Revamping the rank system. Again

[deisik]

I've heard a few times that the Legendary rank doesn't cut it any more, that there are too many members of this rank which totally discredits it, and that there will be even more such members over time. The latter can hardly be argued against. In this manner, folks have been suggesting adding a new rank (grandmaster, admin, mythical, whatever). I think this will only further confuse the issue. We already have a few varieties of members (just members, junior members, full members, senior members). I propose a different approach which consists in gradual increase in the activity level required for every rank, so that some users wouldn't end up stripped off of their current rank. For example, Hero member right now requires activity of 480. After implementing the change, it would first require 494, then 508, and up to, say, 960...

What do you guys/gals think?

[Lauda]

I think this is a decent idea (considering that the forum is aging and it's based on duration) that should be coupled with more changes before being labeled as a'revamp'.

I propose a different approach which consists in gradual increase in the activity level required for every rank, so that some users wouldn't end up stripped off of their current rank. For example, Hero member right now requires activity of 480. After implementing the change, it would first require 494, then 508, and up to, say, 960...

I'd like to combine that with either with changing the names of the ranks, and/or adding some newer ones. The system does feel a little dull to me, especially after one reaches 'Legendary'.

[hilariousandco]

The ranks should just follow the existing pattern of doubling the activity each time. Legendary should be made achievable at 960 then the next rank at 1920 and so on.

[ModGirl]

I also like that idea to create another category which will be the most higher of the members and that category will be only for those members who will the most trusted members of this forum so that people will easily recognize the most trusted members of the members and we will not need any guarantee from a third party while dealing with them.

[Lauda]

I also like that idea to create another category which will be the most higher of the members and that category will be only for those members who will the most trusted members of this forum so that people will easily recognize the most trusted members of the members and we will not need any guarantee from a third party while dealing with them.

The reputation system, specifically a users trust rating is there for this very reason. It helps distinguish users that have *proven* to be at least somewhat trustworthy from the random people on the forum. Adding specific ranks for *trusted* members may end up being problematic. If such a member scams someone in any way or form, they're likely going to blame the forum (staff) for giving them that rank. In addition to that, it creates a lot more stressful workload for the forum staff (deciding who is really trustworthy isn't as easy as some think).

[hilariousandco]

I also like that idea to create another category which will be the most higher of the members and that category will be only for those members who will the most trusted members of this forum so that people will easily recognize the most trusted members of the members and we will not need any guarantee from a third party while dealing with them.

The reputation system, specifically a users trust rating is there to for this very reason. It helps distinguish users that have *proven* to be at least somewhat trustworthy from the random people on the forum. Adding specific ranks for *trusted* members may end up in potential abuse among other things. If such a member scams someone in any way or form, they're likely going to blame the forum (staff) for giving them that rank.

Exactly. You shouldn't be trusting people based on a rank anyway. You can take it into consideration but having staff implement a trusted badge or rank of whatever sort is only going to lead to abuse and a false sense of security.

[poptok1]

I think this is a decent idea (considering that the forum is aging and it's based on duration) that should be coupled with more changes before being labeled as a'revamp'.

Apropos duration, what about login time? Maybe some sort of endurance rank?
Saw few high rank users with activity just above post count (farmers) their online time must be tiny, there should be something to give justice for those who sit here and observe/read, not only posts or activity should be a factor. 

[Lauda]

Apropos duration, what about login time? Maybe some sort of endurance rank?

That won't work either since it can be easily cheated with an auto-refresh plugin.

[European Central Bank]

as someone corrected me in another thread, there really aren't that many legendaries and you have to be very consistent to get there. not many people stick around in a forum for over two years and keep the activity up.

saying that, I think it would be cool if the most tenacious posters did get some higher ranks. you'd know they were here for the serious long haul. I still wouldn't trust one without verification. all it takes is one little password to get in and wreak havoc.

[mindrust]

It has been some years since  this forum created so with every day new legendary accounts join among us.  Soon most of us will be legendaries. It would be nice to add another rank after legendary. Like legendary-plus :p I support that one.

[deisik]

The ranks should just follow the existing pattern of doubling the activity each time. Legendary should be made achievable at 960 then the next rank at 1920 and so on.

I don't think it is a good idea either to have half the forum promoted to a Legendary rank at some point in the future. In regard to keeping the activity level doubled for each rank, that shouldn't be an issue. If we decide to keep the existing schedule of increasing the activity by 14 points every other week, we would only need to increase the activity threshold for higher ranks more often (or rather less often for lower ranks). For example, incrementing the activity level required for a Senior Member by 14 would in this case require 4 weeks, within which the threshold for reaching a Hero Member rank will be increased two times by 28 in total (14+14). In this way, we will have the new activity levels set to 254 and 254x2=508, or 240+14 and 480+14+14, for Senior and Hero members, respectively...

Please note that I'm talking only about increasing the activity levels required for reaching the next rank, not about the activity itself, which will get increased as per usual, i.e. every two weeks by 14 points

[Marma Kalari]

in order to make things interesting for legendary users it advisable to have some changes in the star signs or another rank which can be used for long term users should be VETERAN  this rank must be given based on the activity level as well as a voting system between the admin or the staff members and make a bench mark which cannot be gained easily to this user class, how about this suggestion folks.

[Lauda]

The ranks should just follow the existing pattern of doubling the activity each time. Legendary should be made achievable at 960 then the next rank at 1920 and so on.

I see this problematic in the long run as you end up having a lot of people labeled in a specific rank that is supposed to be *rare*, e.g. legendary (note: How long this is going to take is debatable).

Soon most of us will be legendaries.

No, the word soon is wrong here. I've seen a lot of people state this, and yet it isn't even close to happening.

Please note that I'm talking only about increasing the activity levels required for reaching the next rank, not about the activity itself, which will get increased as per usual, i.e. every two weeks by 14 points

Progressively increasing the activity levels would probably be a more accurate description of what you're suggesting.

users should be VETERAN  this rank must be given based on the activity level as well as a voting system between the admin or the staff members and make a bench mark which cannot be gained easily to this user class, how about this suggestion folks.

Staff votes on Veteran rank for user X -> User X scams group of people Y -> Group of people Y blame staff for promoting user X. No thanks.

[indijim]

No matter what the system, eventually a lot of people will reach the highest status. If I'm not mistaken it takes years to reah legendary, so it's not easy feat. If there are a lot of people with legendary, than that means there's a lot of activity on this site, and the site is not that young anymore.

[DRaGoN RaNTaRo]

No matter what the system, eventually a lot of people will reach the highest status. If I'm not mistaken it takes years to reah legendary, so it's not easy feat. If there are a lot of people with legendary, than that means there's a lot of activity on this site, and the site is not that young anymore.

if they have a long term plan to maintain this forum for a few more years then they should think about a better system,either they have to revamp the activity level which is not possible since everyone will be affected,one thing they can do is create new ranking level and combine the hours online as well as the reported post accuracy along with the activity level and implement the new ranking levels like you see in elite torrent sites.

[Zosuda]

sounds good give the forum something new and more important ranks would be nice.

[digaran]

Can I become a hero member now? if I promise to post daily for the next 6 months or so?

We should have a ranking system working like t hat.

[jacee]

Can I become a hero member now? if I promise to post daily for the next 6 months or so?

We should have a ranking system working like t hat.

That'll only encourage more people to spam the forum with useless posts if ranks are achieved like that. The current ranking system is doing fine. Adding another rank or maybe even incentives to legendary and up members would be great.

[LoyceV]

On a side track: I really dislike seeing Hero or even Legendary members with big fat Red Trust. I'd like to suggest dropping one rank for each Red Trust from a DT-member. If a user can't be trusted at all, he should be a Newbie, even with 1000+ Activity.

[deisik]

On a side track: I really dislike seeing Hero or even Legendary members with big fat Red Trust. I'd like to suggest dropping one rank for each Red Trust from a DT-member. If a user can't be trusted at all, he should be a Newbie, even with 1000+ Activity.

This is like having thousands of Legendary members sticking around the forum, only in reverse order (but still negative in respect to forum reputation). How can someone possibly be a newbie if he has been active for many years in the forum? The latter is as discrediting as the former, though in a different way. And what should the staff do if all accusations have been removed or otherwise invalidated? To raise his rank to Hero or Legendary again?

Trust is trust while activity is activity (bad or good), and they shouldn't be mixed or confused