AFF Posting Levels.

[admin]

To be honest, forum member posting levels are just window dressing to me. I can't see the point of having them at all.

In any case, AFF is owned by admin so its not a democracy. So holding a poll is about as meaningful as the polls on Sky News... "Press Red if you think Brittany Spears is a good mother" etc etc. It's just not up to us.

Sorry, not meaning to be critical Bill. It's just how it is.

AFF might not be a democracy but I certainly value your collective input!

For the record: straitman approached me before Christmas with his suggestion. I thought it was a good idea, but suggested that we gauge our member's input and that he put up a poll. If there is a clear mandate for change, it will be made. Obviously, its impossible to please everyone (especially with the wording and scope of the categories) so ultimately an "execuctive decision" will need to be made by someone - but I truly hope the the process is as open and transparent as possible.

I presume that the forum is actually hosted with an ASP that hosts many other forums - this may make it more difficult to make such changes to the forum software. If other hosted forums are not requesting similar modifications to the rating system - that hosting company would probably not be inclined to modify their software because just one forum requests it.

Would Admin or the Moderators be able to explain what is possible within the current software?

The AFF Discussion Board uses the leading industry standard vBulletin forum software and is hosted on a dedicated server in Sydney. We therefore do have quite a few options available, which come standard with the package. If you are interested take a look at the vBulletin website.

 

[simongr]

I definitely dislike the rep system. I am a mod on another board where rep became a pat on the back for one's friends and negative rep was a cause of much hand wringing and tears.

I have no opinion either way on the levels but if they are there they should maybe reflect the levels of posts on the forum. Maybe stratify the number of posts that people have and makes the levels relative to that?

 

[drron]

I agree that the current levels are set too low.Using the post count is obviously the simplest way of making the change.I do not agree with assessing a posts worth as we are obviously all different in our views and who decides which posts are worthwhile and which frivolous?Besides the harmless banter that goes on from time to time is one way of keeping people interested in the site and not bemoaning the fact that this is the 533rd time the question is asked.

 

[oz_mark]

I agree that a reputation meter does not really achieve anything.

It is my experience as well that the rep meter while a good idea, does not always work out well.

As QF009 mentioned this is a community and all posts should count. Just because some people choose to stick to particular discussions only does not lessen the value of the playground.

The issue with the playground is that it is really where the non FF type discussins take place. So while it has a purpose as a social lubricant, the worth of the posts in there, relative to the other areas, is questionable. I woul, for examle, suggest that if someone were searching for something FF related, the relevant threads to their search would not likely be in the playground. I only suggested it as a fairly straightforward was of excluding a set of posts. (I think FT had this debate with Omni before)

 

[straitman]

oz_mark,

I think FT had this debate with Omni before

Personally, I'd have to rate 'The Playground' a long way ahead of 'Omni'.

 

[pauly7]

It is my experience as well that the rep meter while a good idea, does not al work out well.

100% agree, even when you have the most impartial, consistant and approachable moderators governing that sort of system, it seems to always end up in an absolute mess - I have seen the same thing destroy another forum.

The majority of the moderators here are really really great, but I wouldn't be comfortable with Admin delegating that kind of responsibility...mostly because certain moderator(s) have very strong opinions about certain things and post quite negatively at opposing chains of thought or even naive questions from newbies... Doesn't bode well for that sort of system, especially with posts here in their inherent nature can be extremely subjective (e.g. commenting on airline service from personal experience).

I'm with Yada Yada, I couldn't care less about the actual posting levels . Unless Admin plans to give away QF gift vouchers to high posters (jokes).

 

[Mal]

I'm happy to see the post counts for the levels change to whatever is felt necessary. I don't feel though that the titles should become w@nky titles.

People who regularly read this forum have their own opinions on posters. Titles don't help to change a person's opinion of another's knowledge, helpfulness, and travel smarts (or lack of any of those). New posters may give more credence to a high posting member, but that's not always wise and they should evaluate any piece of advice separate to whatever rank someone has.

We've been through the battle of ranking individual posts/posters before. Let's not go down that path again

Re not counting posts in the Playground, or possibly excluding searches showing results from the Playground (without some tickbox or something) - that actually may have merit, but that's another can of worms I'd prefer not to open.

 

[Keith009]

I don't feel though that the titles should become w@nky titles.

Agree! I think the current titles are fine. Though maybe create a new one for those who take posting freakery to a whole new level?

 

[codash1099]

I strongly agree with those who say (or imply) that any form of count is next to meaningless, no matter what the levels and titles are.

And I don't see a practical way of judging members on the "value" of their postings - who would judge and on what basis? Date of joining is as good a guide as any and that already exists. If we must, let's just record number of posts with no descriptor.

On the other hand, a real contributor to improvement would be a spell checker. At least that might reduce the amount of teeth grinding that I do :mrgreen:

 

[NYCguy]

I think making a big deal of the number of posts a member makes can be deceptive. My opinion on a matter at another popular FF board was roundly disparaged because the number of contributions I made to the board put me in the "hardly ever post" category, despite the fact that I rack up an absolute sh*tload more BIS miles than the "Evangelist" who accused me of not knowing what I was talking about. (He can't spell, either!)

How about just sticking with "member since..." in-lieu of the actual number of posts?

 

[Reggie]

How about just sticking with "member since..." in-lieu of the actual number of posts?

What would you know NYCguy?



Sorry couldn't resist

Anyway, my opinion FWIW, is pretty much as per NYCguy, I did register on the other forum when I was bored and had time, however haven't been back there in months. If Straitman, admin and co. wish to change the labels, so be it. AFF members know who to ignore and who not to. Newbies can be quickly corrected, and lurkers need to work it for themselves, thats the risk they take. I have learnt a lot from this forum, and saved myself lots of heartache. I also hope I have been able to add something constructive, as well as some humour.

 

[rwatts]

How about just sticking with "member since..." in-lieu of the actual number of posts?

I know I have an extremely low posting count considering the amount of time I've been registered here. I've been too busy learning from others and only post if I think I can really offer useful information.

It didnt take very long at all to learn which posters were the most frequent and which posters to take notice of (and they dont always coincide).

Neither the post count or the join date are essential in my opinion but do sometimes help to put a post in context. Titles for posting levels are unnecessary at all however.

Richard.

 

[littl_flier]

I do think we need a change but I'm not sure if I agree with the levels suggested.

I'm not a fan of rating the posts either. Every member of this forum contributes in their own unique and special way. This can be in the form of useful FF advice, airfare knowledge, class of service information, trip reports, general banter or moaning. As Mal said, we all have our own views of the other posters and I certainly respect any member of the forum's contributions when they're useful, in a good nature or supportive.

From a lurker's POV or a Newbie's, the "rating" could only lead to distrust etc. If a poster who "stirs the pot" or provides banter was to put forward some excellent advice but had a 1* contributor rating, the information provided may be disregarded.

Disregarding playground posts might have some merit but as mentioned, this is an attractive part of the forum and I always love it when Codash has added a new joke to a certain Playground thread. Why should this be punished?

TBPH, I don't really look at post counts or starting dates anyway. I would barely have a clue at how close anyone is to the next level or milestone and sometimes someone with 100 posts advice is better than another with 500.

Just my food for thought.

 

[Yada Yada]

AFF might not be a democracy but I certainly value your collective input!

For the record: straitman approached me before Christmas with his suggestion. I thought it was a good idea, but suggested that we gauge our member's input and that he put up a poll. If there is a clear mandate for change, it will be made. Obviously, its impossible to please everyone (especially with the wording and scope of the categories) so ultimately an "execuctive decision" will need to be made by someone - but I truly hope the the process is as open and transparent as possible.

Hi Clifford,

Thanks for filling me in. I didn't know this initiative had your backing so I felt it was worth mentioning that we're wasting our time discussing something that is not our decision to make. Apologies if I have offended. I was just trying to stop a train that seemed to be heading for the ravine. :-|

My $0.02: Remove posting level descriptors, post counts, the location field, the member-of field, avatars and even the PM system. Limit posts per member to 10 a day. If a member wants any additional bells and whistles, then they have to pay. Essentially, an LCC model.

 

[Keith009]

My $0.02: Remove posting level descriptors, post counts, the location field, the member-of field, avatars and even the PM system. Limit posts per member to 10 a day.

Do you manage an airline FFP by any chance? :shock:

 

[oz_mark]

Thanks for filling me in. I didn't know this initiative had your backing so I felt it was worth mentioning that we're wasting our time discussing something that is not our decision to make. Apologies if I have offended. I was just trying to stop a train that seemed to be heading for the ravine. :-|

From what I have seen of the way straitman operates, I would have been most surprised if he had not bounced the idea of admin first.

My $0.02: Remove posting level descriptors, post counts, the location field, the member-of field, avatars and even the PM system. Limit posts per member to 10 a day. If a member wants any of these bells and whistles, then they have to pay. Essentially, an LCC model.

I think we should stick with the New World model.

 

[Ric]

AFF members know who to ignore and who not to. Newbies can be quickly corrected, and lurkers need to work it for themselves, thats the risk they take. I have learnt a lot from this forum, and saved myself lots of heartache. I also hope I have been able to add something constructive, as well as some humour.

Totally agreed. That's the reason that I agreed to a change but not giving suggestions what changes should be. It might seems like a contradiction but its not. With my level of posting, I don't think I am anywhere near to be a "senior". And as Reggie infer, whatever, AFF members who frequent the site often will know who to ignore and who not to. And I might add we can also pick that that ceratin posters have their areas of specialty e.g. Dave Noble on AA and thus when researching a certain topic, we can go and look at the member's postings on said topic.

I too have learn a helluva lot from this forum and quite ashamed that I have not contributed much....but hope to do so in the future.

And yes, a spellcheck feature is needed.

My 2 cents worth.....

Ric

 

[Reggie]

And yes, a spellcheck feature is needed.

My 2 cents worth.....

Ric

Ric,

There is, look to the top RHS of the posting box above the smiles and below your name. There are 4 buttons, the one with the tick and ABC is the spell checker

 

[oz_mark]

Or at least it gives you a spell checker to install.

 

[Reggie]

Or at least it gives you a spell checker to install.

Oops, I thought it was always there. Thanks oz-mark.

Sorry Ric