Posted By: JTimothyA
Rating Schmating - 07/26/02 10:24 AM
Sorry gang, the 'rate a member' thing is tacky - a bit too mindlessly ad hominem for my taste. No doubt I'll be rated lowly for this view. :-)
It would be far more interesting - and might actually represent some value - if one could rate the threads. That might lend toward encouraging interesting comments from participants.
__
/im
It would be far more interesting - and might actually represent some value - if one could rate the threads. That might lend toward encouraging interesting comments from participants.
__
/im
Posted By: Bob M
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/26/02 12:49 PM
In a "friendly" forum the rating feature isn't necessary. I'm a moderator on my Association (Union) Bulletin Board and the rating system is often used to express personal dislikes for certain individuals more so than their opinions. Unlike the CF, there are many "pot stirrers" who thrive on irritating other board members. The rating system is their way of trying to give someone a "dope slap" without an actual physical assault.
No one really pays attention to the ratings on my other board, and I believe the same will happen here.
Bob
No one really pays attention to the ratings on my other board, and I believe the same will happen here.
Bob
Posted By: mombo
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/26/02 03:31 PM
Yeah Private JTim, I think this rating thing is pretty dumb. Why would any group need it? Seems all it would do would be to cause dissension in the ranks.
General Mombo
General Mombo
Posted By: Webmaster
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/26/02 05:42 PM
Looks like a subject for the next Collector Forum Poll!!
Posted By: TERRY BARFIELD
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/26/02 11:53 PM
Tim, I`m on other forums and its mostly ignored. Its there, but oldtimers just don`t pay it any attention.
terry
terry
Posted By: Pharologst
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/27/02 12:47 AM
"Rating" seems to me to be too much like a beauty contest. :rolleyes: It really lies only in the eye of one beholder and can't (shouldn't) be truthfully expressed. I think this feature will ultimately be ignored for the most part, and as such, the computer/server resources devoted to it would better serve some other purpose. (I'll assume tht my non-rating just went to 0 .)
Posted By: flacoastie
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/27/02 01:18 AM
Seems to me the only real value this rating system could have is in the Marketplace Forum with a 5 star being the highest with no complaints down to 0 star with multiple complaints.
Rich
Rich
Posted By: DANIEL
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/27/02 01:53 PM
MEMBER RATED
I just turned my off.
That is how I feel about it.
(Speling corection maid frome the attention off the poost belowe)
Thaks Pierhead
I just turned my off.
That is how I feel about it.
(Speling corection maid frome the attention off the poost belowe)
Thaks Pierhead
Posted By: pierhead
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/27/02 04:56 PM
Quote:
That’s how I fell about it.
Posted By: Elmer
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/27/02 05:13 PM
I'm in agreement ..... the member rating feature reeks too much of a popularity contest and IMO is not needed nor desired on these forums.
I've shut mine off too!! :p
Dan
I've shut mine off too!! :p
Dan
Posted By: Jim Chesher
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/27/02 05:44 PM
I agree that the rating thing is tacky and not needed in this forum. I too have turned mine off.
Posted By: WackoPaul
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/27/02 07:32 PM
Ditto..
Posted By: Pharologst
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/27/02 09:21 PM
Turning mine off, don't see the need for it.
Posted By: Weasel58
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/27/02 09:58 PM
The Rating :rolleyes: feature of the new boards is a waste of time and bandwidth, thusly I decree it shall be turned off in my profile.
Posted By: pierhead
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/27/02 11:08 PM
I don't see the need for it either. However, someone was nice enough to leave me a great mark. I wouldn't want to offend them, would I? I'm going to leave it on - until John figures out how to turn it off.
Posted By: Webmaster
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/27/02 11:39 PM
I found the switch to turn off the member rating feature.
Now there is a feature to have more levels of membership based on the number of posts. Right now it takes 50 posts to become a WACKO. It could be that reaching 250 posts (for example) gives you the title of "SUPER WACKO".
What are your feelings, gang? Leave it as it is or introduce some higher level of recognition based on higher number of posts?
Now there is a feature to have more levels of membership based on the number of posts. Right now it takes 50 posts to become a WACKO. It could be that reaching 250 posts (for example) gives you the title of "SUPER WACKO".
What are your feelings, gang? Leave it as it is or introduce some higher level of recognition based on higher number of posts?
Posted By: flacoastie
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/27/02 11:44 PM
I like the Super WACKO idea. My wife said I reached that level about 38 years ago when I asked her to marry me. I don't know if that's a compliment or insult on her part. She also said I would never reach Saint status so Super WACKO it is.
Rich
Rich
Posted By: Pharologst
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/28/02 12:50 AM
John I kinda like the idea of basically only two levels, Newbie and Wacko. It keeps everybody on an even footing without creating false levels.
Once you've done the 50 posts, and basically demo'd your ability and desire, being a WACKO should be all that is needed. The admin levels are necessry just so that others know who to go to for problems.
Once you've done the 50 posts, and basically demo'd your ability and desire, being a WACKO should be all that is needed. The admin levels are necessry just so that others know who to go to for problems.
Posted By: DANIEL
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/28/02 02:16 AM
I am with you Rich.
I like the Idea of being a super WACKO.
Maybe something more challenging like a 1000 post.
If you post that much, you are a super wacko.
And this is a level that anybody can be if they really want to.
I like the Idea of being a super WACKO.
Maybe something more challenging like a 1000 post.
If you post that much, you are a super wacko.
And this is a level that anybody can be if they really want to.
Posted By: mombo
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/28/02 04:05 AM
I'm with George. Why fix it if it ain't broke?
Posted By: Bud Schrader
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/28/02 04:19 AM
John, thanks for turning off the rating feature- my thoughts are for wacko only,(after 50 posts) could get confusing for "wacko" badges, "super" wacko badges, etc. Just my thoughts-----
Posted By: Jim Chesher
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/28/02 04:04 PM
My vote is to just leave it Newbie and Wacko. This forum doesn't need any more confusing levels.
Posted By: TERRY BARFIELD
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/28/02 06:28 PM
I`d also like to keep it the way it is, no need to further separate the masses. It makes it less of a family and more of a government.
terry
terry
Posted By: Torchbearer
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/29/02 12:10 AM
I agree with most... leave it Newbie and Wacko. A "Wacko" by any other name...
Tim - Keeping the flame lit...
Tim - Keeping the flame lit...
Posted By: SThompson
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/29/02 02:36 AM
Pot stirrers, Bob? I think that had to be a crack about me. This old beaver loves to stir the pot. If this forum didn't have some controversy to debate some of us might get just a wee bit board here. Don't rate me or hate me, just debate me!
Posted By: Webmaster
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/29/02 02:38 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by SThompson:
Pot stirrers, Bob? I think that had to be a crack about me. This old beaver loves to stir the pot. If this forum didn't have some controversy to debate some of us might get just a wee bit board here. Don't rate me or hate me, just debate me!
Pot stirrers, Bob? I think that had to be a crack about me. This old beaver loves to stir the pot. If this forum didn't have some controversy to debate some of us might get just a wee bit board here. Don't rate me or hate me, just debate me!
But we welcome all, old friend.
Posted By: MrsTLC
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/29/02 04:34 AM
I agree with the majority, no rating needed nor do we need to see Super WACKOs 
However, I must say it's really great fun to watch the "true pot stirrers" in action. Come on Sean, you haven't stirred it up for quite awhile. :rolleyes: I miss you.
Ruthie
However, I must say it's really great fun to watch the "true pot stirrers" in action. Come on Sean, you haven't stirred it up for quite awhile. :rolleyes: I miss you. Ruthie
Posted By: Bob M
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/29/02 12:06 PM
JC is right, Sean. I was referring to my Association Board and not to your or anybody elses postings at the CF. The posters at my other board can be less than kind in some of their posts. The best part is returning "fire". He who laughs last, laughs best!
Bob
Bob
Posted By: rscroope
Re: Rating Schmating - 07/29/02 02:22 PM
I think Sean was just doing exactly what he said in a 'tongue in cheek' manner. No harm - no foul.
I think it would be very hard to offend Mr Thompson personally? Now GLOWs are another story! LOL
Bob
I think it would be very hard to offend Mr Thompson personally? Now GLOWs are another story! LOL
Bob
© 2024 Collector Forums