[Proposal] New "Ancient" ranking / higher than Legendary

[enhu]

The forum keeps the ecosystem of Bitcoin and the altcoins so this board should last if we're to keep it that way. As long as the system don't change, 30 years is nothing. Time flies and you shall see it when you're 50+.

[1713892707]

1713892707

[1713892707]

1713892707

[disclaimer201]

I'd love to see a new rank just for the heck of it. Bring the action, we will have many more legendary members soon. This or add another rank before legendary and make legendary a little harder to achieve. Even better, make all ranks harder to achieve. 30 or 60 posts are nothing nowadays. Forget the 30 years idea UNTIL we have a club of members who posted here for 30 years.

[Fwdxlsh]

Good constructive feedback. Thanks for telling us why.

No need to be sarcastic.


I don't like it, because it is unnecessary. It certainly doesn't help with promoting Bitcoin. We should be focusing on ways to make the site more comfortable for users so they have a free outlet to work on Bitcoin related ideas, and not feel uncomfortable here. The site is for work. It can be for play too because of the Off-topic forum, but I don't see a point in making unneccessary arrangements or features when more needed arrangements and features are still very much not placed into affect on the site. Work first, then play.

Keep in mind that it is my personal opinion, so it deserves to be respected just like yours does.

[Xian01]

Good constructive feedback. Thanks for telling us why.

No need to be sarcastic.
I don't like it, because it is unnecessary. It certainly doesn't help with promoting Bitcoin. We should be focusing on ways to make the site more comfortable for users so they have a free outlet to work on Bitcoin related ideas, and not feel uncomfortable here. The site is for work. It can be for play too because of the Off-topic forum, but I don't see a point in making unneccessary arrangements or features when more needed arrangements and features are still very much not placed into affect on the site. Work first, then play.
Keep in mind that it is my personal opinion, so it deserves to be respected just like yours does.

These forums do not exist to make you comfortable or to promote Bitcoin.

These forums are brutally harsh and unforgiving. If your feelings are hurt, or you are triggered, or whatever coddled nonsense you are reacting to, I might suggest you find other forums to patronize.

[qwk]

Should only be available to users who were active on this forum for at least two reward halvings.
Not for the 2013 bunch

You'll get your chance sometime in 2020 or so

[Monnt]

I guess a range between 1850 and 2150 would be ideal, a painfully long random waiting period will make the activity note interesting.

there was already a discussion about this, for the new forum, among the other proposal, i wuld also like to see a new rank, but the name you choose is a bit underwhelming

legendary sound more badass, maybe "Eternal" or something like this?

How about "Old-Timer" xD

[jackg]

It would help the forum to keep going! Would it not?

I don't really think it would. While it would be nice for this forum to live for a long time, I doubt anyone will care about an online number of points and title to stay here for several decades.

People would donate if they have worked for 10 or 20 years on making their account with 5000-7000 activity.

Would they? I don't think it would really make someone donate over $3k (right now) because they have been here for a long time.

Not to mention the fact that people have better activities to do.

But if they could sell their account for ~5 or 10 BTC. Then, they might donate. Won't they?

[hilariousandco]

New ranks should or probably will have to be added eventually especially when the highest rank becomes common. The ranks up to Hero just double the activity of the previous one so Legendary should become 960 activity and add another rank at double that and when the time comes double that one etc. Not really a fan of the randomness or Legendary but maybe the new rank could be random instead, though would prefer fixed ones.

[DebitMe]

Why not incorporate trust ratings into the trust ranking system?  If you get a certain number of positive trust posts or points, then you can get opened up to different forum ranks. Perhaps put this in conjecture with time on forum or post count and you can start having different ranks based on contribution to the community.

[Sir_lagsalot]

I think this is a good idea, as it sheds light on the old members of the community. There are new legendaries almost every two weeks, so it's getting easier and easier to find one.

I think the activity should be 1920, so it ties in with the doubling activity pattern.

[dogie]

Why don't we just stop pretending its called activity and call it "how old your account is"? Post count or actual activity has nothing to do with the rating any more and most people have 2-10x their "activity" score in posts.

[WaterSupply]

Yes i agree with theymos.

Legendary already takes a very long time to get. I really do not think that ancient or veteran is really needed. The system is already pretty good and adding even more complexity can get confusing. I would say leave it as it is.

Legendary already takes several years to obtain. I feel like this is enough. Maybe if I someday start to see that there's some decently-sized subset of Legendary members who are "noticeably more veteran", then another rank would be appropriate.

[Lauda]

Why don't we just stop pretending its called activity and call it "how old your account is"? Post count or actual activity has nothing to do with the rating any more and most people have 2-10x their "activity" score in posts.

Indeed. Technically the name "activity" is false because it does not accurately represent the activity of a user. It would be more accurate if it was called e.g. "age" or something similar.
Update:
"Age" was just a random thought, not my suggestion and should not be put much time into thinking about it.

[minifrij]

Indeed. Technically the name "activity" is false because it does not accurately represent the activity of a user. It would be more accurate if it was called e.g. "age" or something similar.

Though if it was called age, I don't know about anyone else, but I think it would just confuse people more. They could think that instead of an arbitrary value, it instead corresponded to days/weeks/months. That and it isn't completely about the age of the account, since the Activity value is based on the amount of periods active. Personally, I think changing it to Age or something similar would just confuse more than help, though that may just be due to me being used to the current activity system.

[dogie]

That and it isn't completely about the age of the account, since the Activity value is based on the amount of periods active

That's not really true due to potential activity, if the account has been active at all then activity = 14x days of account age which is lame as hell.

[lemipawa]

I think Legendary should be the highest one, but add a new one like "Veteran" to be in between a "Hero" and "Legendary".

[theymos]

"Activity" is a good name because it shows how many days you've been active on the forum. If you created an account in 2010, used it for a week, and then returned in 2015, your activity (including potential activity) would be pretty small.

I agree that it'd be better to look at the quality of your posts and things like that, but this can't be calculated automatically.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I like this idea but something about the word "ancient" I don't like.  Can't it be something creative, like a latin or greek phrase or something else?   And right now I'm too lazy to research something.

[GTO911]

Legendary was used prematurely, It should have been Veteran, then Legendary

[hilariousandco]

Why don't we just stop pretending its called activity and call it "how old your account is"? Post count or actual activity has nothing to do with the rating any more and most people have 2-10x their "activity" score in posts.

Indeed. Technically the name "activity" is false because it does not accurately represent the activity of a user. It would be more accurate if it was called e.g. "age" or something similar.

You could make the same argument about age. Activity isn't literally how active you are but how active you have been over time ie how active you have been in posting in the two week periods.