Title Ranking

[FruityPunch]

...Here's my new suggestion: What if everyone could just make their own custom title with the User CP? Moderators would no longer have to stress about people going gung ho on spamming and I get what I want... oh yeah, and other people would too.

It's better that titles are bestowed on, rather than simply changing, otherwise you'll see a lot of people calling themselves V.I.P.s or Administrators

[James Ko]

It's better that titles are bestowed on, rather than simply changing, otherwise you'll see a lot of people calling themselves V.I.P.s or Administrators

Hense why some folks think that people will spam so that they can get titles bestowed on them by the number of posts they have.

I think people associate you more with your avator, I notice a few times people reply/quote a post thinking it was another person and then later realize is someone else that has the same avator pic.

[rourou]

i agree to what james says about the avatar... myself does that also in forums where you are free to upload your avatar, i recognises ppl not by their nick but by the avatar that they uses.

issue about the member title... hrm.. i'm pretty much happy with the current ones.. and yes i do agree that having a special title does promotes ppl to spam. like what redken and james say there may be just a small number of ppl who would actually spam to get that special title. but the thing is once someone start spamming others follow suit. so 1 single spammer can generate and influences others to do the same thing as well.

[spcnet]

And once again, I feel that the arguments for keeping the member titles at status quo more convincing so they are here to stay for a while.

[Radken]

It's better that titles are bestowed on, rather than simply changing, otherwise you'll see a lot of people calling themselves V.I.P.s or Administrators

That's just a remote possibility. I could also hint alot of members are aware that the [img] code is on. However, I wouldn't say the feature is bad just because there might be a chance where people could start incessantly flood pages with pictures of their favorite actors or actresses.

issue about the member title... hrm.. i'm pretty much happy with the current ones.. and yes i do agree that having a special title does promotes ppl to spam. like what redken and james say there may be just a small number of ppl who would actually spam to get that special title. but the thing is once someone start spamming others follow suit. so 1 single spammer can generate and influences others to do the same thing as well.

There'll be no spam if people are accessible to making their own titles in the User CP. My new suggestion was to convince that spamming would no longer be associated to titles if it becomes an option that's open up to everbody despite post count. Someone just has to turn it on in order for that to happen. Titles are nothing special so therefore no one has to and certainly no need to put forth any effort into earning it.

And once again, I feel that the arguments for keeping the member titles at status quo more convincing so they are here to stay for a while.

If that's true then there must be fallacy in my reasoning. Unfortunately, I don't know what that is.

[spcnet]

If that's true then there must be fallacy in my reasoning. Unfortunately, I don't know what that is.

I think you have very valid reasonings for the custom titles. However, there is one major pitfall that I can envision with allowing custom member titles--and that is some members will abuse this option and enter inappropriate titles. It's an extra bit of monitoring work that is then required on the maintenance work that I don't want to have to add on to.

[James Ko]

I think you have very valid reasonings for the custom titles. However, there is one major pitfall that I can envision with allowing custom member titles--and that is some members will abuse this option and enter inappropriate titles. It's an extra bit of monitoring work that is then required on the maintenance work that I don't want to have to add on to.

Solution : Make Radken the Title Moderator

[Radken]

There are ten moderators involved with the forums. And if everybody did their part to help with surveilling then there wouldn't be any problem at all. However, what I've come to understand here is that if no one is willing to put forth effort or take a chance any attempt to bring up change would be useless...

Thank you to all who participated.

[wkeej]

title does not matter to me.
the reason is that it is a forum with various topics and one tends to concentrate in certain threads. hence u tend to form some "friendship" within certain threads. junior, senior, or whatever do not matter really.

[spcnet]

There are ten moderators involved with the forums. And if everybody did their part to help with surveilling then there wouldn't be any problem at all. However, what I've come to understand here is that if no one is willing to put forth effort or take a chance any attempt to bring up change would be useless...

It's not that change is always necessarily bad and custom titles were actually something that were implemented at one point of the forum's lifetime. It created a lot more spam than we wanted so it added some extra weight to maintaining the forum. I didn't think the benefits of custom titles outweighed the extra effort of the side-effects and there were valid reasons against them too from other members. Thus, it is at its current status. I do thank you for your feedback too.

[flyingfox2002]

I don't understand the point of ranking. So a person becomes a "master" instead
of an "apprentice" by posting 100's of msgs. Then what? What good is that going to do that person?

It's just a form of "xu rong¡§(µêºa).

[strawberry]

Just to add on some thots,

My sis said that at her forum, the highest honour was God....she was teasing that ours is so boring (but she meant in jest ....but I thot it was very funny..

but now, I am curious...how did SPCNET come about? How long has it been already? Are the moderators among the founding members etc?

[FruityPunch]

Yes, yes! I'm interested too...

Stuff like, who was the founder, why was this forum started, how long it has been around, is it costly to maintain this site, what can we do to contribute, and why SC is always missing in action... Oops...

[strawberry]

Yes, yes! I'm interested too...

Stuff like, who was the founder, why was this forum started, how long it has been around, is it costly to maintain this site, what can we do to contribute, and why SC is always missing in action... Oops...

SC missing in action...hmm..what do you mean?

[Bubblegum]

Yes, yes! I'm interested too...

Stuff like, who was the founder, why was this forum started, how long it has been around, is it costly to maintain this site, what can we do to contribute, and why SC is always missing in action... Oops...

I don't think it answers all your questions but here's a link to SPCNET's history.

http://www.spcnet.tv/about.php

I think SPCNET was once a message board (the really old style) before it got changed to this layout.

does Fruity mean why don't we see much of SC?

[James Ko]

I don't understand the point of ranking. So a person becomes a "master" instead
of an "apprentice" by posting 100's of msgs. Then what? What good is that going to do that person?

It's just a form of "xu rong¡§(µêºa).

There is an impression with a title like master, he or she is experienced while the apprentice is not. It is all an illusion but some folks see it that way.

Another way of seeing this as a perk being unique. Be yourself and not with the mass. That is why some folks want unique titles.

[FruityPunch]

I don't think it answers all your questions but here's a link to SPCNET's history.

http://www.spcnet.tv/about.php

I think SPCNET was once a message board (the really old style) before it got changed to this layout.

does Fruity mean why don't we see much of SC?

Yes, yes! That's what Fruity means! Thanks for the link. I love reading history! It looks like a piece of wonderful history.

[Suet Seung]

There is an impression with a title like master, he or she is experienced while the apprentice is not. It is all an illusion but some folks see it that way.

Another way of seeing this as a perk being unique. Be yourself and not with the mass. That is why some folks want unique titles.

I would think their usernames are unique titles all on their own already. Having a title or not does not change your personality or how people see you on the forum. The way you act/post on the forum is unique too. So it all depends on you...not some title.

Just because this forum doesn't have fancy titles, it does not mean it's less fun or interesting. It's what you bring into the forum, not what fancy titles brings.

[Radken]

I would think their usernames are unique titles all on their own already. Having a title or not does not change your personality or how people see you on the forum. The way you act/post on the forum is unique too. So it all depends on you...not some title.

Just because this forum doesn't have fancy titles, it does not mean it's less fun or interesting. It's what you bring into the forum, not what fancy titles brings.

I don't think that was what James intended with what he said. Let me ask you then, the forum is fine the way it is but do you not concur that there could be room for improvement regardless of what you might deem as necessary? Another question, why is it you would think that if someone proposes a change such as being able to have a title it would be because that person think the forum is boring? Why "less fun or interesting?" Why can't his meaning be "to be more fun or interesting" and not anything else? I'm not going any further into this matter since I'm not him obviously. Thank God.

However, I find it interesting how you speak of creativity when it comes to posting and yet I've found nothing different about what you've said than any others who are also against the appeal to bring back custom titles have already brought up. (No offense.) Also, the vibe I'm receiving is that you've a belief where a person is certainly capable to express their individuality through the rhetoric in their posting but to do the same through a customized title would be ridiculous because frankly, you see no purpose where in that is what the name is for.

Perhaps, a name and title are two totally separate things? Or better yet, I want two names then; one where the boys can call me during the day and another for the ladies to call me at night. Honestly, it's just an alternative preference. No need to make it more than what it already is.

[Radken]

I had hope by now that the issue with spam would've been resolved with what I've already said but as it apparently shows I haven't done a very spectacular job so back here I am again... Hey, how's everyone?

Now, I don't mind coming back into a good argument but I've to admit, it does become a bit tedious when a person has to provide a rebuttal to the same premise over and over again; especially when there are some readers out there who tend to ignore the main points. Nothing personal but it's kinda hard to debate with people who has not even fully grasp what's being talked about.

It's not that change is always necessarily bad and custom titles were actually something that were implemented at one point of the forum's lifetime. It created a lot more spam than we wanted so it added some extra weight to maintaining the forum. I didn't think the benefits of custom titles outweighed the extra effort of the side-effects and there were valid reasons against them too from other members. Thus, it is at its current status.

Pardon for my analysis but although what we may have here is a sound explanation, what this really is as a matter of fact to me is just a reflection of the past that no longer applies to the present debate. I'm completely aware of the drawbacks that custom titles have come with before. That's why I've tried to recommend suitable ideas to help rid of these annoyances. Finding the answers to the problems was never the hard part. What's difficult is putting them into play.

The real question to beg for which surprisingly has never been explored thoroughly enough is, who among us in reality actually has the power to do so or more importantly, does he or she wants to?

*Glances at a certain individual somewhere.*

After all, isn't that what it all comes down to really? Not the spamming per se, not what other members might believe is correct, this is ultimately about how you perceive. I could have all the support in the world and most of the people here at the forums to back me up but truth be told, it would hardly matter if you simply disagree… If that is true, it's okay. I only wish that you admitted it sooner so I could’ve move on.