Updated rank listings for users on the site

Jason Pipes · Post by **Jason Pipes** » Wed May 03, 2006 5:10 pm

Let me know what you think of these user ranks for the site! List is title # of postings required to achieve that rank. Please feel free to recommend others as well.

New Member 0
Member 20
Supporter 50
Contributor 200
Enthusiast 400
Associate 600
Patron 1000
Expert 2000

M.H. · Post by **M.H.** » Wed May 03, 2006 5:40 pm

Naja...take my case for example...in another year or two I will be able to reach the 2000 but I would never ever call myself an "Expert"!
That could be very embarassing concerning newbies...

...they would think I really have a clue...

What about: "Quasselstrippe"?

(chatterbox, motormouth or tattletale in english)

Nordwest · Post by **Nordwest** » Wed May 03, 2006 5:56 pm

I do not care at all, this says nothing, sorry.

Michael (Ex-Patron)

And 99% of my posting are more or less spam, a waste of bandwith.

Hans · Post by **Hans** » Wed May 03, 2006 10:17 pm

Don't like "expert". I ask a lot of questions. Does that make me an expert on asking Qs. Actually professionally I am, but on the forum I don't think so! I swing between a P.I.t.A. and genuinely wanting to know.

- Hans

David W · Post by **David W** » Thu May 04, 2006 12:26 am

I agree with Hans.

I have over 1,000 posts on another forum, because I ask a lot of questions. Lots of posts does not make you an expert. Do we need titles at all? Why not just list No of posts.

Shadow · Post by **Shadow** » Thu May 04, 2006 12:36 am

Looks good right up to the "Expert" class.

I rather thought of myself as expert on German military matters when I first joined the Feldgrau botherhood ............ BOY, WAS I DEAD WRONG !!

However, there ARE individuals belonging to this forum who have earned the right to be considered experts in the field of German military history (Dr. Leo Niehorster pops to mind), but their knowledge on the subject has nothing to do with their total postings.

Maybe something along the lines of "Grand Patron" might be more appropriate.

Just a suggestion - FWIW.

Jason Pipes · Post by **Jason Pipes** » Thu May 04, 2006 4:59 am

Ok, I see, out with expert, in with something else! Thanks guys!!

Helmut Von Moltke · Post by **Helmut Von Moltke** » Thu May 04, 2006 6:09 am

or maybe expert could be replaced with "master", a good title for big posters like Sid!

Andy H · Post by **Andy H** » Thu May 04, 2006 9:09 am

New Member 0
Member 20
Supporter 50
Contributor 200
Enthusiast 400
Associate 600
Patron 1000
Expert 2000

What's the point and what's qualifying criteria other than quantity?

Why should somebody with 400 posts be considered a 'Ethusiast' and have a higher ranking than a Contibutor (which I belive is based on $ donated)?, and are we all not ethusiasts anyway!!!!

Ranks are somewhat purile, though some see value in having a rank after there name. Just have members and staff, and everyone can make up there own mind about the relative merits of a poster, rather than someone make a subjective value based on a poster having attained a certain rank through sheer quantity.

Alex Coles · Post by **Alex Coles** » Thu May 04, 2006 10:55 am

I don't understand. That means somebody with 2,000 SPAM posts is called an "Expert" while the Enthusiast with 400 full of detail posts is lower.

M.H. · Post by **M.H.** » Thu May 04, 2006 11:13 am

I still like "Chatterbox"!

Alex Coles · Post by **Alex Coles** » Thu May 04, 2006 2:06 pm

I still like "Chatterbox"

Who's that?

Howard · Post by **Howard** » Fri May 05, 2006 12:32 am

MH wrote:

I still like "Chatterbox"!

Get's my vote too

Helmut Von Moltke · Post by **Helmut Von Moltke** » Fri May 05, 2006 1:48 am

17 SS Panzer Grenadier wrote:I don't understand. That means somebody with 2,000 SPAM posts is called an "Expert" while the Enthusiast with 400 full of detail posts is lower.

But so far, the only "expert" is Sid with 5000 posts, and he isn't a spammer.

Wolfkin · Post by **Wolfkin** » Sat May 06, 2006 7:39 pm

Hello!

It doesn't really matter to me. However, one comment I would like to make is the QUALITY of posts by the members.

There are members here who have been around for many years who have post counts of between 100 and 800 or even less, but these are all high quality posts that contribute a great deal. Then there are members here who have been around for a year or less and have 1000 or more very low quality posts.

This is why I believe that post counts do not matter. It is the quality of one's posts that matter.

Cheers,

Wolfkin