ St. Petersburg, FL
|
#35
|
Yeesh! I don't have the inclination to dissect your posts and regardless of what I have said in the past, you still can't "fathom" my point of view
![]() |
2009-04-09
, 00:26
|
|
Posts: 5,478 |
Thanked: 5,222 times |
Joined on Jan 2006
@ St. Petersburg, FL
|
#36
|
So again like I said, you look at that list of people and tell me that 1000 posts doesn't tell you that they are a Senior member?
![]() |
2009-04-09
, 00:39
|
|
Posts: 2,869 |
Thanked: 1,784 times |
Joined on Feb 2007
@ Po' Bo'. PA
|
#37
|
It seems it really does come back to that whole listening thing.
![]() |
2009-04-09
, 02:07
|
|
Posts: 480 |
Thanked: 378 times |
Joined on Apr 2008
@ Chicago-ish
|
#38
|
![]() |
2009-04-09
, 02:52
|
|
Posts: 1,028 |
Thanked: 578 times |
Joined on Mar 2009
@ Chicago
|
#39
|
You may not be trolling, but you are missing the point.
This is exactly the point. The current system suggests that there's some sort of meaningful seniority implied by the member levels, which there isn't, so the goal is to put together a system that doesn't imply anything. Thus, the codenames.
The Following User Says Thank You to JayOnThaBeat For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2009-04-09
, 04:02
|
|
Posts: 1,605 |
Thanked: 1,601 times |
Joined on Mar 2007
@ Southern California
|
#40
|
Forbidding the option of "no change" is an instance of those presently in power controlling the choices of those not in power.
![]() |
Tags |
bikeshed color, change we can believe in, maemo forum, maemo.org, whoring for harmattan |
|
I would like the lowest status rating, whatever the system.
But I would still prefer to vote "no change". I am not interested in someone's argument that that isn't logical. That would be my choice, not theirs.