I am back to Major Player. Has the classifications of "what we are" been bumped up. I see people with over a 1000 posts "downgraded" to trustee.

It's just a pointless title with no real meaning (such as mine, for instance). We'll probably do away with such classifications completely very soon.

Dear Mr. Hurd...

It has come to our attention that you've been publically using the term "COOT" to describe yourself.

According to our bylaws, article 3 section 5a Subparagraph 9 no one under the age of 60 is allowed to use the term "coot" unless that status is conferred upon them by a minimum of three officially qualified neighborhood LOUTS under the age of 13.

(an exception is made for anyone who wears their pants more than four inches above their natural beltline, a practice in which our "associates" in your home community report that you DO NOT participate.

Please cease and desist your use of this term immediately.

Sincerely.

The Grey Panthers.

Hum, pointless, not to sure about that? But, maybe the names should be changed to something based on each persons level of addiction or conviction? You know, like:

Arrested (Just signed on)

Booked and Printed (verified by the warden)

Convicted and sentenced (hooked and staying)

1-2 year sentence/etc. (based on post volume)

Prison Lawyer (based on value of contribution to the good of the forum)

Lifer! (would not leave if the warden left the door open)


And just make the wranglers Guards!

:)

Just a thought form a new Trustee, well maybe a lifer! According to Bill, I'll qualify for "COOT" in about 8 months.

Mike

..or just plain "older n' dirt"

personally I think it should be...

from newbie to old hands:

Getting loads of work
Thinning out a little
Is my phone on?
On here so much I don't have time for work!!


:-)

..or just plain "older n' dirt"

Hey, I resemble that! EEERRR!

Mike

I like the idea of doing away with the member titles.

1 - Aren't we trying to get away from recognizing people by status here?

2 - I would hate to see people feel more inclined to post just to achieve a higher status.

Fully agreed, Jesse. I'm thinking about putting the location right below the user name. Although I still want to identify our sponsors and manufacturer's representatives because it's important to know who and what they are when they're posting.

i don't hate the titles, mostly because they are somewhat useful when scanning the classifieds, to get a whiff of who the seller is. just a whiff....

i don't think anyone posts just to run up their title, do they? to run their mouth, yes, guilty party right here! but that's different, simply a pathology....

WHAT!!!????

You mean people post things here that are of dubious value?

i don't hate the titles, mostly because they are somewhat useful when scanning the classifieds, to get a whiff of who the seller is.

I think the post counts would tell you more about that, and I don't believe Chris is proposing to elimate those, just the titles.

i don't hate the titles, mostly because they are somewhat useful when scanning the classifieds, to get a whiff of who the seller is. just a whiff....

i don't think anyone posts just to run up their title, do they? to run their mouth, yes, guilty party right here! but that's different, simply a pathology....


I have seen some who post just to run up their numbers and I think I saw a guy who put up about 30 posts in two days or less. Chris shut him down if I remember right! That was never my intention in being here. I peruse the posts many times a day looking to learn and to help those I can, as I can do that right now being retired. I have helped many people here, and enjoy doing it. I have also been wrong many times, but that too is a learning experiance for me and others, and there is always someone to put me in my place, be it Chris, Boyd, or whomever. I don't mind it at all, and everyone learns.

I was asked, by Chris, if I wanted to be a wrangler while at NAB last year. Foolish man! I said I don't have enough knowledege in any area to be of any help. I don't lie about my qualifications. Besides, not be a Wrangler, I can express my views and not worry about representing this fine community. If I were a Wrangler, I would have to change the way I post and what I post. I would be a caretaker and not just a participant. Chris can kick me off at any time and no one will know I'm gone. He seems to be pissed at me right now, I think I know why, but not sure, but he has not kicked me off yet. I may still get back into his good graces. Just hope I'm not kicked off!

I do disagree with removing the titles under the names. As long as they are penned by Chris and the forum, I think they are very appropriate. I do not like the way other forums do it with everybody naming themselves, i.e. maddog---video fornicator--and all the other crap that people will use. I have not asked how people get their their own designations, but maybe I should be Old Fogy!

Think of it this way, what if you took off the number of posts that each person has, it is the same thing! Then a post from a person who has contributed 10 times would carry the weight of Boyd Ostroff, with over 8,000 posts and a thousand times more knowledge than me. We are currently have a little differance of words on another post, but hehe, I'm just having fun and provoking some thought. Not trying to do anything else! :) :)

Anyway, just an Old Fogy expressing his confused thoughts. Oh and remember, give to the Alzheimer's Association!

Mike

When I first got here I found the titles to be a tool. Not an absolute, but it quickly gave me an indication of the level of participation of the person giving their comments. Maybe just the number of posts would serve the same purpose but "categorization" gave me a simple way to understand something about the background of the person providing an answer to someone's (or my) question.

Although I've begun to recognize the regulars and those that speak from years of experience, it took me a while to know them by name. Quickly looking at their "title", allowed me to grasp their participation in this forum.

Maybe only the top 10% or 20% should have titles, or drop the titles below "Trustee".

When I first got here I found the titles to be a tool. Not an absolute, but it quickly gave me an indication of the level of participation of the person giving their comments. Maybe just the number of posts would serve the same purpose but "categorization" gave me a simple way to understand something about the background of the person providing an answer to someone's (or my) question.

Although I've begun to recognize the regulars and those that speak from years of experience, it took me a while to know them by name. Quickly looking at their "title", allowed me to grasp their participation in this forum.

Maybe only the top 10% or 20% should have titles, or drop the titles below "Trustee".


I understand the usefulness of the member titles and post counts, however, they may be misleading in guiding you to decide whose posts deserve more reverence.

For all everyone knows, my 500 posts are 250 questions and 250 thank you's in the Vegas forum.

So I think, here, content should be king.

My suggestion would be to leave the members' join dates up as a sign of involvement. It's simply a less quantitative sign of status than post counts and member titles.

Chris, I fully agree that company affiliations should be put under the members names who need them.

For all everyone knows, my 500 posts are 250 questions and 250 thank you's in the Vegas forum.

But you do remember those 250 answers, don't you? And are willing to pass them on to the next person who asks?

No need for that... just search before you ask. With our current database of questions and answers, chances are high that whatever question you have, it's been asked and answered here before. All you have to do is look for it, and our Search function makes that very easy.

In order to "level" this playing field, since you hand assign sponsor titles and don't want to lose them, why not make all of the post based titles the same title ( i.e. Board Member or something like that ). That way, we can still look at the post numbers to get level of participation and wranglers and company reps are still delineated.

Dear Chris,

When I first joined this site, I thought that the titles had some meaning.

Later, after I started working with PHP, I learned that they were derived from the number of posts.

So, if you want to remove the titles, I understand.

However, the titles have meant something to new users. Members with the largest numbers of post have been around for some time and have shown some dedication to this site.

If you choose to remove the titles, please consider adding a special title, or "Star", to denote special contributors.

By this, I mean that there are contributors that post very well thought out, carefully worded, and most informative posts. While no contributor can or will be 100% correct all of the time, these contributors strive to be very accurate and diplomatic.

So, if you eliminate the titles based on the number of posts, you could give titles to highly respected contributors as you see fit. This would be an "earned" award.

Dan, I would hope and assume that everyone is trying to post accurate and diplomatic answers/questions/comments/etc... That's what sets this board apart from many others.

I don't mean to single you out here, but I think there's an inherent flaw to your plan. The "starring" of key contributors would seem to go directly against the leveling of the playing field here, JMO.

I really believe the join date is indicative enough of members' involvement without being as quantitave a means to measure what some seem think of as post worthiness.

I agree completely that DVInfo is "Best in Class"! I truely want it to stay that way.

I am trying to word this diplomatically: I put more trust in the information posted by true experts in their fields than others.

I read all of the posts in the areas that I am most interested in and there is a difference of opinions and quality of information, as one would reasonally expect.

Also, there are members who devote a lot of time researching and then posting information for others. Examples in the audio area would be Steve House and Douglas Spotted Eagle.

In other areas, I find the posts by A. J deLange and Boyd Ostroff highly informative.

I fully trust many others, but the list is too long to list here. I just wanted to point out some examples, no slight is intended to other experts that I have not mentioned.

I also sometimes learn from new users; everyone was a new user at sometime in their life.

I put more trust in the information posted by true experts in their fields than others.Me too. Trouble is, neither post counts, nor titles automatically assigned by post counts, nor even join dates are an accurate reflection of this. We're not going to do a "reputation" points system, either. So I'm not sure what the best method is. We've had some excellent, very helpful replies from brand new members with only a handful of posts...

In any community, reputation is something people come to know and rely on. Seems to me that no reputation can be earned by assigning a "label". That's guilding the lily, ya know? Like it or not, reputation is earned, not given.

Hard to disagree with Bill's thoughts. Over the past several years, Chris, you've consistently made good decisions regarding this board -- I'm confident that whatever you come up with will further that pattern. (Having said that, though, I'm gonna go quaff a 6-pack of Coors to drown my sorrows over being kicked out of the Inner Circle...!)

:-)

This makes me not care what it says under my name:

Just a sanity check on some random thoughts and would appreciate any words of warning, particaularly from people with experience like Charles Papert and Cole McDonald...

from:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=70712

I certainly don't consider myself to be anywhere in the same class as Mr. Papert...but that quote speaks volumes...folks who strive to give good information will earn the respect of the community. Do what you will, I have that quote bookmarked to keep me warm in the cold MN winters ;)

Chris, I liked your idea of putting the location under the name. It's the only bit of information that is of any real use (other than the sponsers), quite often i see people with no location and that makes it harder to answer their questions when it comes to regions etc. It's also nice to immediately identify folks in your area.

I'm not bothered about what happens to post counts or join dates, they don't really tell you anythin.........I hear scientists have dolphins pushin buttons on computers to get fish.

Andy.

I've found titles to be both helpful and frustrating. The few times I've posted I've had helpful advice given to me by professionals Teutsch and Spotted Eagle, who were thankfully dumbing themselves down to answer simple questions, and any system that encourages these professionals to post I'm all for. But then there are people like me right now who are just posting to attain a higher rank without adding anything helpful.
Sorry, couldn't resist.
I say keep the titles. No system is perfect but I think yours does provide a little extra incentive for the big guys, and by no means am I saying it's the main reason they post, to encourage the small guy.

I've found titles to be both helpful and frustrating. The few times I've posted I've had helpful advice given to me by professionals Teutsch and Spotted Eagle, who were thankfully dumbing themselves down to answer simple questions, and any system that encourages these professionals to post I'm all for. But then there are people like me right now who are just posting to attain a higher rank without adding anything helpful.
Sorry, couldn't resist.
I say keep the titles. No system is perfect but I think yours does provide a little extra incentive for the big guys, and by no means am I saying it's the main reason they post, to encourage the small guy.

Matt,

See Matt, you are only strenghtening Chris's position of removing the names, because you put my name in the same sentence with Douglas Spotted Eagle's. The only way I even come close to him, it that I have a brother named Douglas! And, he writes books and I struggle to read and understand them!

I am far from a professional, but I too try to learn each and everyday. And, I do try to help others whenever I can. I have learned so very much in the two plus years I have been a member here and because of that it has opened doors for me.

I am writing this at 2:00 am because I have been shooting all day long helping others. Up at 4:30am to shoot part of a short until 4:00pm, and I just got home from shooting 6 hours of tape at the Burt Reynolds Museum in Jupiter, Florida for some classes given by Mr. Reynolds. Dead bone tired, but it was a fun day!

You know that Chris will make the right decision, whatever it is. He too is out of my league.

Listen to what Chris, Douglas, Greg, Pete, Boyd, Dylan, Rob, and many others tell you and with them you can take the info as gospel. Take mine with a grain of salt, but I'll do my best.

Mike

I like the titles.... I was hoping it if I stayed around long enough, I get could a personalized one...something catchy like, The minister of media.....or The Bishop of Broadcast..or Frank. You know...something cool.

My 2 cents : I like the titles. And "Frank" is a cooltastic title...

So there!

:)

john
evilgeniusentertainment.com

...diving into threads possibly way past their "use by date", but just can't help myself.

Personally, I think the titles are a usefull guide to the calibre of the information you are reading (or should be). Of course, this depends on the way the title is earned, and sheer quantity doesn't mean quality - other on - line forums are the proof of that pudding.

Again, personally, when the term "level playing field" has been mentioned I am utterly perplexed. This business (film/ video/ sound) has nothing "level" about it, but then, neither does any other activity that involves real people doing real stuff. There's always the knows and the know not, the haves and have nots etc etc.

The people at the bottom of the pyramid want to get to the top of that pyamid and want information from people further up to do it. If they can't identify people at a higher level, who do they trust? Are those people always going to be right? Of course not. Right is such a subjective concept with so much on this forum due to the complexities involved.

So, how to identify people on DVinfo who have posted often and are usually right (er, -ish) or at least have made a positive contribution to either a direct question or a theme? If sheer quantity is not the final arbiter, you're left with quality, and the only person who can answer the question "Did this contribution solve/ help with your problem" is the poor prune who's got the problem/ query in the first place. In order for he/ she or it to do that, there has to be a feedback mechanism of some sort , possibly every post has a "usefullness" selector to one side, with viewers able to not comment as it's not relevant, or select from a range of 1 to 10, 1 - no use whatsoever : 10 - solved the problem.

It's not an instant answer, as the database of who gets what ratings will take quite some time to build, but in time those contributers who get consistently high "stars per post" scores will go up the ratings and thus earn their up - market monickers (nicknames).

Hey, it's not perfect, but hey, either am I.

Hope this is worthy of consideration.

Cheers,

Chris

PS. Wouldn't it be a sod if, after all that, the same people ended up back with the same names they have now? Cest la Vie!

I think this could be simplified mightily. Put a single tick box in every post - the question adjacent is "Did this post teach me something relevant I didn't already know?".

There's your "Star" rating system in a box.

Cheers,

Chris

Hum, pointless, not to sure about that? But, maybe the names should be changed to something based on each persons level of addiction or conviction? You know, like:

Arrested (Just signed on)

Booked and Printed (verified by the warden)

Convicted and sentenced (hooked and staying)

1-2 year sentence/etc. (based on post volume)

Prison Lawyer (based on value of contribution to the good of the forum)

Lifer! (would not leave if the warden left the door open)


And just make the wranglers Guards!

:)

Just a thought form a new Trustee, well maybe a lifer! According to Bill, I'll qualify for "COOT" in about 8 months.

Mike

I don't know. That would make Chris and wranglers, "Dead Man Walking", right? ;)

and had some more time to consider the options and comments in previous posts, the more my suggestion to make the "titles" a function of the democratic process seems to make sense.

If you analyse most of the threads (well, the ones I frequent anyway) they (mostly) start with someone asking a question. They finish either with problem solved or new direction indicated. Along the way a good number of people learn things they didn't know they didn't know.

Each one of the people posting/ reading (and learning) is in a position to answer the question "Did I learn something [relevant or not] from this post". If they got the chance to answer that question (just once for each post), it would very quickly become apparent who was posting the replies that mattered to the people that needed it.

As Chris said earlier, even newbies have posted cracking stuff. Conversly there have been a few from "old hands" which seem to have missed the target completely and taken out a handfull of innocent bystanders instead.

So, basically what I'm proposing is the most "level playing field" possible, every poster is judged by every member on the quality of every post. You just can't get fairer than that. No favourites get played, no one can "buy in" to a higher level, no "old boys network" can save you from bad posts. The more posts, the more chances to get voted. The better the posts, the more votes ditto. As for the wranglers, well, no one in their position can hope to be voted "person of the year" and special rules will need to apply - could be something to "put to the committee" in a poll (once options have been mooted).

Yep, gonna have to buy a couple more servers to keep track of which posts have been voted for by whom AND make sure no one can do an 'end run" round the system, but it seems to provide a solution to all the points raised in the thread.

Oh, and yes, I think the posters location, number of posts, joined date AND "Star" rating (title) should go onto every post.

Don't know how Chris is going to take to the prospect of having St Peter replaced at the gates of Heaven by a file server, but hey, stranger things have happened.


Cheers


Chris

and had some more time to consider the options and comments in previous posts, the more my suggestion to make the "titles" a function of the democratic process seems to make sense.



I watched www.packing.org go downhill fast after a user rating system was implemented.

While it's a totally diffrent type of website from this one, it used to be an excellent source of info and discussion on it's targeted issues. Now it's often a place where "children" run rampant.

If the administrators choose to use and assign "titles" or not, what is important to me is that a constant flow of information takes place. But any kind of system where users affect the administrative functions tend to bring some degree of "contentious" behavior.

This is a very interesting and extremely useful site to me.

I wasn't for one moment suggesting, to continue in the vein of Mike T's analogy, that Chris and all the subordinate Wardens order all the guards off the site, quit, then decamp to the golf club, stopping only to hand the penitentiary master keys to the assembled inmates to let them do whatever they wanted, come what may.

I can't even see where my proposal even suggests that any administrative functions are surrendered by anyone to anyone.

My starting point was and is that, in this thread, Chris and others have expressed (stop me if I have misinterpreted anything anyone has written) dissatisfaction at the value/ meaning of the labels attached to high post contributors.

Being a firm "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" type, and personally thinking that some type of acknowledgement of the "worth" of a contributor is "a good thing", I was merely suggesting a way to improve the system of rewarding merit rather than scrap the entire label system entirely.

I have no knowledge of the web site you mentioned, what it was like, what was changed, nor it's effects, but the last thing I want to see is DVinfo change drastically, unless it's for the better.

I'm neither a behavioral (?) phsycologist, nor an expert at chat room web systems, so I have no idea whether my idea even has a snowballs chance of working, downhill with a following wind. It's an idea, nothing more, nothing less.

The more I see on this site, it is apparent that Chris has taken it from strength to strength by NOT making stupid decisions. But, decisions can't be made in a vacuum (tho' my missus has her doubts about some of mine) and I wasn't aware that my suggestion had been made by anyone else.

So, sorry if you were under the impression I was suggesting letting the "patients" run the "asylum", I weren't.

BUT - it would be nice if the labels measured quality, not quantity.

And another thing......there must be an awefull lot of contributors on this site(again, stop me if you've all been there, done that) with qualifications, industry experience as long as your arm (and leg in some cases) etc etc etc. Now (here's that hot water again) what about doing a section on just who some of these contributors are, what they've done etc etc. I don't know, you see a posting from Joe Blogs, click on his name in the post and it takes you to a three page summary of his Academy Awards etc. Feeling suitably humbled, you take every written word as Gospel ( I jest).

Just a thought. Start sharpening chain saws - now!


Cheers


Chris

Can I have dibs on "The Decider"?

I would vote to keep the titles. Sometimes it's a nice information of someone, it's not something I really keep in mind or pay attention to, but it's nice to have.
I wouldn't vote for a user ratings system. I think that would become a mess much too quickly.

It wouldn't be a disaster if the titles dissapear, but if I could choose, I would rather have them.

From the point of a totsl noob, I have barely noticed the titles. I'm on several message boards accross the place and tend to judge people on what they say rather than how often they say it. I don't think a rating system is the answer - I think titles aren't a good idea at all, unless it actually tells me something about the person.

Location was one of the suggestions, which is limitedly useful. Honestly,I don't know what would be useful at all.

When someone 'takes out innocent bystanders' there's usually several people willing to get everyone on track. No one seems too hesitant to point out that a particular piece of advice was a little on the dodgy side.

Are professionals really encouraged by the title? So a tiny piece of text is more rewarding than knowing you've helped someone else? I'm not sure such encouragement is necessary.

But then, I am at the bottom of the pyramid. What do I know?