Should the 500 post benchmark be raised.

[emw]

I know - we could have an automated system that parses the posts and looks for key phrases that appear in helpful posts, as well as those that appear in non-helpful or community posts.

For example, phrases like "repair permissions" and "reset PRAM" receive positive ratings, while ones like "macs suxorz" or "go Yankees" receive negative marks. Additionally, we could include penalties for poor grammar and spelling (that's for you, ~Shard~ ).
Just in case this takes off: repair permissions reset PRAM run disk utility cron utilities apple support site repair permissions reset PRAM run disk utility cron utilities apple support site repair permissions reset PRAM run disk utility cron utilities apple support site repair permissions reset PRAM run disk utility cron utilities apple support site repair permissions reset PRAM run disk utility cron utilities apple support site repair permissions reset PRAM run disk utility cron utilities apple support site repair permissions reset PRAM run disk utility cron utilities apple support site repair permissions reset PRAM run disk utility cron utilities apple support site repair permissions reset PRAM run disk utility cron utilities apple support site

 

[~Shard~]

I know - we could have an automated system that parses the posts and looks for key phrases that appear in helpful posts, as well as those that appear in non-helpful or community posts.

For example, phrases like "repair permissions" and "reset PRAM" receive positive ratings, while ones like "macs suxorz" or "go Yankees" receive negative marks. Additionally, we could include penalties for poor grammar and spelling (that's for you, ~Shard~ ).

I like it! Let's inform arn...

P.S. Very good punctuation and grammar in that last post.... And yes I realize the irony of complimenting your good grammar by using a sentence fragment myself. And starting these sentences with "and".

 

[MacNut]

When I started this thread the initial idea probably should of been thought through a little more. The basic idea is that there is a lot of fluff here and while 500 posts is probably a good number it seems that a lot of people inflate the numbers and if we weeded out the useless posts I would bet that the total post count on the site would drop by half.

 

[jamesi]

noooooo please nooo. ive been a member for a while now and i barely have any posts b/c i think its ridiculous to post that much. really, i only respond to things im really interested in. 500 posts is definately enough.

 

[emw]

But again, how do you define a "useless post"? Sure, there are some that fairly clearly serve no valuable purpose, but others, including friendly banter, serve a purpose that may not be as clear - providing comic relieve, building community, etc.

Perhaps we should just stop focusing on the importance of avatars since, if someone really is here to be helpful, they don't care all that much about getting one.

 

[MacNut]

noooooo please nooo. ive been a member for a while now and i barely have any posts b/c i think its ridiculous to post that much. really, i only respond to things im really interested in. 500 posts is definately enough.

and thats part of the problem, everyone has to get a word in wether its needed or not, and that is where the numbers get inflated and the dedicated veteran who's only gonna post when needed gets burned by person who's only been here 3 months but has over 2000 posts.

But again, how do you define a "useless post"? Sure, there are some that fairly clearly serve no valuable purpose, but others, including friendly banter, serve a purpose that may not be as clear - providing comic relieve, building community, etc.

Perhaps we should just stop focusing on the importance of avatars since, if someone really is here to be helpful, they don't care all that much about getting one.

I think this boils down to "I want an avatar" once I get it I stop trying. The banter is good, its the help threads when the answer has been clearly given yet another 30 posts after just clog the system.

 

[srf4real]

I like the avatars- it helps me recognize the people who post three comments in a row instead of saying it all at once!

 

[elfin buddy]

I like the avatars- it helps me recognize the people who post three comments in a row instead of saying it all at once!

lol, fantastic point, srf4real!

MacNut, if you're so righteous about posts meaning something and you're annoyed by people blazing to 500, perhaps you should follow the rules yourself

See MacRumors Forum Rules, Minor Problems, Point 6. Not trying to be a dick here...just saying...

But yes, I do like the idea of benchmarks for seniority besides post count. Frig, I should be an admin by now

 

[MacNut]

Point taken The problem is that as you type a response and hit submit another point has been addressed so its either edit the post or try to keep up with the convo, I admit to doing it but everyone seems to be guilty of it at some point.

 

[srf4real]

yeah, just saw the opportunity for a jab there and took it. Sorry... had a rough day. I really have much love and appreciation for all the old school MR people. or I'd still be the same mac idiot! Thanks. Keep da faith.

 

[bousozoku]

I like the avatars- it helps me recognize the people who post three comments in a row instead of saying it all at once!

Indeed. We have one certain person who will not combine his posts. He doesn't post that often any more, but he never posts only once in a thread.

 

[amin]

I posted whenever I felt like I had something to say, helped whenever I could, visited this site often; and it took me three years to get to the 500 mark. I think raising the mark will just inspire people who post BS to post even more BS. Maybe a minimum time would be a good idea. Something like at least 500 posts total and at least 100 posts per year for a minimum of two years.

 

[wmmk]

Indeed. We have one certain person who will not combine his posts. He doesn't post that often any more, but he never posts only once in a thread.

oh yeah, he used to look like steve jobs and use a dell monitor, right?

 

[sushi]

Maybe a minimum time would be a good idea. Something like at least 500 posts total and at least 100 posts per year for a minimum of two years.

I like the minimum time idea. Maybe two years would be good before you can earn a 'tar.

By doing this, we would remove the spam factor since to earn a 'tar would require both time and a minimum number of posts.

 

[bousozoku]

oh yeah, he used to look like steve jobs and use a dell monitor, right?

That could be another one. This one has a very distinctive avatar that's orange and he's from northwestern Europe.

Note the trouble with white text. When it's quoted, it's revealed.

 

[mad jew]

I wouldn't mind seeing the older members (members who've been here for over a year or so) given a subtle distinction such as a dark grey location instead of a black one. There are some older members out there without 'tars and it'd be nice to be able to recognise them quickly. The key would be making it a subtle distinction though.

 

[MacNut]

I wouldn't mind seeing the older members (members who've been here for over a year or so) given a subtle distinction such as a dark grey location instead of a black one. There are some older members out there without 'tars and it'd be nice to be able to recognize them quickly. The key would be making it a subtle distinction though.

That is a good idea, My whole reason for this thread (altho I didn't express it right in the beginning) was that post count has become a benchmark for seniority even tho a dedicated member who may have been here for 3 years and has only 200 posts does not get recognized but a member with 1000 posts who's been here 3 months gets recognized faster. The post count should remain at 500. How should "veteran status" be determined, do you need a minimum of 50 or 100 posts so the one time posters that started 5 years ago but never post aren't counted?

 

[mad jew]

I'd personally keep the old member status separate from the post counts since the 'tar already accounts for that, but that's just me. I'll be honest, I haven't really thought through this idea but I just thought I'd post it nonetheless.

 

[MacNut]

The following is a brainstorm Since we have veterans without avatars (those who have been here 2 years or more) and veterans with avatars (say those who have been here 5 or 6 years, or original members) is it possible to have different color codes to distinguish years of service?

 

[sushi]

The following is a brainstorm Since we have veterans without avatars (those who have been here 2 years or more) and veterans with avatars (say those who have been here 5 or 6 years, or original members) is it possible to have different color codes to distinguish years of service?

Interesting idea.

What ever change is made, if any, I think that it should:

- not increase the workload of the Mods/Gods.

- be easy to implement.

- be easy to recognize.

 

[Unspeaked]

The very fact that this thread even exists is a sad testament to a false sense of entitlement...

 

[SodaPopMonster]

 

[thedude110]

You know, this thread was really killing me in a "why won't this thread die" kind of way, but this seventh page so far reminds me of everything I love about the Internet. Off topic, smart and random.

Human beings are ok sometimes.

 

[~Shard~]

You know, this thread was really killing me in a "why won't this thread die" kind of way, but this seventh page so far reminds me of everything I love about the Internet. Off topic, smart and random.

Human beings are ok sometimes.

I agree, but I think this thread should be closed now - it's served its purpose...

 

[Mr. Anderson]

You could just stop posting in it and it would die all by itself...

D