Is this better than star?

[Horton]

Not this list exactly but would something like this.... would make the guys that hate stars less unhappy?

 

Lurker

Newbie

Rising Star

Active Contributor

Know-it-all

Addicted to BOS

Get a Life Already

Posts more than Horton

[ThePantsManCan]

I'd like to be the first to ask for "Addicted to BOS" next to my name. Essentially, I am a Lurker but I have the Heart of an ADDICT!!! The rate at which I refresh my screen is proof of that alone.

[Than_Bogan]

To my way of thinking, that's actually slightly worse. Titles just seem confusing because they have no obvious ordering.

 

And if you don't want an obvious ordering, then this seems to serve no purpose at all, and so get rid of it.

[RichardDoane]

people can give themselves whatever title they desire by filling out a bio, and putting a tag line into their post, plus, they can update and change it themselves as they deem fit, less maintenance for the site admin

[estrom]

As a relative newb here, when I see a post from someone I don't recognize, I look at their profile. I'm interested in where they're from, how long they've been a member here, etc... I can also see how much they participate through their activity, reactions, badges, etc... That's about everything I need to know. Then I'll recognize them in the future when they post. With all that info. already available, I guess I'm not seeing the need for titles or stars.

[Chef23]

I was in the if it is good for the site camp before but have shifted to I don't care. I think people are way too wound up on this issue. I would let the stars roll for a while and see how it goes then you could swap to the tags if you wanted and see if it makes a difference. It all won' t impact my time here.

[estrom]

@Horton, I'll follow up by clarifying that the reason I don't see this as necessary is that this site is set up and run so well already. Why muddy the waters? The features on this site and the ease of access to information is better than many, many other forum type sites I've visited or frequent.

 

[danbirch]

I'm not so sure that "Know-it-all" is the right term for someone who is beyond an "active contributor"...It could be interpreted as being condescending.

[gregy]

I think this is on the right track, not even sure we need anything though. Its had me thinking.

 

I want to make a comment on the site. @horton stated "Ranking systems are standard for most big forums and I think they would be good for BallOfSpray"

 

Horton and other contributors, you have created something unique here. I'm in several other activities that I frequent forums and the experience here is just better! I like the layout. I like how people of all level can communicate together. I like the friendly atmosphere. I like how you censor things out.

 

Don't be in a hurry to compare yourself with other "big forums".

[andjules]

The problem with stars is they create a harsh hierarchy. Those without stars feel unsuccessful and unacknowledged. By making the ordering a little less 'obvious' and adding a dash of humor, everything lightens up. The advantage is still there: you get a little context/hint about who is posting and how much they contribute positively to the community.

[jcamp]

I don't really see the need for a ranking system. If you hang out here long enough, you'll get an idea of whose advice to follow or not. Plus, some guy might not post a lot, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have anything constructive to add to the discussion.

[sunvalleylaw]

I don't really care about the stars that much. As I said in the other poll thread, there is some info provided by stars, but also info based on the "reactions", plus common sense in reading the posts. So the stars don't hurt much, and I don't really care. But I think labels like this are worse. They seem sort of arbitrary and narrow to me. The stars are more neutral if we are going to have something, and provide a bit of info without labeling the person as one thing.

 

I also agree that none of this will impact much my time here. Not sure we (or at least I) need any of the above. I probably will mostly ignore the stars or whatever we end up with. I will still ask questions, and post when I have something to say, and receive awesome value and input from great skiers, at a place where I am not required to pay anything.

 

I do plan on a regular donation though.

 

 

Oh, and the labels also seem like they would be more of a PITA for @Horton to manage if we have to have something. But that is up to him.

[jlittle]

I'm with @gregy for the most part. And @OB post right above his is not a bad idea. You definitley need to continue to make the forum better but "big forums" have their downfalls too. I frequent one other forum quite a bit in the winter months. You actually have to pay a yearly fee to get "full access" to all the forum offers. This happened a couple years ago. If you think stars have caused an uproar try telling all the members they have to pay to use the forum. This other forum has several items they keep track of and it all shows up in the header of each post you make (points, level, activity, reputation, basic memeber, premium member etc). Other members can give "rep" to you (thumbs up-green) or (thumbs down- red) based on you posts and your reputation bar fluctuates as such. It appears some of this is already in place here to some degree.

 

Anyway, I really can go either way with the stars. I understand what you're trying to accomplish and you may want to stay the course as the "issue" will die down some I'd guess. However, there needs to be a way of earning stars and also loosing stars.

 

@Horton It appears you must be getting some grief behind the scene as I'm not seeing to much on the forum other than some light complaining and most of that I'm taking as sarcastic jabs. I think. ?? Are you over thinking this? Part of what make this forum good and keeps it under control to some degree is, "it's not a democracy".

[Killer]

Make it related to skiing.

 

The issue it seemed many were having was they are excellent skiers but don't have the "stars" but this isn't a tournament or a slalom Course site, it's the only and best waterski resource site on the web.

 

 

Ratings should be based on post content and reputation on this site and nothing else, we are all equal here. People will be recognized for their contributions accordingly.

 

I think it wouldd be fun if mapple signed up and hid moniker was something like "combo skier"

 

Next step "slalom" "Course skier" "15offer" "Shortline skier" "Pro skier" etc. For tge actual pro Or open skiers feel free to make them "special" Regardless of points.

 

Just because a guy or girl can run buoys doesnt make their opinion ir advice correct or their attitude on a website positive.

[Wish]

Seems not worth the effort stars or otherwise. @Horton Is there some study or facts or article out there that states rating or grading posters is benafitial? I ask because im not part of any other site as a poster lurker. In the strive to make the site better, i think you have done a wonderful job but this seems odd for a bunch of mostly middle aged men. Seems like allot to go through with not a lot of enthusiasm behind it. Maybe if you could present some facts or figures or articles that say why this is a good idea and how it has improved other similar sights may help the argument in favor. Personally I'm still not seeing the point for any visitor (as defined by the above listed catigories.)

[Inboardfix]

Wow, I just came to the realization I'm starless.

[Killer]

@wish most forums have some kind of ratings system tied to number of posts and/or the level of "support" $$$ you provided

[Wish]

@Killer. I figured that but does it make any difference to those sites and how they are viewed. Is there any data or conformation of some sort that this will help? It can't be just ....well, it seems like a good idea...can it??

[Horton]

@Killer Ooooo that is a great idea. Well no. A few number of folks have donated but I do the idea is to improve content not make money. I guess the better the content the easier it is to sell advertising but that is a different thread.

[Brady]

Just do the Utah thing @Horton. No stars is "one wife". One star is "two wives". And then "three wives" "four wives". Etc

[ToddL]

I made that list just to pick on Horton... I guess it got his attention. Just the fact that people are taking these polls says that the BOS fans care about this site. That a good thing.

[Skoot1123]

Not sure how to answer this as it could go a couple different directions. For myself and a few others, I'm just a BOS addict........hanging around on here has helped me form my own opinions on who to trust, but for those just coming on to the site, something is better than nothing. Whether it be stars or a fancy name - pick one or the other and we'll move on.

[mwetskier]

stars an dislikes or any other way for someone to pick on another guy is just right for abuse whitch i just found out in the last few days just like one other guy said about the stars that it was just like a bunch of hi school girls an there clicks i had a guy get mad at me an go back to dislike every post i ever did just to try an get me

[Horton]

@mwetskier "just like a bunch of hi school girls"

 

As admin I am pretty angry about it

[andjules]

It's easy to abuse by people who want to be abusive. And since the stars have come up, I've only noticed one person abusing the system ;-)

 

One of the things that makes this place great is that there aren't a lot of people like that (and in the rare-but-appropriate circumstance, @Horton is not afraid to be transparent-but-decisive in showing them the door).

[6balls]

@dirt, that was a very classy personal response re: not feeling welcome here that you sent to mwetskier.

The back/forth vendetta here has to do with communication or lack thereof. First a dislike on vid's with no way to know why, thus seeming like personal attack. Then retaliation for same. Both were opportunities to communicate.

@mwetskier, this is not a personal shot at you...but I think you may see in retrospect it would have been best to send @brent a personal message about the language in the vids and maybe you could have had a good interaction. For Brent probably better response would have been to contact mwetskier directly via message and try to find out what the issue was rather than hitting the dislike on his benign posts.

As for the video's posted agree they are great. One could always use mute or look up one's own video content and only make parent-approved one's available for kids/family watching.

[Horton]

I am so sick of this. I got rid of stars and now there are levels of Ballerhood or Ballerness.

 

I need to tape my ankle go ski.

[Than_Bogan]

@Horton I know it must be impossible not to worry, but you really shouldn't. This is a minor detail. The reason it seems to have so much passion behind it is that so many of us are so into this site.

 

Keep that up, and don't worry too much about the minutia!

[estrom]

^^^^What Than said.^^^^

 

[Wish]

Actually like the levels. :)

[sunvalleylaw]

Ok cool. Let's just roll with it. I am sorry it has been such a PITA.

[Chef23]

I feel like I have been downgraded :( Just kidding. I don't think it makes a difference.

 

[andjules]

Me too, @Chef23. On both counts.

[Ed_Johnson]

Went from 2 stars to New Baller...Kind of a downgrade, since I've been here since Aug. 09. WOW, thats a disapointment. Feel after being here for years and now lumped as someone who joined yesterday.

[ski4xtc]

@Horton, what is the time span for a "new baller" Someone who joined 2.5 years ago is "new"? If so, you should have a "really new baller" category. Just some thoughts. Change is always hard.

[Horton]

Yes. I know. I will tweak the wording.

[luckyone]

are u talking about baldness ?