Activity & new membergroup limits

[TheSwede75]

I think everyone should start out as "Smelly Pirate Hooker" and move all the way through the ranks as, "Weather Woman", "Sports Reporter", "Sex Panther" and finally "Anchorman" status. But hey, that's just me..

[Korbman]

I think that it should be more of something like this:

time = number of 1-day periods in which you've posted since your registration
activity = min(time, posts)

That'd make people feel paranoid about always getting a post in each day, I think.

True.

What about weekly instead of bi-weekly?

[DeathAndTaxes]

If I post 1 message per fortnight for the next year, I'll get hero. That incentive to contribute.

Uh ... no. 

1 post every 14 days would be + 1 activity every 14 days.   So in a year you would have +26 activity.

If you post 14 times per 14 days then yes you will be a "hero" in a year.  Then again if you are still around regularly posting week after week for a year doesn't it make sense that you should be.   You haven't gamed anything.

[Matthew N. Wright]

If I post 1 message per fortnight for the next year, I'll get hero. That incentive to contribute.

Uh ... no.  

1 post every 14 days would be + 1 activity every 14 days.   So in a year you would have +26 activity.

If you post 14 times per 14 days then yes you will be a "hero" in a year.  Then again if you are still around regularly posting week after week for a year doesn't it make sense that you should be.   You haven't gamed anything.

This. You've successfully 'gamed' the system by being rewarded for exactly what Hero Members are supposed to be rewarded for.

"HAHA I SCAMMED A PAYCHECK FROM MY BOSS BY WORKING 9-5...SUCKER!"

[DeathAndTaxes]

Why do people keep repeating this! It is EASIER than before because all you do is create an account, do 7 posts a week and you gain hero status by WAITING. Not by doing anything, not by being credible, but by WAITING.

And by that virtue, EVERYONE will get promoted to hero.

If logic not your strong suit.

Old System:
Post 400 times in any amount of time (even a single day) = "hero"

New System:
Post on average 14 times per two week period for 400/14 / 26 = 1.09 years = "hero"

How exactly is there any possible scenario where the new system is "easier".  To "game" the new system at a minimum one needs to create an account, login every two weeks, spam 14 posts, and repeat that 26 times.

[edd]

If I post 1 message per fortnight for the next year, I'll get hero. That incentive to contribute.

Uh ... no.  

1 post every 14 days would be + 1 activity every 14 days.   So in a year you would have +26 activity.

If you post 14 times per 14 days then yes you will be a "hero" in a year.  Then again if you are still around regularly posting week after week for a year doesn't it make sense that you should be.   You haven't gamed anything.

This. You've successfully 'gamed' the system by being rewarded for exactly what Hero Members are supposed to be rewarded for.

"HAHA I SCAMMED A PAYCHECK FROM MY BOSS BY WORKING 9-5...SUCKER!"

And what about all the people who won't be able to join the community because they're terrible at making helpful and constructive co-- ... oh.

[DeathAndTaxes]

I think that it should be more of something like this:

time = number of 1-day periods in which you've posted since your registration
activity = min(time, posts)

That'd make people feel paranoid about always getting a post in each day, I think.

Agreed.  That would be horrible.  stackoverflow has a badge where you need to login for 100 consecutive days.  Despite regularly posting questions and answers there for years I always miss a day.  It annoys the crap out of me.

I think 14 day period if fine although you might want to consider 7 day or 30 day simply because it a more logical unit when people think about time.

[Meni Rosenfeld]

If I post 1 message per fortnight for the next year, I'll get hero. That incentive to contribute.

Uh ... no. 

1 post every 14 days would be + 1 activity every 14 days.   So in a year you would have +26 activity.

If you post 14 times per 14 days then yes you will be a "hero" in a year.  Then again if you are still around regularly posting week after week for a year doesn't it make sense that you should be.   You haven't gamed anything.

Actually dogie was right about this particular point.

Note he said "I". He already has 834 posts so if he now posts once a fortnight for 52 weeks he'll have time = 33, posts = 860, activity = min (33*14, 860) = 462 = hero.

That's one of the things I tried to solve with my modification.

Old System:
Post 400 times in any amount of time (even a single day) = "hero"

it was 500 posts per hero in the old system.

Agreed.  That would be horrible.  stackoverflow has a badge where you need to login for 100 consecutive days.  Despite regularly posting questions and answers there for years I always miss a day.  It annoys the crap out of me.

Tell me about it. Eventually I realized "WTF do I care about this badge" and restored order to my life.

[KS]

I guess it's only the "new heroes" who are feeling the "loss".

This new system strikes me as a complicated way to classify members. Why not simply display the post count/registration date/logged-in days? It's not ideal, but "activity" in its current form is in fact rather a measure of longevity or time spent on the forum than activity - like posting.

Also, even though it didn't seem to be used much, I think the "trust" button is useful. you can still see it in the profile but it's much more useful next to the activity/email/whatnot.

[Meni Rosenfeld]

Also, even though it didn't seem to be used much, I think the "trust" button is useful. you can still see it in the profile but it's much more useful next to the activity/email/whatnot.

The trust rating is visible (edit: only) next to posts when you're browsing the marketplace subforum, as it has been since inception.

[gweedo]

I guess it's only the "new heroes" who are feeling the "loss".

Does being a hero member really matter? I know many sr. members who do great things and don't care about hero membership.

[KS]

Also, even though it didn't seem to be used much, I think the "trust" button is useful. you can still see it in the profile but it's much more useful next to the activity/email/whatnot.

The trust rating is visible next to posts when you're browsing the marketplace subforum, as it has been since inception.

It was also visible "everywhere" (my impression). I think it's also useful for non-marketplace threads, a better indication of character than post count/activity/longevity.

[KS]

I guess it's only the "new heroes" who are feeling the "loss".

Does being a hero member really matter? I know many sr. members who do great things and don't care about hero membership.

I'm only judging by the comments in this thread. I does make sense to me that, after being recently promoted to "hero" status, some do feel cheated, as they equate post count to mojo or sth. (bad example, don't flame  )

[Amph]

so this is just to make status more harder to get?

[DannyHamilton]

Was a hero member, now I'm a Sr. Member.  In about 6 more weeks I'll be a hero member again.  In the end, none of these labels really mean much to me.  I can glance a persons post history and in about 10 seconds I can tell if it is worth paying attention to anything they say.  I'm happy with the new system even though I've lost my "hero" status, of course I was happy with the old system as well.  It really isn't worth getting worked up about.

[Welsh]

Literally, these titles mean nothing to me. Just like the above post. You can have all the status in the world. But, it doesn't mean I trust you because you have been a long term user.
This is useful for newbies and spotting scammers. But, they'll find a way to constantly scam, they always do.

[bspurloc]

Literally, these titles mean nothing to me. Just like the above post. You can have all the status in the world. But, it doesn't mean I trust you because you have been a long term user.
This is useful for newbies and spotting scammers. But, they'll find a way to constantly scam, they always do.

It is just Vanity. scammers scam cuz there is a way and there is always dumb dumbs to be scammed

[WuLabsWuTecH]

time = number of two-week periods in which you've posted since your registration
activity = min(time * 14, posts)

I don't like it.

It embodies the assumption that any post above once per day (averaged over two weeks) is not contributing; which I do not agree with.

At the very least number of posts per day should be increased, e.g. min(time * 28, posts).

And you should consider more sophisticated metrics such as sum of f(x) over all two-week periods, f(x) being x / (1 + sqrt(x/14)) or x / (1 + x/28).

Time spent logged in will also be useful to include as a component.

Now let's take the indefinite integral of that function...

Challenge accepted!

Code:

                                         3/2
                             2 Sqrt[14] x
28 Sqrt[14] Sqrt[x] - 14 x + --------------- - 
                                    3
 
  392 Log[14 + Sqrt[14] Sqrt[x]]

Or

28(x-28log(x+28))

I had to use an integrator of the first, the second was easy to do by hand.

[Bjork]

I like this new system actually.  So if I post once per two weeks I get +14 activity??  (until I surpass my current post count)

[DannyHamilton]

I like this new system actually.  So if I post once per two weeks I get +14 activity??  (until I surpass my current post count)

Yes, if your current post count is higher than your activity, then your activity will grow by +14 for every two weeks that you have at least one post.

Once your activity is equal to your post count (if ever), then your activity will increase every two weeks by the lesser of 14 or the number of new posts you make.