New rank or old.

Vilkacis · Post by **Vilkacis** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:05 pm

Whatever we choose, let's stick with it. Poll open for 3 days.

-- Vilkacis

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:08 pm

Vilkacis wrote:Whatever we choose, let's stick with it. Poll open for 3 days.

-- Vilkacis

Well, just so you know. I didn't right down the old ranking system.

You're going to have to come up with a new chart if everone picks the old one.

Goldenwolf · Post by **Goldenwolf** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:08 pm

Hmmm, how about ranking NOT based upon your post count, but your contribution to the pack? We all know who in the Pack contributes and who does not, and the value of their contributions, so base it on that instead.

OR

Have no ranking at all. Make it all equal and fair.

Vilkacis · Post by **Vilkacis** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:11 pm

Figarou wrote: Well, just so you know. I didn't right down the old ranking system.

You're going to have to come up with a new chart if everone picks the old one.

The bottom part of the scale was left exactly the same in the rankings I came up with. I didn't mess with that part.

0-4
5-9
10-19
20-29
30-49
50+

-- Vilkacis

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:12 pm

Goldenwolf wrote:Hmmm, how about ranking NOT based upon your post count, but your contribution to the pack?

This phpBB only goes by post count. There is no way to figure out your contribution to the Pack.

Goldenwolf · Post by **Goldenwolf** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:14 pm

I own my own PHPBB board, and I know for a fact that you can make your own ranks that you can individually assign to people that have no bearing on the post count. It would be quite a task to decide who gets what....so for that you would probably want to have people vote on others' ranks...or something. I don't know if there IS a way to make this all fair, other than we all know who contributes to the pack and who does not. You could go by that, but perhaps that might piss others off?

I dunno. Tough call here.

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:22 pm

Goldenwolf wrote:I own my own PHPBB board, and I know for a fact that you can make your own ranks that you can individually assign to people that have no bearing on the post count. It would be quite a task to decide who gets what....so for that you would probably want to have people vote on others' ranks...or something. I don't know if there IS a way to make this all fair, other than we all know who contributes to the pack and who does not. You could go by that, but perhaps that might piss others off?

I dunno. Tough call here.

Yes, it is a tough call.

Also, this board doesn't have the mods uploaded to it. (Modified programs) I dare not mess with it.

Vuldari · Post by **Vuldari** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:24 pm

Figarou wrote:
Goldenwolf wrote:Hmmm, how about ranking NOT based upon your post count, but your contribution to the pack?
This phpBB only goes by post count. There is no way to figure out your contribution to the Pack.

I Strongly advise against trying to judge each other like that. Just how then would the people who are judged to be insignificant contrubutors feel?

...not a good situation.

Really...It may just be best to remove the ranking system alltogether, but leave the post count visible for the sake of those who are curious.

I like the idea of being able to create a sort of custom "Title" (rather than a "Rank") though. Like, just a part of the member profile (along with "location", etc.).

I'm not sure what I would call myself though.

Vilkacis · Post by **Vilkacis** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:27 pm

Vuldari wrote:I'm not sure what I would call myself though.

I seem to remember you wanting to call yourself a Pack greeter, or some such, once upon a time... or maybe I'm just imagining things.

-- Vilkacis

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:31 pm

Vuldari wrote:

I Strongly advise against trying to judge each other like that. Just how then would the people who are judged to be insignificant contrubutors feel?

...not a good situation.

Whoa..Stop and think for a second. I know someone who has contributed to the Pack big time and he just joined today!!! ABrownrigg was looking at his work from the very beginning.

Have a look.

http://calypso-blue.com/werewolf/viewto ... 5350#15350

Darth Canis · Post by **Darth Canis** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:37 pm

Hmmm my vote did not really seem to help the situation sorry there guys. i love the idea of the ranking on posts i am not so sure maybe on how long you have been a member? Just a suggestion

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:44 pm

Vilkacis wrote: The bottom part of the scale was left exactly the same in the rankings I came up with. I didn't mess with that part.

0-4
5-9
10-19
20-29
30-49
50+

-- Vilkacis

Oh, thats right. Duh.

Vuldari · Post by **Vuldari** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:45 pm

Figarou wrote:Whoa..Stop and think for a second. I know someone who has contributed to the Pack big time and he just joined today!!! ABrownrigg was looking at his work from the very beginning.

Have a look.

http://calypso-blue.com/werewolf/viewto ... 5350#15350

I do not deny that LoboLEO is a great addition to our little group here.

What I was talking about is everyone else. What about those people who don't have Impressive ART archives or are published Authors, etc? ...Those peoples opinons are just as valid and important, but not being selected for special recognition could make them feel shuned or rejected.

Vilkacis · Post by **Vilkacis** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:47 pm

Darth Canis wrote:maybe on how long you have been a member?

The only problem I can really see with that is, again, it's not really a fair indication of contribution. There are people who have been here since almost the first day, yet have not made a so much as a single post in all this time.

As this goes on, I'm starting to think it was all just a mistake and that we should just put it back the way it was. It wasn't a bad system, and I don't think anyone was particularly displeased with it. It was essentially the same as having no rank. I thought it would be neat to make it actually mean something, but it's just turning out to be a big hassle.

Anyway, let the poll go on and let the Pack decide over the next few days, and I'll be fine with it no matter which way it turns out.

-- Vilkacis

Vilkacis · Post by **Vilkacis** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:50 pm

I have to agree with Vuldari on this point.

Forget special rankings, except for particular tasks. We have moderators, admins, and pack representatives. Each has a specific function that they perform that distinguishes them, so a special ranking in that case is appropriate. I don't see anything but trouble if we do otherwise.

-- Vilkacis

Vuldari · Post by **Vuldari** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:09 am

Vilkacis wrote:
Vuldari wrote:I'm not sure what I would call myself though.
I seem to remember you wanting to call yourself a Pack greeter, or some such, once upon a time... or maybe I'm just imagining things.

-- Vilkacis

No...you're right. I did say that once. However, Everyone has been doing that... so it wouldn't really be appropriate for me to claim the title "Unofficial Pack Greeter", as I once suggested I was.

WolvenOne · Post by **WolvenOne** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:09 am

Hmm... I personally don't mind the new system. I miss my legendary ranking of course but I'll get back up there by posting a lot of meaningless entries in which I just yammer on an on endlessly about my toe-nails.

Or I suppose I could just continue contributing whatever I can to the betterment of the forum, whatever-is-easiar.

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:10 am

Vuldari wrote:
Vilkacis wrote:
Vuldari wrote:I'm not sure what I would call myself though.
I seem to remember you wanting to call yourself a Pack greeter, or some such, once upon a time... or maybe I'm just imagining things.

-- Vilkacis
No...you're right. I did say that once. However, Everyone has been doing that... so it wouldn't really be appropriate for me to claim the title "Unofficial Pack Greeter", as I once suggested I was.

I was tempted to call myself the official duckie tosser!!

WolvenOne · Post by **WolvenOne** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:27 am

Well, I suppose we could theoretically work things out so people could give themselves thier own title once they reached a certain level of posts.

I don't exactly know what would be required to do such a thing though.

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:28 am

WolvenOne wrote:Well, I suppose we could theoretically work things out so people could give themselves thier own title once they reached a certain level of posts.

I don't exactly know what would be required to do such a thing though.

As of right now, I have to assign it to you.

TakeWalker · Post by **TakeWalker** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 11:22 am

Honestly, like Anthony said in the other ranking thread, there's absolutely nothing that comes from gaining a rank. No special privileges or anything. Meaning all it really is is a scale to rank how many times you've posted. Nothing more.

As such, I really don't care how we're ranked. I did always think fifty posts for Legendary was kind of foolish, and I like the new system. But in my mind, it's really not something worth arguing or being affronted over. (That and... wow, as long as I've been here, I've yet to break 100 posts?

Geez.)

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 11:27 am

How about if I put no info in the ranking system, Hmmm? Leave it all blank.

Vilkacis · Post by **Vilkacis** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 11:30 am

Personally, I would prefer the old system to that option.

-- Vilkacis

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 11:43 am

Vilkacis wrote:Personally, I would prefer the old system to that option.

-- Vilkacis

Old ranking system is back in place. Yay!!!

I personally don't care for it.

WolvenOne · Post by **WolvenOne** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 1:10 pm

hey, I just realized I'm legendary again.... YAY!

*grabs his ranking and hugs it and pets it and carresses it and names it george.*

THE PACK Message Boards

New rank or old.

Which one?

New rank or old.

Re: New rank or old.

Re: New rank or old.

Re: New rank or old.