Plans for the ranks

Just curious but what is the rank system based on. Mostly everyone is a New Member though there are a few Junior Members. Though this doesn't matter much since currently is it not based on postings. Just a random curious thought. And how are you/what are you planning to base it one in the future.

There are no "ranks" in the system now but maybe you are referring to "titles". There currently are three titles:

New Member - Those members who have less than 30 posts.
Member - Those members who have between 30 and 100 posts.
Senior Member - Those members who have more than 100 posts.

I'd be open to some fun titles we can add.

Tom

Titles works, other Forum systems call them ranks. Thanks though.

We also have "ranks" in our system, but they are not being used right now. Ranks in vBulletin are pictures that can appear under someone's title.

Tom

I just had the idea of making the titles somwhat computer/internet based for example (in no particular order)

• Broswer
• Contributer
• Programmer
• Web Master
• Software Architect
• Project Manager
• Hardware Engineer
• etc.

Maybe some others have some additional suggestions.

Currently the titles are based upon the # of posts. So the more posts you get, the higher the title. Otherwise your ideas are great.

Tom

I was referring to based on the posts, and that the title would refer to how much they've posted. So:

• Broswer (less then 10 posts)
• Contributer (10 to 100 posts)
• Programmer (100 to 200 posts)
• Web Master (200 to 400 posts)
• Software Architect (400 to 800 posts)
• Project Manager (800 to 1600 posts)
• Hardware Engineer (1600 to 3200 posts)
• etc.

Hope that clarifies.

Ah, got it. Thanks,

Tom

tomw,

I notice that there is a distinction between profile images and avatars. It appears that we as regular members of the discussion board can only make profile images and that avatars are reserved for administrators.

Is this assumption correct? If so, will this be the permanent policy?

Just curious...Thanks.

What are the differences between avatars and profile images?

Not a permanent policy. We may turn on avatars soon.

Tom

An avatar shows up below your name (like my picture) where in a profile image only shows up if you click on a username to see their profile.

Tom

thedqs wrote:I was referring to based on the posts, and that the title would refer to how much they've posted. So:

• Broswer (less then 10 posts)
• Contributer (10 to 100 posts)
• Programmer (100 to 200 posts)
• Web Master (200 to 400 posts)
• Software Architect (400 to 800 posts)
• Project Manager (800 to 1600 posts)
• Hardware Engineer (1600 to 3200 posts)
• etc.

Hope that clarifies.

Given that some of these titles actually are used by the Church for employees, wouldn't this lead to potential confusion?

True, I was just sugesting them, and started this tread to hopefully get some other suggestions. Or maybe everyone things it was ok as it was, which is a perfectly good option too.

I've opened the avatar feature up so if you would like to add an avatar to your profile, go ahead. Please remember to follow the rules set forth in our community guidelines as avatars will be moderated.

Tom

Is the icon for "Add to ??'s Reputation" used for anything yet?

haledn wrote:Is the icon for "Add to ??'s Reputation" used for anything yet?

Sorry...I'm not sure what you are asking.

Tom

tomw wrote:Sorry...I'm not sure what you are asking.

Tom

Sorry, different but similar topic. I was referring to one of the icons under everyone's profile / avatar. It isn't clear whether clicking to add a point to someone's reputation is a good or bad thing. At first, it seems like it would be good to click it when you see a great post, but then again, it may be harmful to their account status.

haledn wrote:Sorry, different but similar topic. I was referring to one of the icons under everyone's profile / avatar. It isn't clear whether clicking to add a point to someone's reputation is a good or bad thing. At first, it seems like it would be good to click it when you see a great post, but then again, it may be harmful to their account status.

Ah, got it. Adding points to a person's reputation is a good thing. When you click on the icon, you are given 2 choices. You can approve or disapprove of the post you are looking at. You can also add a comment why you approve/disapprove. Approvals get positive points while disapprovals get negative points. The more approval points someone has, the more his approves are worth to someone else. So, for example, if I have a very high approval rating and you have a normal approval rating, when I approve someone's post, that user's reputation gets more points than if you were to approve the post. You can read more about how you can help by viewing this post.

Are you able to see your reputation? And what comments you recieved on which posts?

I agree that the Tech-based titles may lead to confusion--so perhaps we should take the ranks/titles from the 'LDS' half of "LDSTech"

If the ranks/titles are based strictly on the number of posts, we should correspond them with the length written by the various authors of the Book of Mormon:
Omni (< 10 posts)
Jarom (10 - 100 posts)
Enos (100 - 200 posts)
Jacob (200 - 400 posts)
Moroni (400 - 800 posts)
Nephi (800 - 1600 posts)
Mormon .... etc.

I guess we may be uncomfortable with even an implied 'ranking' the ancient prophets (who is to say that Nephi was greater than Moroni?) Just a thought.....

Though you could base it on how much of the book of mormon they wrote, since the titles are based on how many posts have been submitted.

thedqs wrote:Are you able to see your reputation? And what comments you recieved on which posts?

Currently this data is hidden. I don't want to create an environment where people compete for the most positive votes. The notes are for moderation purposes.

Tom

captaz wrote:I agree that the Tech-based titles may lead to confusion--so perhaps we should take the ranks/titles from the 'LDS' half of "LDSTech"

If the ranks/titles are based strictly on the number of posts, we should correspond them with the length written by the various authors of the Book of Mormon:
Omni (< 10 posts)
Jarom (10 - 100 posts)
Enos (100 - 200 posts)
Jacob (200 - 400 posts)
Moroni (400 - 800 posts)
Nephi (800 - 1600 posts)
Mormon .... etc.

Interesting concept. Another way to look at it is to start at the first of the Book of Mormon (new members would be Nephi) and for those with the most posts, they would have the title of Moroni.

Would Mormon come before Mosiah (i.e. Words of Mormon) or later (after 3/4 Nephi)? Would there be multiple Nephis (1 Nephi, 2 Nephi) or would it be consolidated? Would you put Ether before Nephi or add Mahonri Moriancumr in a consecutive order? I kinda like this idea, uniquely LDS naming convention and if done in order would eliminate the ranking by page amounts.

I think you stick to the book as it is printed, not necessarily chronologically.

Tom

I would prefer to be labeled as a lookieloo rather than a lurker

Heh...good one Cary.

Tom

So if Tom got harsh and changed his rank to Ammon, would he lop off avatar arms?

bh5k wrote:So if Tom got harsh and changed his rank to Ammon, would he lop off avatar arms?

I have PaintShop Pro and I am not afraid to use it. :p

So when someone reaches Alma/Moroni (depending on the ranking system) what then? Look at the quality of his/her post and either make them a moderator or ban them?

gblack wrote:So when someone reaches Alma/Moroni (depending on the ranking system) what then? Look at the quality of his/her post and either make them a moderator or ban them?

Maybe they don't get banned, they get translated. :rolleyes:

I though becoming a Moderator was translation. And becoming an admin was exaltation.

Just another idea (I was just reading my Engineering Book) we could have the rankings like: Flip-Flop, Logic Gate, (some more steps onto getting bigger systems), RAM, Processor.

That way we avoid the problem of using the prophets and ranking them, and it is still technical.

8080, 8086, 286, 386, 486, Pentium.

Win3.1, Win95, Win98, Win2000, WinXP, Vista (we'll skip WinME...)

Unit, Kilo, Mega, Gigi, Tera

BasicA, QBasic, VB, .Net

300 bps, 1200 bps, 2400 bps, 4800 bps, 9600 bps, 56K

dial-up, DSL, Cable, OC3

Monocrome, CGA, EGA, VGA

640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x1024

RussellHltn wrote:(we'll skip WinME...)

I'll second that.
Good ideas.

Pre-existence, Garden of Eden, Lone and Deary World, Celestial.

But someone usually gets squirmy about the reference.

Which brings me to one of my favorite LDS Tech trivia questions: What is the first temple to be designed with film in mind? And why? (Understand the why and the answer is easy.) No fair looking up the answer.

I'll take a stab at it, although I don't know really. Was it the Provo, UT temple? Because their temple district would service such a large number of members that they needed to speed up the temple session.

Just a guess.

thedqs wrote:Provo, UT temple?

Nice try, but no.

This was a nastier problem then just speed.

Is it the first temple where the majority of the presentation stays in one room?

mkmurray wrote:Is it the first temple where the majority of the presentation stays in one room?

Yes. But if we were to use that definition, it would probably be Kirtland. That's not the right answer.

Edit: Well, at least I think so. I can't be 100% of how it was introduced. I'd have to go find that book again. The real question here is why was the technology introduced? Understand that and you'll know why that temple got it first.

RussellHltn wrote:Which brings me to one of my favorite LDS Tech trivia questions: What is the first temple to be designed with film in mind? And why? (Understand the why and the answer is easy.) No fair looking up the answer.

Answer=Swiss Temple.
Reason=Then Elder Hinckley was trying to find a way to present the Temple in as many languages as possible with as few people as possible.

michaelcox wrote:Answer=Swiss Temple.
Reason=Then Elder Hinckley was trying to find a way to present the Temple in as many languages as possible with as few people as possible.

*ding* *ding* *ding* *ding* We have a winner!!!! Trying to do it the old way would have created serious logistical issues given the number of languages in Europe and the size of the needed staff.

Really it was the language barrier? Cool. I just know that it also made the session go a lot faster too. It also later allowed for the creation of small temples since you need only minimal space. Anyway thanks for the quiz.

Cool info on the ranks/titles. Also, interesting to learn about the language barrier. Now I am ready for Mormon Trivial Pursuit.