New rank?

[DLCseller]

How about Vod Blamer?
Im blaming Vod for this thread.

[1713514057]

1713514057

[Muhammed Zakir]

How about Vod Blamer?
Im blaming Vod for this thread.

Don't drag user's name into this.

If you really like it, put "Vid blamer" in personal message.

[hilariousandco]

Can I suggest an opposite thing (related with the ranks). Why not decrease the activity when an user been banned (for spam reason) this should improve the quality of all the posts and I am sure the users will put more attention in what they write here (in the forum). That was just my personal opinion and I don't think it is necessary to add a new rank, but I am still supporting the color for each rank.

It should be good idea. What if the ban was for PM spam? Does this still apply or only for "substantial posts"?

P.S. Admins should tell about this in the ban notice or else, we will have to see many threads in Meta.

I don't think this is a good idea. Activity would only really matter much to signature advertisers and from what I gather some sort of signature bans that can be dished out to individually users as a punishment were being looked into by BadBear and theymos.

[DLCseller]

How about Vod Blamer?
Im blaming Vod for this thread.

Don't drag user's name into this.

If you really like it, put "Vid blamer" in personal message.

Im just kidding,mate.
But Im still gonna blame Vod for this.

[el kaka22]

How about Vod Blamer?
Im blaming Vod for this thread.

Why are you blaming Vod? The topic's starter wasn't him, it was another user called yatyatling. But he has the first reply of this:

The current highest rank here is Legendary with 775-1030 activity points to achieve. Perhaps we can have a higher rank at like 1300-1400 points? Like 'History Maker' or 'Part of Bitcoin History' etc.?
It's just a suggestion. You can take or not take it.

How about Vodlike ?

[DLCseller]

How about Vod Blamer?
Im blaming Vod for this thread.

Why are you blaming Vod? The topic's starter wasn't him, it was another user called yatyatling. But he has the first reply of this:

The current highest rank here is Legendary with 775-1030 activity points to achieve. Perhaps we can have a higher rank at like 1300-1400 points? Like 'History Maker' or 'Part of Bitcoin History' etc.?
It's just a suggestion. You can take or not take it.

How about Vodlike ?

Im blaming Vod because of him, I suggest "Vod blamer" for a new rank.

[Muhammed Zakir]

Can I suggest an opposite thing (related with the ranks). Why not decrease the activity when an user been banned (for spam reason) this should improve the quality of all the posts and I am sure the users will put more attention in what they write here (in the forum). That was just my personal opinion and I don't think it is necessary to add a new rank, but I am still supporting the color for each rank.

It should be good idea. What if the ban was for PM spam? Does this still apply or only for "substantial posts"?

P.S. Admins should tell about this in the ban notice or else, we will have to see many threads in Meta.

I don't think this is a good idea. Activity would only really matter much to signature advertisers and from what I gather some sort of signature bans that can be dished out to individually users as a punishment were being looked into by BadBear and theymos.

Disabling signature will do the work too.

Most people nowadays are banned for sig spam, so decreasing their activity may also make their rank go down, not all time, but will and also, this increases the time for their promotion. So I think this is a good idea but may not be good as disabling signature.

[hilariousetc]

Most people nowadays are banned for sig spam, so decreasing their activity may also make their rank go down, not all time, but will and also, this increases the time for their promotion.

It might not make their rank go down either. There's quite a substantial amount of activity to be gained between FM to Snr and Snr to Hero so it won't have much difference if you're in between those ranks. A signature ban will be far more effective in these instances.

[R2D221]

After a while they will become more common though and eventually everyone who is active will likely become Legendary so new ranks should be added over time.

The solution to this is adjust the current rankings, not create new ones.

[Muhammed Zakir]

After a while they will become more common though and eventually everyone who is active will likely become Legendary so new ranks should be added over time.

The solution to this is adjust the current rankings, not create new ones.

I think by "adjusting", you meant to increase activity for ranks. I don't think this is better than adding new rank and also this look unjust towards new members to me.

[hilariousandco]

After a while they will become more common though and eventually everyone who is active will likely become Legendary so new ranks should be added over time.

The solution to this is adjust the current rankings, not create new ones.

Nah, I don't think so. I think it would be unfair if people were getting demoted. If the ranks keep getting longer and longer to achieve it wouldn't be bad (say five years to get the next level after Legendary then eventually ten after that for example).

[Grand_Voyageur]

Most people nowadays are banned for sig spam, so decreasing their activity may also make their rank go down, not all time, but will and also, this increases the time for their promotion.

It might not make their rank go down either. There's quite a substantial amount of activity to be gained between FM to Snr and Snr to Hero so it won't have much difference if you're in between those ranks. A signature ban will be far more effective in these instances.

What about an auxiliary penalty to be included with temp bans? Like an halving of amount of activity that can be earned after the expiration of the same ban? As an example, If someone got banned for 14 days after the ban expired, in the next 14 days he could earn only 50% of activity. If he got banned for 60 days after the ban expired, in the next 60 days he could earn only 50% of activity.

[redsn0w]

Most people nowadays are banned for sig spam, so decreasing their activity may also make their rank go down, not all time, but will and also, this increases the time for their promotion.

It might not make their rank go down either. There's quite a substantial amount of activity to be gained between FM to Snr and Snr to Hero so it won't have much difference if you're in between those ranks. A signature ban will be far more effective in these instances.

What about an auxiliary penalty to be included with temp bans? Like an halving of amount of activity that can be earned after the expiration of the same ban? As an example, If someone got banned for 14 days after the ban expired, in the next 14 days he could earn only 50% of activity. If he got banned for 60 days after the ban expired, in the next 60 days he could earn only 50% of activity.

It "similar" to my suggestion, but I have asked the diminution of the activity for each ban so also if someone received 2-5 ban he can continuing post after his ban (with the limitation of the ranks but he cannot wear a properly signature).

[--Encrypted--]

I just got an idea..

how about adding a secondary rank? A rank which depends on a user's post quality or their average number of words per post?
post quality can be decided by users, but some kind of "like" button feature is required.
 (which can only be used by full members and above. I think this should be obvious, but oh well.)

I think that will decrease the low-quality posts a bit... maybe

[Muhammed Zakir]

I think that will decrease the low-quality posts a bit... maybe

I don't think so.

I just got an idea..

how about adding a secondary rank?

Additional rank is better.

A rank which depends on a user's post quality

It will have to be done manually and if it is, this rank will be suit best as a badge. I don't like it even if it is a badge though.

or their average number of words per post?

It will only increase spams. People will put more crap in their post to get this rank.

post quality can be decided by users, but some kind of "like" button feature is required.

It can be easily misused using alts.

Overall, no from me.

[el kaka22]

In fact most of the signature campaigns now don't count low quality posts. So the signature spams also won't be counted. I hope that people can think before they post.

[merve10495]

"Part of the furniture"

Can we have "Part of the infrastructure" for the level above that

[Muhammed Zakir]

In fact most of the signature campaigns now don't count low quality posts. So the signature spams also won't be counted. I hope that people can think before they post.

Are you sure about that? I think managers do check the posts but I don't think all managers check all posts and campaigns using bots will count spams and it may not count substantial posts. Most bots check the number of words in user's post which is wrong to check whether a post is substantial or spam. Some spams may look like substantial post. It is hard to know "real" intention of the user. I do think signature campaigns increase spams.

[yatyatling]

In fact most of the signature campaigns now don't count low quality posts. So the signature spams also won't be counted. I hope that people can think before they post.

Are you sure about that? I think managers do check the posts but I don't think all managers check all posts and campaigns using bots will count spams and it may not count substantial posts. Most bots check the number of words in user's post which is wrong to check whether a post is substantial or spam. Some spams may look like substantial post. It is hard to know "real" intention of the user. I do think signature campaings increase spams.

I agree your point, but you have a typo (bolded)

[redsn0w]

In fact most of the signature campaigns now don't count low quality posts. So the signature spams also won't be counted. I hope that people can think before they post.

Are you sure about that? I think managers do check the posts but I don't think all managers check all posts and campaigns using bots will count spams and it may not count substantial posts. Most bots check the number of words in user's post which is wrong to check whether a post is substantial or spam. Some spams may look like substantial post. It is hard to know "real" intention of the user. I do think signature campaigns increase spams.

Simple the signature campaigns maintainers should accept only valid users in their sig. campaign if the allow each user to enroll it is normal that the spam will increase (but as someone said yesterday (a well know term term) "any publicity is a good publicity") because more posts >> more view of the signature but when you try to write more the quality of the posts will drop.