Forum ranks/positions/badges (What do those shiny coins under my name mean?)

[mexxer-2]

Just saw this thread

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=12156.msg169751#msg169751

whose original poster rank is anonymous: why is that?
Is him/her someone who asked to have his account deleted or what?
Or did he just asked to change his/her originale name to "anonymous"?

Sorry if it's wrong section or if it's a dumb question but is the first time I notice such a "rank"

thanks in advance for your help

AFAIK Anonymous=guest who hasn't registered an account yet, I think posts from non-registered members were allowed in the earlier stage of bitcointalk. NVM actual explanation below.

[1713914730]

1713914730

[1713914730]

1713914730

[1713914730]

1713914730

[1713914730]

1713914730

[1713914730]

1713914730

[--Encrypted--]

Just saw this thread

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=12156.msg169751#msg169751

whose original poster rank is anonymous: why is that?
Is him/her someone who asked to have his account deleted or what?
Or did he just asked to change his/her originale name to "anonymous"?

theymos change the name to anonymous and/or deleted the account. posts stays in the database.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=67541.msg789906#msg789906

[Zz]

AFAIK Anonymous=guest who hasn't registered an account yet, I think posts from non-registered members were allowed in the earlier stage of bitcointalk.

No, it was Atlas. He was registered to the forum but theymos deleted his accounts for trolling.

[azguard]

dont fotget that brand new can post for four hour they need to be on forum for that time after that they can post

[hilariousandco]

dont fotget that brand new can post for four hour they need to be on forum for that time after that they can post

That's not true and hasn't been the case for probably a year or so.

[azguard]

dont fotget that brand new can post for four hour they need to be on forum for that time after that they can post

That's not true and hasn't been the case for probably a year or so.

to bad
think that need to be back again

[shorena]

dont fotget that brand new can post for four hour they need to be on forum for that time after that they can post

That's not true and hasn't been the case for probably a year or so.

to bad
think that need to be back again

The newbie jail did not stop spammers, but kept many actually new users out. Just considering how many people create an account to ask for help in the german section its good that we no longer have that jail. I suspect this is similar for other local sections. While english is common, there are still some that do not feel confident enough to ask for help in a language they barley understand. Why force those to spend 4 hours and a few posts in a section they can contribute nothing to. argument refuted by Cyrus below.

[Cyrus]

Just considering how many people create an account to ask for help in the german section its good that we no longer have that jail. I suspect this is similar for other local sections.

IIRC local sections were exempt from the newbie jail. They were the only place, besides the newbie section, where newbie members could post.

[dnaleor]

I already proposed this, but let me expand on it a bit

I suggest to take into account inactivity as well
for example when you don't post once every 2 weeks, you can actually loose points once you become a senior member

also scaling the needed activity/posts/login time dynamically somehow (certainly for higher ranks) seems reasonable.
Maybe even add trust to the mix.

If you can loose points, a lot of "old spam accounts" wouldn't be sold to new users, because those accounts wouldn't have a high ranking.
I suggest that people can loose 14 points for every period you weren't active starting from the full level. When you have dropped back to the points needed for full level (126), you can't drop any further.

I suggest to reserve the rank "ledgendary" for people who reached some kind of level in the "trust three". I suggest level 2.
This way, we would (1) encourage honest behavior (less scams)  and (2) encourage the use of adding people to the trust list, not using the default trust list.
This won't be easy to implement, but I think it would add a lot of value
Also, please remove the "randomness" for ledgendary and just make it 2.5 years be default (910 points) or just 1000 points for the nice round number.

[kydranel]

Avatar is an alternative low rank character of high ranking members in order to make some signatures that some signature campaigns require and other reasons? am i right?.

[hilariousandco]

Avatar is an alternative low rank character of high ranking members in order to make some signatures that some signature campaigns require and other reasons? am i right?

Uwotm8  . Your post makes zero sense but if you mean only Full Members and above can have avatars and some people choose to rent them out on signature campaigns then yes you're right. If not, then no.

[kingaltcoins]

It would be better to add this tag for scammers since default trust can be manipulated by some green trust members !

SCAMMER: Manually applied by administration, regardless of post count and gets 5 red Xs under his name.  

[hilariousandco]

It would be better to add this tag for scammers since default trust can be manipulated by some green trust members !

SCAMMER: Manually applied by administration, regardless of post count and gets 5 red Xs under his name.  

It would be too much work for staff and mods generally don't get involved with scam accusations and is why it was removed. And what makes you think staff couldn't be manipulated the same way? It would be just too much fuss and people would be pestering mods to tag the hundreds of accounts that try scam here. 

[kingaltcoins]

It would be too much work for staff and mods generally don't get involved with scam accusations and is why it was removed. It would be just too much fuss and people would be pestering mods to tag the hundreds of accounts that try scam here. 

Can't it be configured manually in such a way that an user with a negative trust of 2 gets that "5-cross tag" forever after 14 days, if the accuser doesn't change his mind (obviously he won't) but if he removes his remark (rare case) for that user within or after 14 days, the "5-cross tag" also gets removed automatically after 30 minutes?

And what makes you think staff couldn't be manipulated the same way?

FYI, "staff" members are not just selected merely by one's activity count right? If not, then staffs are to be trusted.

[mexxer-2]

It would be too much work for staff and mods generally don't get involved with scam accusations and is why it was removed. It would be just too much fuss and people would be pestering mods to tag the hundreds of accounts that try scam here.  

Can't it be configured manually in such a way that an user with a negative trust of 2 gets that "5-cross tag" forever after 14 days, if the accuser doesn't change his mind (obviously he won't) but if he removes his remark (rare case) for that user within or after 14 days, the "5-cross tag" also gets removed automatically after 30 minutes?

And what makes you think staff couldn't be manipulated the same way?

FYI, "staff" members are not just selected merely by one's activity count right? If not, then staffs are to be trusted.

Staff have been doing unethical things as well, one example that I can give of is EAL claiming giveaways from PD from various accounts Stunna has locked the thread so that EAL may not have gotten a chance to prove otherwise, another would be a staff member who first promised a guy payment of 0.x payment(xDeathwing) and only paid 0.0x, and there was another one too.
BTW FYI DefaultTrust members are "chosen" as well

[hilariousandco]

It would be too much work for staff and mods generally don't get involved with scam accusations and is why it was removed. It would be just too much fuss and people would be pestering mods to tag the hundreds of accounts that try scam here.  

Can't it be configured manually in such a way that an user with a negative trust of 2 gets that "5-cross tag" forever after 14 days, if the accuser doesn't change his mind (obviously he won't) but if he removes his remark (rare case) for that user within or after 14 days, the "5-cross tag" also gets removed automatically after 30 minutes?

Why do we need a specific scammer tag when the trade with extreme caution is usually enough and works pretty good at the moment?

And what makes you think staff couldn't be manipulated the same way?

FYI, "staff" members are not just selected merely by one's activity count right? If not, then staffs are to be trusted.

Staff are selected by how good their reporting is, doesn't mean to say we can be totally trusted. People should do their due diligence with any user here regardless of rank. A staff member might not rip you off for a bitcoin or two but might for 100. Some staff may be open to bribes for certain things as well.

[kingaltcoins]

Staff are selected by how good their reporting is ....

What do you mean by that ? Is it like "the more positive trust points a member possess, more is the chance of becoming a staff member ?

[hilariousandco]

No, the number/accuracy of the posts you have reported.

[healer]

I will also try to report useless posts from now

[Classy]

I know this post is old but thank you for it. I was confused how the rankings worked and what they meant.