A thought about post counts. Options

[*Libertie*]

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:

• Should the post count be removed from display?
  So far, we've discussed removing the post count only from the miniprofile next to every post, or removing it from display from the general public, meaning that each individual can see only his own post count. Of course, they would still be displayed for the staff members.
  
  
• Should there be a minimum post count requirement for making a request?
  This hasn't really been covered, but my point of view is that the designer should ultimately make the decision on whether or not to accept a request, so if he or she wants to make a layout/graphic for a user with no posts, that's the designer's prerogative.
  
  
• Is there a problem with our current system for Official Membership requirements?
  It's been discussed that having a minimum post count requirement encourages users to attain Official Membership in as little as 1-2 days by making quick, thoughtless posts. However, since the OM title is a reward for those who are actively a part of the community, the post count does need to play a role. One suggestion that is currently being discussed is the idea that in order to become an Official Member, the user must be a member for a set period of time (one month) and maintain a minimum ppd (assumedly 5). This is a lower post count requirement than the one currently put into place (about 150 compared to 200), but it doesn't allow for a user meeting all the requirements in just a couple of days - rather, it encourages the member to take his time getting acquainted with the community before collecting the posts. The problem is how to go about figuring out how long the user has been a member. Do we figure out the actual join date? I would rather use the timespan from the user's first post to the most recent.

[*mona lisa*]

Yup, it has to be dome manually by admins.

Should there be a minimum post count requirement for making a request?

• This hasn't really been covered, but my point of view is that the designer should ultimately make the decision on whether or not to accept a request, so if he or she wants to make a layout/graphic for a user with no posts, that's the designer's prerogative.

So I now think having the minimum post count to request something isn't beneficial. As it has been mentioned, members often spam in order to meet that requirement. And I agree that if a designer wants to fulfill a request, it's up to him/her to decide if he/she wants to do it for someone without any posts, same as whether or not he/she wants to actually fulfill the request at all.

[*I Shot JFK*]

Yup, it has to be dome manually by admins.

[/list]So I now think having the minimum post count to request something isn't beneficial. As it has been mentioned, members often spam in order to meet that requirement. And I agree that if a designer wants to fulfill a request, it's up to him/her to decide if he/she wants to do it for someone without any posts, same as whether or not he/she wants to actually fulfill the request at all.

Agreed.

My concern with the idea of looking at a member's earliest post in conjunction with their ppd in order to determine official membership is that members who have long periods of inactivity will find it hard to keep up... But i suppose as long as there is provision for 'special cases' as it were, then it's all good

[*Libertie*]

^Right, a person who posts a little at first, doesn't come back for a while, then comes back, posts a lot, and brings up his ppd - that doesn't seem like too much of a problem because at least at that point he's had to wait a month and it doesn't seem like he was posting with the sole intention of meeting the OM requirements.

..or does that even make sense? Remind me not to post when I haven't slept in 34 hours.

[radhikaeatsraman]

I believe we should get rid of the post count requirement altogether, but that staff and other current official members/designers should determine who deserves the title of official member or designer. It shouldn't be something any boob can attain in a matter of days. If a moderator or official member believes that someone deserves to be one, they should PM an admin saying why. The admins, mods and official members should then decide who attains that particular title.

[viugiufgjhfhjfhg...]

I believe we should get rid of the post count requirement altogether, but that staff and other current official members/designers should determine who deserves the title of official member or designer. It shouldn't be something any boob can attain in a matter of days. If a moderator or official member believes that someone deserves to be one, they should PM an admin saying why. The admins, mods and official members should then decide who attains that particular title.

Ideally, "peer review" would be the best way to make sure someone deserves Official Membership status; however that could be a very slow process due to the number of people implied in each decision. Also, I don't think this system would produce that many fair nominations having seeng the interactions between members during a hiring session, et al.

I'd preffer a more automated selection process that's less depending on CB users (other than staff members, of course); this far into the discussion, I am quite satisified with giving people probation time to earn O.M. on their own merits.

[viugiufgjhfhjfhg...]

Yesterday I noticed of another "negative" aspect of having to meet a post requirement in order to maintain Official Membership.

A user that has been an active member for an extended period of time, that does own a significant number of posts and then goes on a hiatus ( its PPD falling under 5) does seem to have a harder time bringing up its post rate than a newer member.

That seems to be a problem with the PPD formula, though. I'll try to find the case that gave me the idea, and I'll update it in this post.

[*Azarel*]

A user that has been an active member for an extended period of time, that does own a significant number of posts and then goes on a hiatus ( its PPD falling under 5) does seem to have a harder time bringing up its post rate than a newer member.

This is true, and some members that go on hiatus create new usernames in order to avoid having to pull up an extremely lacking ppd. However, there have also been members that work to raise up their ppd, in spite of long hiatuses; I myself was one of them, eventually raising my ppd up to a peak of about ten-ish (at least), after a five month hiatus (before I unregistered).

... I forgot my point, and I'll edit it when I remember (hopefully).

[gelionie]

It's true that it's very difficult to bring up your PPD after a hiatus of one month or more, when your PPD originally isn't that high.

It took me half a year to get official member status with two months hiatus in between.

[datass]

What about those people that joined few years ago, and was not active until few months ago? It was hard to get my PPD up even though I've been really active for the past few months just because I joined earlier back and wasn't active.

[gelionie]

^ yea, I agree. It's not fair.

[HakunaMatata]

• Should the post count be removed from display?
  So far, we've discussed removing the post count only from the miniprofile next to every post, or removing it from display from the general public, meaning that each individual can see only his own post count. Of course, they would still be displayed for the staff members.

Having it visible causes pre-judgement, so I'd like to see it removed from view completely except, as you said, to the the individual and staff.

• Should there be a minimum post count requirement for making a request?
  This hasn't really been covered, but my point of view is that the designer should ultimately make the decision on whether or not to accept a request, so if he or she wants to make a layout/graphic for a user with no posts, that's the designer's prerogative.

Mmm, I like the minimum post count, because then at least the requester knows to make posts. However, a low 25 minimum of quality posts sounds like a good compromise. As stated, it is the designer's choice in the end, but perhaps emphasizing making quality posts will result in a complete layout and good contribution the community.

• Is there a problem with our current system for Official Membership requirements?
  It's been discussed that having a minimum post count requirement encourages users to attain Official Membership in as little as 1-2 days by making quick, thoughtless posts. However, since the OM title is a reward for those who are actively a part of the community, the post count does need to play a role. One suggestion that is currently being discussed is the idea that in order to become an Official Member, the user must be a member for a set period of time (one month) and maintain a minimum ppd (assumedly 5). This is a lower post count requirement than the one currently put into place (about 150 compared to 200), but it doesn't allow for a user meeting all the requirements in just a couple of days - rather, it encourages the member to take his time getting acquainted with the community before collecting the posts. The problem is how to go about figuring out how long the user has been a member. Do we figure out the actual join date? I would rather use the timespan from the user's first post to the most recent.

I like the set period of time idea, it'll stop the rampage of come-and-go users that just want the title for nothing. However, I think a new formula needs to be worked out to include those who go on hiatus. Maybe only calculating posts per day of the weeks that they were actually active?

[*Uronacid*]

I can't stand the fact that:

When I'm not an official member I can't edit the title to my post. If I make an error, I can't fix it... it really upsets me.

[*Libertie*]

Having it visible causes pre-judgement, so I'd like to see it removed from view completely except, as you said, to the the individual and staff.

I agree with you, I'd like to get rid of the pre-judgment that goes along with seeing the post count next to a person's post. Do you think, then, that it should be removed from the user's profile (when you click their screenname) as well? I'd be satisfied with just having it removed from view when reading topics.

I like the set period of time idea, it'll stop the rampage of come-and-go users that just want the title for nothing. However, I think a new formula needs to be worked out to include those who go on hiatus. Maybe only calculating posts per day of the weeks that they were actually active?

I thought about this, and for Melissa, the user that actually started this discussion between Jordi and I, I actually looked over her most recent posts for the past couple of months to calculate her current ppd, so to speak. I would say that for cases such as this one, we should go by how active they currently are as opposed to how active they've been, but this creates a lot of extra work for the admins since there isn't a set way to keep track of it after OM status has been given to them. Admins have to keep checking to make sure Official Members are keeping up their 5 ppd requirement, and it would be pretty difficult to have to remember a specific set of users who have become exceptions to the rule. =\

[viugiufgjhfhjfhg...]

I agree with you, I'd like to get rid of the pre-judgment that goes along with seeing the post count next to a person's post. Do you think, then, that it should be removed from the user's profile (when you click their screenname) as well? I'd be satisfied with just having it removed from view when reading topics.
I thought about this, and for Melissa, the user that actually started this discussion between Jordi and I, I actually looked over her most recent posts for the past couple of months to calculate her current ppd, so to speak. I would say that for cases such as this one, we should go by how active they currently are as opposed to how active they've been, but this creates a lot of extra work for the admins since there isn't a set way to keep track of it after OM status has been given to them. Admins have to keep checking to make sure Official Members are keeping up their 5 ppd requirement, and it would be pretty difficult to have to remember a specific set of users who have become exceptions to the rule. =\

I do agree that it will be an herculean task for the administrators to review post histories and decide wether to grant OM again or not, depending on the case.

I don't know if having a topic where users that go on a break could post and announce their departure would help with regards to keeping the number of cases for admins to study under control. It's quite likely that we'd need to set up a rule establishing that only people who post in that topic would have their cases reviewed, too. Under the light of the "CBers on leave", that is.

[MiSSxMELON]

In my opinion, post counts play a mixed role.

It's good in the sense that it shows activity in members, but post counts aren't the only factor. How often a member is on createblog is also a valid point.

In my case, I have a very low PPD, but I am on very often. The reasons why I have a low post count are, 1. When I first started cB, I focused more on submitting graphics than participating in the forums and 2. When I began to explore the forums, I only posted when I had something meaningful to say, such as expressing my opinions or thoughts, or I posted when others replied to what I said.

Unfortunately, because of the importance of PPDs, I doubt I will ever have a major "role" on cB, since mine is so low. However, I don't mind because I still contribute through submitting graphics.

And who knows? Once I start to get to know others better, I'll probably post more. IRL, no one would be able to get me to shut up. :D

[viugiufgjhfhjfhg...]

I found this topic while lurking through the Lounge archives. It's not directly linked to this discussion, but rather I thought it would be strange if Official Members received this kind of treatment nowadays.

Woooooouldn't it be nice

[*Uronacid*]

I found this topic while lurking through the Lounge archives. It's not directly linked to this discussion, but rather I thought it would be strange if Official Members received this kind of treatment nowadays.

Woooooouldn't it be nice

It sucks that it's not like this anymore... truth is, no-one cares about post counts, and official membership anymore...