Missed opportunity to speak of TITLES

[thescot]

Wouldn't the fact that this topic keeps coming back suggest that some gave them more attention than they were due?

. . .

Not necessarily. Perhaps it's just the opposite. Perhaps it suggests that the topic should be reconsidered by the powers that be due to the numbers who wish them to do so. Perhaps objections to our silly titlles suggests more importance assigned by the objectors than is due.

Arguments and assertions to the contrary, the titles were always taken as tongue-in-cheek by the vast majority of the forum's members. Anyone who took them seriously should reevalute things.

And if you somehow felt "excluded," I will personally assure you that you are welcome here, that you are full member, and that no one intends to exclude you from anything. See? You are not excluded at all. I can't imagine anything on this forum that a title--or lack of same--could possibly have excluded you from.

[Bugbear]

Matt has a great point here I think. The original premise for removing the special titles and post count related rankings, all of which meant little REAL effect in the grand scheme of things, was that they were potentially intimidating to new members and had little relevance to the value of that persons posts and contribution to the forum. As Matt has astutely noted, instead of three camps in this debate--those of those in favor of the titles, those against the titles for some particular REAL (not imagined) reason, and those who couldn't give a rip either way---we seem to be hearing only the voices of those in the first and thrid camps, and no REAL valid argumants for why the special titles and ranking should NOT be a part of the forum again.

I for one, when I arrived, and to a degree still, valued the notoriety of those with special titles, even silly and meaningless as, say, grand defender of the rubber chicken, as they were unofficially earned recognition of some particular contribution to the forum, be that based on knowledge, service, or simply a major contribution to the overall tenor and tone of the forum family atmosphere. The ranking, faulted as they were by potentially inflated numbers due to low utility posts like "nice kilt" and "way to go", still, when combined with the recognition of how long the poster had been a member here, and with the reading of just a few of that member's posts, fairly quickly could tell the newbie who really had a valued voice and opinion in this forum, regardless of who often they posted. And over time those with lesser numbers of posts, but a long duration here, also came to be recognized as being knowledgeable, but selective in their choice of what to say and when, such as Mac o Rath, just as an example.

But the point overall is that where was the hue and cry to rid the forum of these achievement points actually coming from, the populace in general, the newbies (I for one never as a newbie complained about intimidation by either the numbers or titles), or the admins for fear of scaring of newcomers (something I am not sure has ever been demonstrated to be a valid concern with any case demonstration or data).

I like Grant, Jock, and the many others here miss them, and the whimsical jocularity that they brought with them to this extended kilted family we call a forum, and long for those "olden days" of yore.

I even see that Grant has changed his avatar to a black swatch, a symbol of his mourning for their loss, perhaps?

Again, just one man's O.

jeff

There are members who have stated that they perceive other members as posting to drive up their rank etc.

Removing the rank and post count would remove that complaint issue; though I suppose it would not fully remove the perception.

I guess at this point, for me, it really doesn't matter; the perception of others would still linger...

I think this all has to do with people, through their posts, rubbing other people the wrong way, and very little to do with titles and ranks.

[robthehiker]

There are members who have stated that they perceive other members as posting to drive up their rank etc.

Do they feel that XMarks would be a better place without people driving up their post count by saying things like "welcome" and "happy birthday" and "sorry to hear you're not well"? Interesting.

[Bugbear]

Do they feel that XMarks would be a better place without people driving up their post count by saying things like "welcome" and "happy birthday" and "sorry to hear you're not well"? Interesting.

I don't know.

However, except for one very weird birthday thread, I have been avoiding posting in those threads.

Like I said, I am beginning to feel that this has very little to do with the counts and titles, rather an underlying issue of guessing why other people are posting: intentions etc.

And with that, I should probably drop out of this thread.

[MacLowlife]

OK, so I have posted on a related topic before. Having followed this thread and having great respect for many of its contributors, I would like to add one point that may not have occurred to most of us. Just as Matt observed that almost nobody has said they OBJECT to the titles, which slipped past me before, I have only recently noticed what might be the most significant phenomenon of all.

I speak of the enthusiastic newcomer phenomenon, the condition where you can't turn around without seeing some lowlife's opinion on just about everything. I have been that lowlife. Maybe this post shows that I haven't entirely escaped my enthusiastic past. But, when I see a person with a high post count whose work I haven't previously noticed, I do two or three things:
1) I consider the quality of his/ her posts- do they seem well reasoned, or at least reasonable? Do they seem to be in the spirit of this special place? Are they occasionally humble, or at least willing to consider another's point of view?
2) I check the longevity-to-output ratio as well as the post count.
3) I go back and see what contributions this person may have made before I noticed.

I might add, I try to see how my fellow X Markers regard this person and how frequently this person's posts stimulate useful conversation and exchange of ideas. And I like to follow how friendly this person is in exchanges.

Titles and post counts don't necessarily give a full picture of a person's worth. I think we all agree on that. But, if nothing else, they give a hint now and then that a person has some street cred and they invite the newcomer, enthusiastic or shy, to investigate further.

Cordially ( and almost humbly)
M'll

[jordanjm]

I always felt good when I ranked up. It was a recognition of real contributions I had made to the forum. In the case of the Welcome, or Hello posts: How many of you stayed here because you were personally welcomed? I know I did, and in that regard I tried to reciprocate by welcoming others here, and growing the user-base, which contributes to the value of the forum, both by encouraging new voices, but also increases the possibility of the advertisers making money, which increases the possibility of the ownership of the site making money. So all of the complaints about welcome posts and them being a bad way to gain a rank do not make sense to me. I really try to contribute here, but there are sooooooo many people who know so much more than me I find it hard to, except in some small ways.

[Lady M]

And if you somehow felt "excluded," I will personally assure you that you are welcome here, that you are full member, and that no one intends to exclude you from anything. See? You are not excluded at all. I can't imagine anything on this forum that a title--or lack of same--could possibly have excluded you from.

I suspect that after being around for all of 30 posts (as of this particular posting by you) you may not have a very good feel for the ambience of the place. There are many personalities, and, like a family, it has developed a unique and somewhat complex relationship between its members. Often times, "traditional" things like titles take on importance way beyond the literal. You see, we all know that none of us is really a samarai, but it was part of who we were.

I'm pretty sure people on this forum have been judged by how man posts they have and have been left feeling excluded.

Alrighty, anyway, I'll throw my 2 cents into this. I'm a member of another forum of an unrelated nature. The forum has almost 30,000 members. They do not use a standard ranking system. No one receives a "rank" until they have reached 1 years time and 1000 posts. At that time, they can then set their own title.

The board has a "welcome" section as well as games and a few others that are irrelevant to the board, these sections do not count towards post count. I should also mention that this forum uses the same software as ours. Just putting it out there that it's worked very well for them. People get a fun title of their picking once they have been around long enough and have contributed enough. Gives people something to look forward to without a lot of "Nice kilt" and "I agree" posts clogging up the works.

[ForresterModern]

I always felt good when I ranked up. It was a recognition of real contributions I had made to the forum. In the case of the Welcome, or Hello posts: How many of you stayed here because you were personally welcomed? I know I did, and in that regard I tried to reciprocate by welcoming others here, and growing the user-base, which contributes to the value of the forum, both by encouraging new voices, but also increases the possibility of the advertisers making money, which increases the possibility of the ownership of the site making money. So all of the complaints about welcome posts and them being a bad way to gain a rank do not make sense to me. I really try to contribute here, but there are sooooooo many people who know so much more than me I find it hard to, except in some small ways.

No question that Welcome posts are a strong asset to the newbie here showing the interest of the rabble in having them join the family. If I remember correctly posts in that particular forum section did not count toward your running post totals anyway, so there was no ulterior incentive to post welcomes, but also no disincentive, other than it took a wee bit of your time and a few keyboard strokes (my I am feeling so put out by all this typing----). But as MacLowlife states above it is pretty easy to pick out who has the "chops" so to speak around here when it comes to kilt knowledge and experience, and post counts and ranks (which really had no other purpose than to acknowledge attainment of a certain number of posts) while being no guarantee to a true assessment of a member's knowledge, when combined with the longevity of their membership, and with a brief review of thread posts and threads started available at that persons User CP under statistics, could generally give you a pretty good idea of where that member stood among the crowd, and how valuable and trustworthy their information and opinions might be. As did the banner titles under the names, some of which denoted service to the forum in one capacity or another (moderator, former moderator, etc), or specific utility (forum historian), or special honors granted, admittedly without specific criterion but with general consensus (kilted legend), by the forum officials. They gave some credence to those people's long term involvement and value to the forum, regardless of their rank or number of postings. For me as a newbie they helped me figure out who to listen to and pay credence to and who to cast a skeptical eye toward, but also who to ask specific questions of, and whose answers to best believe. Over time thay have become less important as I developed my own knowledge of who among my fellow xmarkers I could believe in and understand and value thier information and opinions, so right now I don't really care what my particular rank is, but someone new reading this thread might care, and to them it might be helpful. And okay we occasionally get a little lift when we cross a milestone with a recognition congratulatory post in the celebrations thread. But some day, hopefully, if I stick around here long enough, learn a lot more and also contribute back what I have already learned both here and elsewhere, as well as by experience, maybe someone
will think enough of my contributions to honor me with a special title (Honored Kilted Belittler of Grant) or other recognition. I certainly believe that they don't detract from the forum or its friendliness, cost little but a small program adjustment and a few extra electrons moving through the wires, and add some honor and whimsy back to the mix to keep things loose and easy going, while still interesting, informative, and fun to participate.

jeff

[Livingston]

How many have tuned in just to see that Panache thug give that handsome Grant fellow his come-uppance?

Oo...Oo...I did! I did!

(...and might I say it was usually well deserved too! )

Me too!

Grant your contributions do, as far as I am concerned, help the fun element along in a major way. Gosh! Did I really say that? Should I have said that? Well actually --------YES I SHOULD!

Very well deserved. And your contributions ... right, never mind.

[Rob Wright]

I admit I miss my old title. When I received it I was very involved with writing and performing murderr mysteries, writing a review column for the local paper and other projects. The title was an extension of who I was and am.

Rob