Forum Ranks

kq76 · 11-28-2005, 11:24 PM

If we could have a different ranking system, what would you want?

We currently have:

Hall of Famer 2K
All-Star Starter 1K
All-Star Reserve 500
Major Leagues 300
Minors (Triple A) 200
Minors (Double A) 100
Minors (Single A) 50
Minors (Rookie Ball) 20
Bat Boy 1

My current suggestion would be:

All-time Starter - top 1-9 (as well as the next rank, this might not be possible automatically)
All-time Reserve - top 10-25
Hall of Famer - 4K (controversial I'm sure)
All-star Starter - 2K
All-star Reserve - 1.5K
Major League Starter - 1K
Major League Reserve - 500
AAA - 300
AA - 200
A - 100
Rookie Baller - 50
Bat Kid - 1 (we don't want to discriminate

)

That would increase the number of ranks by 3 to 12 and up most of the post counts so that there's not so many posters of the same rank (EDIT: or at least those at the top ranks).

This thread is just for fun so don't take it seriously if you don't want to.

canadiancreed · 11-28-2005, 11:26 PM

ya it does seem to be static afer a while. The top two I dont think you can do statically unless you assigned the rankings manually, and that could be an issue if you have active posters at the 9-10th and 24-25th spots

rem · 11-29-2005, 12:11 AM

I have always thought that HOFer should be 3,000, because 3,000 is the magic hits number to get into the Hall of Fame.

Astros33Resurrected · 11-29-2005, 12:53 AM

well rem that works for posters who have weak posts. Their posts are only considered singles. I should be a HOFer because my posts are considered HR's.

theasfl · 11-29-2005, 01:01 AM

I really like the top 1-9 and top 10-25 idea, perhaps take that same idea up to 100, something like:

1-9 All Time Greatest
10-25 All Time Starter
26-50 All Time Reserve
51-100 Hall of Famer
2K All-Star Starter
1.5K All-Star Reserve
1K Major League Starter
500 Major League Reserve
300 AAA
200 AA
100 A
50 Rookie
1 Bat Boy

this is, of course, assuming that the previously mentioned method is possible.

endgame · 11-29-2005, 01:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Astros33Resurrected

well rem that works for posters who have weak posts. Their posts are only considered singles. I should be a HOFer because my posts are considered HR's.

I've grown to think of mine as just long, loud, strikes.

I do like the idea that this is under discussion. I don't know how serious of a consideration you want to give the matter, but I'd be curious what the result of a poll would reveal in terms of what the current 'labels' infer to a relatively new member, how veteran members perceive the effect (if any), and what either sees as the intention of establishing or maintaining the pseudo-hierarchy at all. But that's just me. Strrrrrrrrrrrike two!

kq76 · 11-29-2005, 01:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by endgame

I do like the idea that this is under discussion. I don't know how serious of a consideration you want to give the matter, but I'd be curious what the result of a poll would reveal in terms of what the current 'labels' infer to a relatively new member, how veteran members perceive the effect (if any), and what either sees as the intention of establishing or maintaining the pseudo-hierarchy at all. But that's just me. Strrrrrrrrrrrike two!

When I was a newbie I found the ranks helpful in determining the likelihood that the person really knew what they were talking about. Being a HoF does not guarantee that the person is correct all, or even most, of the time, but I think it does help.

It was kind of neat rising through the ranks too, but at the same time I feel as though they went by too quickly, especially the low ones. You probably want the ranks seemingly within reach, but you don't want them to be too easily reachable neither.

Once you're around awhile most of that changes though. You develop your own ranking system of how reliable and reputable others are and after becoming a HoFer there's nothing to look forward to. I think a change might help shake at least some of the latter up.

I like ranks and I hope they stay. Visible post counts OTOH I could do without. I don't like to be constantly reminded of exactly how much I've posted.

eriqjaffe · 11-29-2005, 12:40 PM

Wow, I'm closer to being a HOFer than I thought! Heck, I'd probably already be there if not for The Crash.

Oh, and +1!

endgame · 11-29-2005, 06:48 PM

No doubt the ranks serve purpose, sometimes agenda, and I think it's likely it changes from time to time with the prevailing audience.

An interesting concept to explore, although it unfortunately dabs into the sticky glue that is ego, would be either a profile addition or a rank relabeling that could include awards similar to those of our muse.

For instance, in order to be a Hall of Famer you would have to be voted into that group by a yet-to-be-determined committee membership ranging from a collective of moderators-only to a forum-wide vote, nominations by the lesser numbered advisory etc...

One could have perhaps MVP2005 if their impact on the gaming environment was such that it merited that kind of recognition. Perhaps a Fireman Award, for instance, for a SandMan who has time and again stepped up to retire an otherwise series-ending fiasco by a patch-hitter (typo-intended). The ideas are really unlimited, but it opens an avenue and system where one can apply some meaningful appreciation to membership and labels/award bestowed on individuals to cast a better perspective of role and contribution.

In addition, as one better defines characters, personas, and membership it naturally follows that we better define the community: its aims, constituents, and values.

I had anticipated concluding these comments with humorous antecdotes in which we put members on waivers, elect a Commissioner, expand the Forum League or place OT into contraction but I decided that 1) You can make up your own jokes and 2) I have a low confidence that anyone knows when I'm joking.

Jestor · 11-29-2005, 07:05 PM

I wish OT posts still counted.

molarmite · 11-29-2005, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jestor

I wish OT posts still counted.

Haha don't we all. I also agree that we should do this. It doesn't take much time either to do. If it's possible you should do:

Top 10%-HOFer
Next 10%-All-Star

and so on until the bottom.

Davey Eckstein · 11-29-2005, 09:11 PM

I'd be close to the HoF if not for the crash. I've lost motivation since :-p.

MrJones · 11-30-2005, 12:41 AM

Woo hoo I'm almost in rookie ball!

canadiancreed · 11-30-2005, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jestor

I wish OT posts still counted.

if they did the rankings would be meaningless. We've got at least 100 posters that would be over 10,000 posts by now (stats not guarenteed)

Jonzard · 11-30-2005, 01:26 AM

Im against anything that makes people spam to get post counts up

molarmite · 11-30-2005, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by canadiancreed

if they did the rankings would be meaningless. We've got at least 100 posters that would be over 10,000 posts by now (stats not guarenteed)

No more pointless threads in the OT then if posts would count. Some of the posts in there have a purpose. But I guess the pointless posts are the best kind.

molarmite · 11-30-2005, 08:33 PM

Or we could have a OT post count of just posts in the OT and it can be like whoever spams the most gets a higher post count.

Sublimity · 12-01-2005, 09:09 AM

A separate OT post count is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better than combining the two. What goes on in OT shouldn't count for OOTP-related stuff.

molarmite · 12-01-2005, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sublimity

A separate OT post count is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better than combining the two. What goes on in OT shouldn't count for OOTP-related stuff.

Well the Talk Sports forum is un-OOTP related and you get posts there.

11-28-2005, 11:24 PM	#1
kq76 Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 12,035	Forum Ranks If we could have a different ranking system, what would you want? We currently have: Hall of Famer 2K All-Star Starter 1K All-Star Reserve 500 Major Leagues 300 Minors (Triple A) 200 Minors (Double A) 100 Minors (Single A) 50 Minors (Rookie Ball) 20 Bat Boy 1 My current suggestion would be: All-time Starter - top 1-9 (as well as the next rank, this might not be possible automatically) All-time Reserve - top 10-25 Hall of Famer - 4K (controversial I'm sure) All-star Starter - 2K All-star Reserve - 1.5K Major League Starter - 1K Major League Reserve - 500 AAA - 300 AA - 200 A - 100 Rookie Baller - 50 Bat Kid - 1 (we don't want to discriminate ) That would increase the number of ranks by 3 to 12 and up most of the post counts so that there's not so many posters of the same rank (EDIT: or at least those at the top ranks). This thread is just for fun so don't take it seriously if you don't want to. __________________ My OOTP Wishlist \| My FAQ List OOTP Wiki \| Your Recommended Team Nicknames, By City (A Crowdsourced Project) For Beta/Devs: Full screen (1920x1080) Last edited by kq76; 11-29-2005 at 01:39 AM.

11-29-2005, 01:01 AM	#5
theasfl Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Coral Springs, FL or Orlando, FL (UCF) Posts: 7,988	I really like the top 1-9 and top 10-25 idea, perhaps take that same idea up to 100, something like: 1-9 All Time Greatest 10-25 All Time Starter 26-50 All Time Reserve 51-100 Hall of Famer 2K All-Star Starter 1.5K All-Star Reserve 1K Major League Starter 500 Major League Reserve 300 AAA 200 AA 100 A 50 Rookie 1 Bat Boy this is, of course, assuming that the previously mentioned method is possible. __________________ All-Sports Fantasy League The ASFL 22 different games, 9 sports. Please check out the website (www.theasfl.com/asfl2/). The league is free- if you're interested please fill out the signup form and/or email the commissioner. Miami Talons (ABL): 2004, 2005 & 2008 Champs

11-29-2005, 12:40 PM	#8
eriqjaffe Hall Of Famer Join Date: May 2003 Location: Under The Christmas Fish Posts: 7,733	Wow, I'm closer to being a HOFer than I thought! Heck, I'd probably already be there if not for The Crash. Oh, and +1! __________________

11-29-2005, 06:48 PM	#9
endgame Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 16,842	No doubt the ranks serve purpose, sometimes agenda, and I think it's likely it changes from time to time with the prevailing audience. An interesting concept to explore, although it unfortunately dabs into the sticky glue that is ego, would be either a profile addition or a rank relabeling that could include awards similar to those of our muse. For instance, in order to be a Hall of Famer you would have to be voted into that group by a yet-to-be-determined committee membership ranging from a collective of moderators-only to a forum-wide vote, nominations by the lesser numbered advisory etc... One could have perhaps MVP2005 if their impact on the gaming environment was such that it merited that kind of recognition. Perhaps a Fireman Award, for instance, for a SandMan who has time and again stepped up to retire an otherwise series-ending fiasco by a patch-hitter (typo-intended). The ideas are really unlimited, but it opens an avenue and system where one can apply some meaningful appreciation to membership and labels/award bestowed on individuals to cast a better perspective of role and contribution. In addition, as one better defines characters, personas, and membership it naturally follows that we better define the community: its aims, constituents, and values. I had anticipated concluding these comments with humorous antecdotes in which we put members on waivers, elect a Commissioner, expand the Forum League or place OT into contraction but I decided that 1) You can make up your own jokes and 2) I have a low confidence that anyone knows when I'm joking. __________________ "Try again. Fail again. Fail better." -- Samuel Beckett _____________________________________________

11-30-2005, 01:26 AM	#15
Jonzard Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Minnesota Posts: 3,647	Im against anything that makes people spam to get post counts up __________________ For a scientist must indeed be freely imaginative and yet skeptical, creative and yet a critic. There is a sense in which he must be free, but another in which his thought must be very precisely regimented; there is poetry in science, but also a lot of bookkeeping. — Sir Peter B. Medawar FTB

11-28-2005, 11:26 PM	#2
canadiancreed Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 11,660	ya it does seem to be static afer a while. The top two I dont think you can do statically unless you assigned the rankings manually, and that could be an issue if you have active posters at the 9-10th and 24-25th spots

11-29-2005, 12:11 AM	#3
rem Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: College Park, Md. Posts: 5,024	I have always thought that HOFer should be 3,000, because 3,000 is the magic hits number to get into the Hall of Fame.

11-29-2005, 12:53 AM	#4
Astros33Resurrected Hall Of Famer Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Lufkin, TX Posts: 2,213	well rem that works for posters who have weak posts. Their posts are only considered singles. I should be a HOFer because my posts are considered HR's.

11-29-2005, 09:11 PM	#12
Davey Eckstein Banned Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Laundry Barn Favorite food: Bran flakes. Posts: 1,283	I'd be close to the HoF if not for the crash. I've lost motivation since :-p.

11-30-2005, 12:41 AM	#13
MrJones Minors (Single A) Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 84	Woo hoo I'm almost in rookie ball!

11-30-2005, 08:33 PM	#17
molarmite Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Minnesota Posts: 4,927	Or we could have a OT post count of just posts in the OT and it can be like whoever spams the most gets a higher post count. __________________ From the wise mind of Davey Eckstein "Now all you need is a signature. A quote or initial, perhaps." [

12-01-2005, 09:09 AM	#18
Sublimity Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: This thread. Posts: 3,199	A separate OT post count is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better than combining the two. What goes on in OT shouldn't count for OOTP-related stuff. __________________ mrs ria: I hereby dub Sublimity the Glorious Upholder of the 5B3. Current leading vote-getter in the Worst Poster in OT History poll.