A thought about post counts. |
A thought about post counts. |
![]()
Post
#1
|
|
![]() The one man Voltron ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Member Posts: 711 Joined: Dec 2006 Member No: 491,519 ![]() |
In my short experience as a CreateBlog community member, I have realized post statistics do play a significant role in the user's experience since they grant access to extra features and are a requisite (that can be bypassed in exceptional occasions) to apply for staff membership. This is the not the first place where I have seen this system being used, and thusly it is not the first time I pass this thought to the community to consider. Without further ado, I'll proceed to explain my position about this subject.
In my opinion, post quotas only manage to make users work enough to meet them in order to enjoy the benefits they get for reaching the 50, 100, etc.., post mark. Such acting is not necessarily linked to making users involved in improving the community, but rather in seeking personal goals that may or may not transcend (positive or negatively) onto the rest of users. That is mainly because apart from the site's general rules, there's not a standard establishing how a person should fill the demanded rate. Since it's pretty easy to maintain a high PPD ratio without adding anything that contributes to the site in general while avoiding the violation of any general rule, the point of having a posts limit becomes kind of moot, in the end. Lastly, keeping a post count policy seems to have stemmed an underlying rivalry between users based upon the number of posts when it comes to, for example, hiring sessions. Despite knowing it's not a must-meet requirement, people seem to focus first on their PPD then on evaluating whether their skills can be of any help to Createblog or not. And that is pretty counterproductive to the purpose of selecting people willing to sacrifice time and efforts for an online community. |
|
|
![]() |
*Azarel* |
![]()
Post
#2
|
Guest ![]() |
Also, as a side note, if a user has his or her warning level raised, Official Members status is automatically revoked (the board is set to do this). The member has to reapply after his/her warning level goes back to zero. I thought it might be nice to know that our Official Members at least have to stay out of trouble. Actually, it's not; the only way any members change status groups is by being manually moved by the admin. In any case, I agree that post count should at least be removed from the miniprofile at the left of every post because a member should not be posting to increase that number but rather to improve the quality of the site. I know that I have long since ceased to pay attention to it, especially because the post count displayed is inaccurate of the actual number of quality posts and threads I've created.![]() I would say the timespan from the user's first post to their most recent one. That seems to be the most accurate way to go about doing it. >.< I'd also suggest going about the issue this way, perhaps with staff members helping calculate how long the member has been active. Uhm. Despite reading all the posts in this thread, I'm still not entirely sure where the discussion is so that's all I have to say for now. ![]() |
|
|
*Libertie* |
![]()
Post
#3
|
Guest ![]() |
Actually, it's not; the only way any members change status groups is by being manually moved by the admin. Hmm, for some reason I thought that was how it worked. =x Ah well. Anyway, in short, issues discussed in this topic:
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |