I voted for maemo.org style headers, because cryptic release names would be meaningless to many people.

But I don't like the use of stars in the header. Stars are associated with a quality rating, and a member with a low post count would appear as a lowly-rated user (aka troll).
Some other graphics should be used instead of the stars. The Ubuntu forum, e.g., uses coffee beans.

Do you like the Emperor's new clothes?

o Yes! Especially the shirt.
o Yes! Especially the shorts.
o Yes! Especially the flip-flops.

Forgive me if I don't feel invited to offer my opinion here. - This time it's a non-problem and the outcome isn't of much relevance, so I don't feel betrayed because I can't vote. I only hope we will not see more of this kind with issues that really matter.

Why can't you vote?

honestly i can't understand why not make tree levels instead of 8 only to scare new comers who never head gregal mistral and all that stuff.
My suggestions make three levels 1)Newbie for anyone just sign up 2) senior member people who are more older in the forum posted an amount of posts able to help others and posted an amount of useful post as suggested by PB , 3 Developers those who have posted an amount of useful post and with developing skills, to make this easier and well explained in a sticky post above.

The stars in the example GeneralAntilles posted are an example from downloads ranking - i.e. it is showing the rating given by that user to the application in question.

One would imagine that on the forum it would be replaced with useful informaiton like post & thanks count (and maybe their ratio).

I'd think there are better options available than the current 3 solutions but then figured the current situation makes sense. You can have someone who just signed up being 'new user' or 'apprentice' or something and beyond that you are a member (for what that is worth). This happens after a period of time and a number of posts (e.g. 1 month, 50 posts, when both are complied its changed). This way you know who is new and who is not. And that is it. There is no further use. You know the people who are around because you are not new. You can click on their profile to figure out how new they are and such, or read the forums from pastto get impressipn.

Furthermore, one could assign their own characteristics in their title. For example some folks are UNIX experts, other folks are developers (of what?), or Maemo.org council. This could be reflected in their title. Now it is reflected in their signatures; so right now the signatures represent the title giving the user complete control over their title. Also OK, but that leaves the current member levels useless.

I don't think the codenames of Maemo releases should be used because its confusing. They refer to something else. If I am a 'Diablo' while I run Bora what does that make me? Pfff. Maybe nice for some folks to get fond memories of their past Maemo experiences but otherwise not useful. Except for something as subjective as 'fun' or 'humor' but people have no control over that.

Bottomline: signature is for humor, fun, title, and any ******** you can imagine. Tags are not. Titles are not. They are informative and accurate instead.

When the move from iTT to maemo.org was announced, it was said that there would be no change. The move hasn't even happened yet and now there is a poll in which the only question is what kind of change is going to be done to the post headers and "no change" is not even an option...

...apart from the theme. The post header is part of the theme.

And GeneralAntilles said he forgot.

A maemo.org karma score in the post header is content, not theme. Maemo codes as level names are content, not theme. A new sub-forum called "maemo.org" is content, and new stickies replete with references to maemo.org, are content, not theme.

Sorry sir, but the several efforts taken towards the maemoization of itt have been recognized. Do not object that you are judged by what you do rather than what you say.

I so rarely look at it as I consider the content the messages which are posted by the vibrant community here. However, happy to disagree.

Perhaps. But long before the tmo move was thought of, the ITT wiki was being decommissioned in favour of the maemo.org one, and the "maemo.org" forum replaces the previous "[Site] Comments/suggestions".

Are you objecting to the fact that (in your eyes, at least) the promise of "no change (except URL & theme, and adding moderators)" has not been kept (i.e. this is a semantic argument)? Or that the perceived changes outside of that scope are sub-optimal/dangerous/damaging?