I'm pretty confused by the status of members since the Webmaster Resources Discussion Forums became SitePoint Community Forums. Now, if someone registers as a new member, they are automatically made a "SitePoint Member" rather than as it used to be a "Junior Member" then after 10 or so posts, they became a member. I find it annoying if you help someone who you think is a member, but aren't sure! It also helps to keep track of newbies etc.
So, why not have "SitePoint Junior" and "SitePoint Member" status? Just a little thought...
Oh no... not "god" status. People would begin to think I am egotistical. I'll just keep "SitePoint Moderator" for now.
I didn't like the "Junior Member", "Member" differentiation. I don't know why but it always made me think of "Junior Members" as children. I think it is because I grew up as a "junior" and that was always a designation of my being a child.
I agree with most of what Quinn suggested, with a few modifications:
SitePoint Member: for those who have established themselves and post occasionally
SitePoint Regular: those who post on a daily basis and are easily recognizable by the SitePoint community
SitePoint Addict: lots and lots of posts
SitePoint Guru: top 5% or 10%
Also maybe we could use SitePoint Lurker for those who only come out once in a while to make a post... this would enable the rest of us to find out who they are and possibly encourage them to make themselves more at home with the SitePoint community.
I think it'd be tricky to determine which people "post once in awhile" or "only post now and then"...and so naming them might cause a few arguments...if you grade on a curve using percentages there can be no arguments. It also encourages people to keep posting to retain their "title."
I agree with Chris (TWTCommish) that it should be on percentages and not by someone judging who posts the most but Is it possible in UBB to get this information or would you have to work it out as that could be a slow process. I also agree that junior does make you think of a child and agree that all people should start as "SitePoint Member" .
So I agree that the titles should be:
<LI>0%-20%: SitePoint Member
<LI>20%-40%: SitePoint Frequenter
<LI>40%-60%: SitePoint Regular
<LI>60%-80%: SitePoint Addict
<LI>80%-100%: SitePoint Guru
Fletch
P.S Could You Post The Top Posters Again or The Percentages if possible please.
Chris, I didn't mean someone was going to go and pick all these people's titles according to how often they think they post, just think it should be up to SitePoint to decide the margins for each title (either percentage-wise or by the number of posts as some other people suggested). I was merely providing an explanation for my title suggestions:
SitePoint Member
SitePoint Regular
SitePoint Addict
SitePoint Guru
(percentage/# of posts margins would be set by SitePoint admins)
IMHO, "Frequenter" just doesn't sound like an appropriate title, and would probably get easily confused with "Regular". Four levels (and then Moderator and Admin status of course) should be sufficient enough to provide a distinction for each title without any confusion. Any more than four might create a 'class' structure, which could (stressing could) result in some unwanted situations (ie: "I've got a question about my site that I need answered by a SitePoint Guru...").
So keep it simple, keep it fun, and everbody should be happy with their new titles.
[This message has been edited by eradtke (edited June 19, 2000).]
May I be named "The person formerly known as SitePoint Member?" How about it?
(In case any of you didn't get my attempt at a joke, Prince the music artist changed his name to a symbol and that's what he's called nowaways...the artist formerly known as Prince)
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote/font><HR>Originally posted by d3v: LOL Nicky.
May I be named "The person formerly known as SitePoint Member?" How about it?
(In case any of you didn't get my attempt at a joke, Prince the music artist changed his name to a symbol and that's what he's called nowaways...the artist formerly known as Prince)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Did you know he's changed his name about ten times? He's gone by names like Christopher, Alexander Nevermind, Prince, The Artist Formerly Known as Prince, The Artict, that old sybol, and I believe 3 or 4 others I cannot recall right now.
I guess "regular" is better...but a "Regular" is someone who visits regularly...daily, basically...a frequenter is just someone who frequents it...less than a regular, IMO.
Actually Prince's legal name is Prince. HE started publishing music under the "Symbol" because he had a contract dispute with his record company. It seems when he signed the contract, they got "ownership" of his name and likeness for as long as the contract was in effect. Talk about bad negotiations. Anyway the contract ran out last September and he has since decided to release new music under the Prince name again. In fact his new album should be available now.
Now this all relates to Internet development because???
Well I have the answer to that as well. Prince's new album is available directly from him (no record label) and you can only purchase it online in downloadable format (read .MP3). Can't remember the website information though because I heard it on the radio while listening to the Mark and Brian Show. Hard to write and drive at the same time.
I think frequenter sounds like they come more often than regular. Plus frequenter is hard to say...
------------------
Nate
nate@jumpthru.com
ICQ 70944023
http://www.jumpthru.com - Free web hosting.
http://www.webmaster-sources.com - Build your site today!
http://www.funandfreestuff.com - Because life was meant to be free.
I had to scroll back up just to remember what this thread was about...
I suggest that you use whatever system you like, but that the top posters should be given the designation "Site Point MASTER". Much cooler than other titles.
Oh, and Prince (he'll always be "Prince" to me) - I remember back in the beginning of MTV with Little Red Corvette and 1999. I really used to "dig" him. I had many of his "records" and cds...
I don't know what designation I should be given, as I have a fair number of posts, but its hard to say what quality I have contributed... (Is there some quality gauge to measure the posts? I could get up to 1000 posts really easy if I had my heart set on it!)
/font><HR>Originally posted by d3v:
Bookmarks