User ranks, Stars...

[shortcat1]

I have read few times in the last days people asking what the stars were there for. The answer is simple: they mean nothing!

Your ideas are welcomed! Also, we could improve our User rank system. HW is getting bigger and our previous ranking system might need a fix, or maybe, we can add more ranks after our current ones.

This is our current system:

<table border="0" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="2" width="100%"> <!--Begin Template: faq_misc_rankrow --><tr><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF">HWL Office</td><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><img src="./images/xpsilver/star.gif" /><img src="./images/xpsilver/star.gif" /><img src="./images/xpsilver/star.gif" /></td><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF">-1 </td></tr><!-- End Template: faq_misc_rankrow --><!--Begin Template: faq_misc_rankrow --><tr><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF">Midget AAA</td><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><img src="./images/xpsilver/star.gif" /></td><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF">1 </td></tr><!-- End Template: faq_misc_rankrow --><!--Begin Template: faq_misc_rankrow --><tr><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF">CHL</td><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><img src="./images/xpsilver/star.gif" /></td><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF">50 </td></tr><!-- End Template: faq_misc_rankrow --><!--Begin Template: faq_misc_rankrow --><tr><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF">GRETZKY !!!!!</td><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><img src="./images/xpsilver/star.gif" /></td><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF">99 </td></tr><!-- End Template: faq_misc_rankrow--><!--Begin Template: faq_misc_rankrow --><tr><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF">AHL</td><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><img src="./images/xpsilver/star.gif" /></td><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF">100 </td></tr><!-- End Template: faq_misc_rankrow --><!--Begin Template: faq_misc_rankrow --><tr><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF">NHL</td><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><img src="./images/xpsilver/star.gif" /><img src="./images/xpsilver/star.gif" /></td><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF">250 </td></tr><!-- End Template: faq_misc_rankrow --><!--Begin Template: faq_misc_rankrow --><tr><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF">Hall of Fame</td><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><img src="./images/xpsilver/star.gif" /></td><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF">1000 </td></tr><!-- End Template: faq_misc_rankrow --></table>

It makes no sense to go from NHL to Hall of Fame and go from 2 to 1 star in the process..

And no, this board doesn't let us put stars according to the number of years since the member has registered. Stars have to be associated with Ranks, and ranks are either manually given to members or linked to posts numbers.

If you have ideas to improve the rankings system, go ahead!

The meaning of it is to make HW a more friendly place. One of HW's 4 rules is "Quality. No post padding! (Quality before Quantity)." We don't want to encourage post padding, but we do want to recognize the members who are making of HW the #1 "World Wide Fans Community". If you don't believe me, check by yourself on google Btw, just for fun... And 2nd in google for "Fans Community" behind Harry Potte's website.. hehe

:ghg:

[Edited on 2005-12-10 by sakiqc]

Fozzy says that I should have lots, lots, lots, lots... way lots... :king: and everybody else has to ask him (politely and remunatively) for stars and he'll consider it. Don't fear, he says... he will answer in due time (of course, due is moderated by how much he is due).

ok? do you understand, peons? you others who are there for him and him alone?

he says his handcuffs are big and strong... just like his stick :king:

I think I deserve 4 stars.

*waits to be bumped down to no stars*

and you are....?

Just because someone posts a lot (like me) doesn't mean they know what they're saying. The stars should be given out by admins. Hah, this feels like nursery school; earning gold stars and having them taken away.

and you are....?

In all honesty, that's pretty weak.

I'd suggest a 5 star system (if possible)

Super Admins and Mods - 5

1000 - 4

500 - 3

100 - 2

n00b OMG! - 1

wow... it costs more the higher you go... you lose only one at n00b but you lose 5 at Super Admins and Mods.

By the way, what about the Rockers? What happens to them? or are they just stylistically passé?

Here is the new user rank system: Any comments?

It is not complete, as I'd like to add other ranks at the end. Ex: scout.. assistant-coach.. coach.. GM..president.. owner..

retired number.. hof inductee..

Also, just noticed that NHL veteran appears twice humm

Initiation 0 *

Novice 50 **

Atom 100 **

Peewee 150 **

Bantam 200 **

Midget 250 **

CHL Rookie 300 ***

CHL Star 350 ***

NHL Draft Eligible 400 ***

AHL Tryout 450 ***

AHL Leader 500 ***

NHL Injury Call-up 550 ***

NHL Role Player 600 ****

NHL Regular 650 ****

NHL Power Play 700 ****

NHL Franchise Player 750 ****

NHL All-Star Team 800 ****

NHL Veteran 850 ****

NHL Idol 900 ****

NHL Legend 950 ****

NHL Stanley Cup 1000 ****

NHL Yearbook Cover 1050 ****

NHL Veteran 1100 ****

golly! you tink alot about dis stuf... wow!

[revvvrob]

i'm too lazy to read if someone already said this but i note a couple of things -

1st - there are 2 levels of NHL veteran at 850 and 1100

2nd - once you get past 500 posts - i would use increments of 100 and not 50. My thought is that anyone into the 500s is clearly a regular, and probably (hopefully) will be around for a long time - well beyond 1100 posts. Save some of the prestigious rankings for 2000 posts or 3000 posts. Something for HW members to shoot for 3-5 years from now.

i have other ideas ... but i'll save them for another post! :king:

[Trizzak]

and you are....?

That's harsh dude.

Coldblooded.

[CoRvInA]

Nice and Dandy!

ONE THING THOUGH!

I miss the button that would send me up or down quickly! (the one on the same page thingy)

Cheers

[sakiqc]

Nice and Dandy!

ONE THING THOUGH!

I miss the button that would send me up or down quickly! (the one on the same page thingy)

Cheers

There's one actually,

Click the "Top" icon. You can find it below each message, at the left.

[shortcat1]

That's harsh dude.

Coldblooded.

If you look at the whole post, you'd see that it was intended as a silly response, just like all of my responses on this topic.

As far as I'm truly concerned, what the admins & mods decide to be the criteria for 'stars' or any other rating system is their affair. They're either the ones who created this site for us to communicate and enjoy.

If you want a site where getting 'recognition' for contribution is either really difficult or confusing, go to thefourthperiod.com. I was active in there for quite a while, contributed quite a bit, both as a commentator on topics or a creator of topics. My answers were, as far as I understand, seriously thought out but, after a long time of consistent activity, my status remained at '0'.

For that matter, if the admins & mods were to decide to take away the posting scores as they are and replace them with some other system then I'd accept it. There would be some disappointment, of course but it's their right/responsibility to do what they believe to be best for this community.

In the end, whatever system is set in place, this one or one like it is probably the best that can be used. It is easy to understand and evaluate. It's as close to being objective as possible. There is always an aspect of subjectivity involved but, in this manner, it's pretty minimized.

Now, in a note of levity (I can't avoid it.)... so, bosses, :bow: did I say good here? Do you think that this'll give me more points or make me KING :king: OF :king: THE :king: WHOLE :king: WIDE :king: WORLD :king: ?