158 replies to this topic

[Dr. Watz0n]

Besides, someone might still come up with useful ideas. I have a few ideas myself, for custom titles granted for "extraordinary" behavior. Such titles might be given temporarily to certain members, to acknowledge that behavior. But I'm still mulling over the idea.

Great here's some suggestions:

• Went two posts in a row, without saying something idiotic.
• Is finally able to contain the puddle of drool under their keyboard.
• Finally, gets the concept that socks are supposed to match.
• Member since July 19 2009, and finally said something useful.
• Proof that even morons can use Game Maker.
• If only this member's Mother had said "No", at prom night.

Let me know when I can start nominating people.

I think I qualify for the last one on that list....

But in any regard, giving away temporary titles, in my opinion, is fairly pointless. Yes, we can give some away for winning the Cage Match for X times in a row, or for having a topic with over 1000 posts, but in all honesty, none of this has anything to do with game making, and on top of that, the community. We shouldn't judge each member by their join date, post count, or member title. Each post they make should be judged separately. I can't tell you the number of times I've read something amazingly intelligent by one member in a certain topic, only to find their website announcement full of spam, double posts, and pointless attacks on other, fairly constructive critics.

[Jenner]

Really, so many members in the community already act superior to everyone else; why rank them and give them an extra reason to do so?

Because this community grows, and I am starting to get troubles remembering which members I should take serious

[bendodge]

Post Counts
Post counts mean very little. Take ragarnak and Roach for example. ragarnak has an extremely high post count because he answers tons of Q&A questions. Roach's post count is almost as low as mine, even though he has made many popular DLLs. Overall, post counts are a poor indicator of anything.

Moderator Selection
This idea has a scintilla more merit than the previous one, but it's still garbage. Simply reading the forum is all that is required to determine a users reputation (or "rank", if you prefer). For example, as I read through this topic I always read posts by people I respected and often skipped posts by people I'd never heard of or I knew from past experience are idiots. That works perfectly fine.

Think of high-class clubs (Bilderbergers for example). No one uses titles, everyone is simply Mr. So-and-so. But the "in" crowd knows who's in and who isn't simply by experience. You don't need a tag on your lapel.

Some time ago there was a Karma system that allowed users to add or subtract points from each other and make snide comments. I was one of the admins on the project soon after ari_aaron started it. It was pretty good for most of its lifespan. It required Firefox and some patience with quirky bugs, and we were pretty heavy-handed in moderating, and therefore it tended to attract "quality" members (with a few notable exceptions). Before it was discontinued because the team tired of constantly updating the codebase to fix bugs and chase IPB and Firefox updates, dealing with stupid members bugging GMC staff or making tempests in a teapot about obviously insecure (and optional) features like PM archiving on an external server, or non-users hilariously fussing that they wanted out of a mysterious "elite" system they couldn't see (they probably also demand housewives exclude them from their phone gossip), it was a marvelous demonstration of exactly how such systems crash and burn with a community as large and may I say immature as the GMC. ^{I am well aware that I wrote a 101-word sentence.}

[Stryke]

Read peoples posts.

It doesn't take long before you know who's got it going and who doesn't.

Exactly. I like to use the classroom analogy. Remember when a new semester starts, and you have a class full of total strangers? But after a few weeks of classroom discussion, everybody knows who's smart, who's funny, and who's an idiot. EVERYBODY knows.

And nobody needs to wear a "sign" on their head announcing it.

That's only if you're really active on the forums. I've came back after a long time and there's so many new members and I don't know what to expect from them.
How would a person that just registered today know who to go for reliable answers?
Well, some people just want to get their game fixed, and don't really want to get involved in the community.

[e_barroga]

Read peoples posts.

It doesn't take long before you know who's got it going and who doesn't.

Exactly. I like to use the classroom analogy. Remember when a new semester starts, and you have a class full of total strangers? But after a few weeks of classroom discussion, everybody knows who's smart, who's funny, and who's an idiot. EVERYBODY knows.

And nobody needs to wear a "sign" on their head announcing it.

That's only if you're really active on the forums. I've came back after a long time and there's so many new members and I don't know what to expect from them.
How would a person that just registered today know who to go for reliable answers?
Well, some people just want to get their game fixed, and don't really want to get involved in the community.

I'm sure they would be happy to get a reply nevertheless.

[KC LC]

How would a person that just registered today know who to go for reliable answers?

Well, some people just want to get their game fixed, and don't really want to get involved in the community.

Well, selfish people like that should find another forum. This isn't an "ask-an-expert" service to fix your game.

Every member here is entitled to try and help. Even novice members can provide useful answers. We want people who will participate in the process, and give something back -- not just those looking to solve a bug and then move on.

[gmXpert2000]

That's only if you're really active on the forums. I've came back after a long time and there's so many new members and I don't know what to expect from them.

It only takes a click of "view all posts by this member" to read everything a particular member has written and therefore get a feel for what kind and quality of member they are.

[WeThePuppets]

That's only if you're really active on the forums. I've came back after a long time and there's so many new members and I don't know what to expect from them.

It only takes a click of "view all posts by this member" to read everything a particular member has written and therefore get a feel for what kind and quality of member they are.

But who would do that for 80,000+ members?

Sokota

[GearGOD]

All the suggestions made so far can be summed up with a simple karma system.

[rogerwillson]

You have to be here not only good but very good.
If you reply some persons and get thank you and some greetings, that all will be noticed by administrator.
After some time your performance is good then it will automatically ranked. As well if not good answers, then also it can be banned.

[DMEISTER]

You have to be here not only good but very good.
If you reply some persons and get thank you and some greetings, that all will be noticed by administrator.
After some time your performance is good then it will automatically ranked. As well if not good answers, then also it can be banned.

The voice of experience

[ev149]

I think the forum is fine as it is, and adding all of these new features would just make it more confusing. Like the saying goes, "keep it simple, stupid."

[DMEISTER]

I think the forum is fine as it is, and adding all of these new features would just make it more confusing.

You didn't seriously think they were actually comtemplating adding any of these new 'features' did you??

[ev149]

You didn't seriously think they were actually comtemplating adding any of these new 'features' did you??

Besides, someone might still come up with useful ideas. I have a few ideas myself, for custom titles granted for "extraordinary" behavior. Such titles might be given temporarily to certain members, to acknowledge that behavior. But I'm still mulling over the idea.

[gmXpert2000]

But who would do that for 80,000+ members?

Sokota

You don't have to. When you see a member and want to know what they're like, that's when you read a few of their recent posts. It'll be a much better reflection of their intelligence/skill level than some text rank calling them an "expert" anyways; plus then you get to know what kind of expert they are (and whether they are even an expert in anything or just an all-around useful member).

Edited by gmXpert2000, 12 August 2009 - 03:31 PM.

[WeThePuppets]

But how many people with 20 posts or so actually know who anyone is? Who's gonna take the time to see if everyone who replied to their topic is an 'expert'? I don't. I remember people by how much they post in a particular topic, how smart they are, or how dumb they are. Or if they just plain annoy me. I can name quite a few prominent members just from memory, but that's because I troll this forum. New people don't, and don't know who's who. If everyone took the time to research someone else, my, what a little CIA we would have.

Sokota

You didn't seriously think they were actually comtemplating adding any of these new 'features' did you??

Besides, someone might still come up with useful ideas. I have a few ideas myself, for custom titles granted for "extraordinary" behavior. Such titles might be given temporarily to certain members, to acknowledge that behavior. But I'm still mulling over the idea.

I think you forgot to bold the sarcasm.

Edited by Sokota, 13 August 2009 - 12:43 AM.

[c_raethke]

You didn't seriously think they were actually comtemplating adding any of these new 'features' did you??

Besides, someone might still come up with useful ideas. I have a few ideas myself, for custom titles granted for "extraordinary" behavior. Such titles might be given temporarily to certain members, to acknowledge that behavior. But I'm still mulling over the idea.

That was a joke I think...

Edited by c_raethke, 13 August 2009 - 12:54 AM.

[KC LC]

If everyone took the time to research someone else, my, what a little CIA we would have.

Sokota, your posts are making less and less sense to me. Are you saying members shouldn't check for themselves... but instead rely on the moderators to tell them who's smart?

How can any sensible person disagree with gmXpert2000's suggestion? It's the best advice this topic has to offer.

[WeThePuppets]

It seemed to be that gmXpert2000 was saying to do this to everyone you ever see on the GMC. He probably wasn't, though. And his suggestion is plain out commonsense. Of course you can tell if someone is intelligent by listening to what they say. But I'm sure there are members who could make a good post here, and a bad post there. So if people didn't take the time to look up multiple posts by a member, they would have one view of a person, and that post. That's what happens all the time. So I am agreeing with gmXpert2000 to an extent, but I'm just questioning how much this can be done. Oh, and I didn't mention anything about moderators..

Sokota

Oh and I don't make much sense to anyone. People tell me that. That's okay though, they'll figure it out when they read more than one of my posts.

Random Edit: If everyone was researching everyone one else, no one would be researching about game development! What a paradox!

Edited by Sokota, 13 August 2009 - 01:09 AM.

[KC LC]

It seemed to be that gmXpert2000 was saying to do this to everyone you ever see on the GMC.

C'mon... he made a point to say "a particular member". You even quoted him saying this (post 108).

I think we all need to read each other's suggestions more carefully, before we try to refute them.