| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 01/03/2007 : 17:44:03
Just a short while ago everyone's member ranks (i.e. rookie, pro, etc) appeared all screwed up. It says Crosby Fan and I (who are veterans) are rookies, and it said Leigh (who's also a veteran) was a pro, and the number/color of the stars is also off. Admin only appears to have one star instead of four, and bablaboushka only appears to have three instead of four. Is something wrong? |
| 40 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| irvine |
Posted - 11/05/2007 : 08:35:22
I think it is all silly, personally. What does the rank truly mean? Nothing. Just make your posts regarding topics you are interested in or want to have a say in. We're all here for reason and one reason only... to discuss a game we all love. So don't worry about ranks. If you want ranks, join the army. Otherwise, just type and enjoy the conversation.
Irvine |
| SlowShot |
Posted - 05/26/2007 : 17:43:42
Ya i completely agree with Mik. Some people take this like every post we do we have to write a essay about and where getting marked on it. Anyways some of the longer posts are boring very boring and when i finish reading it makes me feel like a  |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 05/26/2007 : 16:32:56
If post count supposedly doesn't matter to people, why is it such a big deal to them that some of us have large numbers of posts? If the rankings don't matter, why is it such a big deal how fast we move up them? Not EVERY post on here is going to be meaningful, this is an online forum not an Ivy League debating thesis. And it's about hockey, how intellectual can you get? It's not like this is philosophy class here. Geez loosen up already. |
| 99pickles |
Posted - 05/26/2007 : 16:08:36
For some reason I am having problems putting multiple quotes into one post so I will just address each post/quote/person specifically... sorry.
Big Show hits the nail on the head : those that agreed about it being a problem are some of the ones that noticed instantly when titles were removed. The idea of custom titles that are not related to post counts is a fairly good idea. Except from the site's point of view - because it is still, at least, a small motivator to post a little more when there is a number adding up. And that is good for business, and that keeps a strong site alive for me, the consumer. Everyone wins.
Like BigShow I too threw out a couple oneliner/agreeance posts before, but will never do so again because it reflects poorly on me just like anything in life that anyone does half-a$$ed. Even though they don't realize it. And comically, there are even one word posts in this thread too (go look see who it is).
Like Ripley I might take a break (even though after over a year of lurking and reading, I only just recently joined to post something a month ago - but I was busting at the seems about some things !
So that's the crux of the whole issue : how do you motivate people to post more without a post-counter ?
Only posts in certain threads or topics will allow a +1? But that will only result in the worst offenders swamping the best topic/ threads.
A certain few lighter threads do not get any +1(like Gamenight thread?)? But that would just kill those threads and cause the number chasers to flood the serious topics.
Only responses of more than 30 words give you a +1? 50 words? But that cannot include quoted material though.
Have 2 different post counters, one for posts over 50 words, one for under? Not a bad idea - it will definitely show who at least attempts to author meaningful posts.
The Mods grade each post on it's own merit ? That's a little time-consuming and labour-intensive. Plus lobbying may result. Also, how do you grade ;and some posters may have "homer" status with the Mods (please don't lash out here, just brainstorming ) Interesting idea though.
Here's an interesting stat : one member of this site had only(yeah, only!) 300 posts in their first 3 months, 400 in their first for months (approximations). The minute 300 posts was changed to 2500 posts to achieve the highest status label ( 'Legend' I think they call it), this person went on to make a brief comment on the status change and then posted 2100 TIMES IN THE NEXT 3 1/2 MONTHS !! I have estimated 3 1/2 on the generous side too, I believe it to be less. 2100 divided by 110 days is 20/day for over 3 straight months. To put this into perspective: Most people are having a hard time logging in to "Quest for the Cup" on a daily basis for half that amount of time-span(ok, 2 months), let alone WRITING OUT 20 MEANINGFUL POSTS A DAY. Talk about stats-padding !!
Although it is quite lengthy I have spent more time on this post (over an hour?) than that person has on everything they have written in the past month. And this whole issue is only agitating to me on a medium level.
I like BigShow's idea of custom titles but I would prefer that they have a forum for them and after every milestone (500 posts or so) they have a poll where they offer 4, 6, 8 etc custom titles for the person that the REST of the members vote on (sorry, no guests on this one: possible vote infiltration!)
They could range from the comical to something that is an ongoing motif with that person's opinions or posts ( mine could be "Mr. Long-Winded" if I ever got to 500 posts).
Actually at the speed-rate of some posters, it would have to be at least every 750 posts. |
| willus3 |
Posted - 04/22/2007 : 07:42:30
If it matters to you how much you contribute, the number of posts you have made is always there. Why does a title matter? The only title that matters on this site is that of moderator.
"Go chase headlights!" |
| Guest4462 |
Posted - 04/22/2007 : 03:45:23
get rid of the stupid rankings once and for all. |
| PainTrain |
Posted - 04/21/2007 : 22:37:20
Just out of curiosity what is the posts to get to the new rankings now?
Only out of curiosity. |
| jbraiter |
Posted - 04/18/2007 : 18:20:06
ok thanks a lot admin |
| admin |
Posted - 04/18/2007 : 17:58:16
Ok gang, I've left everyone in the dark for a bit because of 3 reasons:
1) I wanted time to think it all through
2) I wanted time for you guys to debate this a bit.
3) It is a very busy time of year for us at PickupHockey
The titles are back at least temporarily. This is because when I shut them off, the moderator title gets shut off as well. At this time we can not turn the moderator titles back on without turning everyone's titles back on. So for the time being we all have titles again. I will be following up shortly with a full post explaining everything, but due to the switch to the playoff season this debate for me has taken a lower priority. Look for a full post on this topic this weekend.
In the meantime feel free to keep debating it or feel free to go to the other areas of the forum and talk hockey. It's your call. |
| Saku Steen |
Posted - 04/18/2007 : 16:37:38
Could Admin or babs clear all this up??
I've figured it out, the guys gotta play like girls! |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 04/18/2007 : 16:08:27
Guys geez...we're not disappointed (well I'm not, at least) about the rankings dropping. The only reason I even mentioned them was just as an example of how the rankings were changing, not because I was unhappy about it. And I already told you, I was only curious about the new rules, stop turning this into a huge deal... |
| leafsfan_101 |
Posted - 04/18/2007 : 16:06:46
quote:
Originally posted by Mikhailova
Dude, I was just ASKING what the new system was, I was just curious. It's not like I want to know how many more posts I need to be an All-Star again so I can go make a zillion useless posts, I was just wondering what the new rules were. Is that a crime?
Im the same MIK. I think our reps are good enough to know that our posts are legit and we don't post useless garbage.
When life gives you lemons throw them at the Ottawa Senators and their fans and hope it gets them in the eyes ;) |
| Kashmire |
Posted - 04/18/2007 : 16:02:42
I think he Big Show is right on that...I think you guys kinda were dissapointed to see your ranks drop. There are alot of people on this forum that have gotten many of their posts from pointless posts like..."Oh darn calgary lost" or something along those lines. Well, this has been adressed before so I'll stop. |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 04/18/2007 : 15:46:04
Dude, I was just ASKING what the new system was, I was just curious. It's not like I want to know how many more posts I need to be an All-Star again so I can go make a zillion useless posts, I was just wondering what the new rules were. Is that a crime? |
| BigShow |
Posted - 04/18/2007 : 15:42:43
I'm totally overstepping my bounds here, as i am still a newb in these parts.
But i don't understand why you guys even care...
The point that is trying to be impressed upon the regular posters is that what matters is quality, not quantity. Everyone piped up that they agree, and then immediately takes notice that the titles are active again but different.
Maybe they aren't even directly tied to post count anymore, maybe the mods are now just giving a series of 'custom' titles to those that have reached a certain post count based on their thoughts on that poster?
I know i have thrown out a few one line responses, which is what they are trying to get away from. But there are several people that are pushing a thousand posts and every single post of their's, that i've seen, is a one liner. Even the ones agreeing with how it is the quality that matters.
The community is strengthened when people put their ideas and opinions out there. I mean actually put some thought togethor, for or against the topic, bring something new to the discussion. Don't be afraid to be wrong, everyone is a lot of the time. It's the idea that matters, that stirs conversation.
Worrying about your post count, as though that gives your words more merit is just silly. Same goes for the titles. It's the words you put down that will earn you the respect of the other members, if that is what you're after. And if you're really just wanting to have a high post count for no reason but to have a high post count, maybe you should be concentrating on another site that allows games like Count-to-a-Million.
I didn't mean for this to come across as a flame of any sort or an attack on anyone. And while it looks like a rhetorical question it isn't.
Really, ask yourselves, why are the titles even worth noticing?
Does being a top prospect mean your opinion is less valuable than if you were a veteran?
Does having 1200 posts mean you are better equipped to determine if it will take Buffalo five games or six to knock off the Isles?
Obviously it doesn't. |
| leafsfan_101 |
Posted - 04/18/2007 : 15:01:03
Someone needs to explain. I was a vetren and now am suddenly a rookie once more.
Comments and feedback please!!
When life gives you lemons throw them at the Ottawa Senators and their fans and hope it gets them in the eyes ;) |
| semin-rules |
Posted - 04/18/2007 : 14:06:41
Yeah, I was just going to point that out. I used to be an All-Star but now i'm a pro. Has this happend on purpose or is it a glitch?
~~~~~COME ON STARS, LETS BRING IT HOME~~~~~ |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 04/18/2007 : 14:02:18
Now the rankings are back but the stars aren't, and the rankings are different. I used to be an All-Star, now I'm a Veteran. What's the new ranking system now? |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 04/14/2007 : 16:54:12
This isn't the only free site...a lot of forums are free to join. |
| SlowShot |
Posted - 04/14/2007 : 16:00:48
quote:
Originally posted by bablaboushka
Well, now that a decent discussion has actually arisen from this, allow me to reply (Admin, even though I may have jumped the gun, I think this is a healthy discussion for the forums while it's relevant).
First of all, let me clear something up. We were not referring to or singling anyone out when the idea of eliminating the ranks was put forward. Sure there are worse offenders than others, but it's not because of one particular member that this came up. To be honest, this was my idea and I had it in mind for a long time and since then a lot of people have been taking the ranks for granted.
Don't misconstrue this as being punishment. Mik, it is not a situation where we are implementing this as a last resort because "things were getting so bad". But, coincidentally with the implementation of the ranks, content in posts started to drop yet the amount of posts started to rise. I (we) found this to be quite peculiar so I investigated and quickly found out why this was happening. Members started posting just to post, and some were even quoted on the fact they were posting to "raise their rank" or "raise their amount of posts". Along the standards imposed by these forums and by common sense, one might immediately conclude that this was not hockey talk, something this website thrives on.
A common myth throughout this website is that anonymous posting has diminished the quality of these forums more than members. Now guys, I'm not "scolding" you or anything, but this is actually quite far from the truth. Sure some Guests post some absurd stuff that may not be related to hockey but to be honest, that's easy to control. Guests that do that are often just one-time visitors that post something stupid to try to be funny and never visit again. With a click, that's gone. But when members continuously post useless banter and "I agree"s, my job gets a lot harder. Also remember that some of our more regularly-visiting members started out as Guests who posted in the forums. Simply put, it's a double-edged sword.
The ranks are another double-edged sword. Of course people liked them because it gave them "status", it set them apart from other members. We don't want to take away people's sense of feeling to this website, but what was lost in all this was the fact that at their very roots, these forums are for hockey discussion, not moving up the Pickup Hockey ladder. I know this may have been easier for me to say because I have a different sense of feeling to this website (I'm not a better member because I'm a moderator, but I feel that when I received duties to moderate, I became part of Pickup Hockey, if that makes any sense), but as Saku and Ripley (and others) eluded to, this site is for discussing hockey. Even though I have the most posts on this website (for now), I became and stayed a member because of the fluent hockey discussions that were going on, and I love to hear people say that that's the reason they post too. Mik, if we are a unique forum compared to those on the web, then I say good, because it sets us apart and well, makes us better  ! By the way Ripley, it's nice to see you back and I honestly was starting to wonder where you went. What can I say, I always show concern for my Sharks brethren!
The ultimate goal of the elimination of the ranks is to weed out the "post-for-rank"ers and to maintain the genuine, quality hockey discussions that this website is so great to provide us with. We want EVERYONE to keep posting and if post amounts go up, then great! But now, we are hoping that the discussion will be your motivator and not the ranks.
Mik, one last thing. Yeah, I wish the post numbers went down when the posts are deleted, but just doing that wouldn't solve the problem, it would just be a band-aid solution.
Keep the comments coming! You are all members so all of your opinions matter!
Yep
Also I know this is off topic but why is this the only free website? Is it because your just nice.
Go Stars |
| Saku Steen |
Posted - 04/14/2007 : 05:02:35
There shouldnt be any more guests, they dont do us any good.
I've figured it out, the guys gotta play like girls! |
| tctitans |
Posted - 04/13/2007 : 14:39:31
quote:
Originally posted by bablaboushka
A common myth throughout this website is that anonymous posting has diminished the quality of these forums more than members.
I'm not stating an opinion that we should, or should not, allow anonymous postings, not saying which is easier or harder to administer, or which is better or worse. However, I do think your above statement is factually incorrect. Of course anonymous postings diminsh the qualithy of the forums overall. Anonymous posters are unknown, have no history, debates from day to day are difficult, cannot be held to any standard of consistency by the rest of the forum, are more easily draw towards childish acts, lying for fun, fake posts, and numerous other uncontrollable issues. They may add something as well and hence you may have your own reasons to keep them (trying to generate more traffic? get the numbers up? get more subscribers? ...), but don't pretend that they don't degrade the quality of the forums either.
my 2 1/2 cents. |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 04/13/2007 : 14:08:09
OK...I can see where you're all coming from with this, but just a heads up: before joining Pickup Hockey I used to post on dozens of other forums, many of them hockey forums, and I'll tell you; it is impossible to keep a perfect forum. People go off topic all the time, often a lot more so than what I've seen here. People easily have up to 7000 posts and there are dozens more silly games like "Count to 1,000,000" that have nothing to do with the topic and are created solely for the purpose of inflating the post count. Plus they even have whole sections devoted to "Off Topic" discussions. The quality of lots of places out there sucks compared to this site, we're actually not doing such a bad job when you consider the competition (though I agree there are some things that need to be improved, which have been mentioned), so that's why I thought this was a little 'strict'. But I guess in the end it doesn't really matter...as long as you enjoy posting and put out good quality stuff, who cares if you have 6 posts or 2000? |
| PainTrain |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 21:19:32
Babs i agree with you i would like to see hockey discussions with good opinions from everyone. |
| 1 Crosby fan |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 21:16:35
Well Babs you are smart and i agree with ever word you said
Viktor Kozlov is my hero |
| bablaboushka |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 20:52:44
Well, now that a decent discussion has actually arisen from this, allow me to reply (Admin, even though I may have jumped the gun, I think this is a healthy discussion for the forums while it's relevant).
First of all, let me clear something up. We were not referring to or singling anyone out when the idea of eliminating the ranks was put forward. Sure there are worse offenders than others, but it's not because of one particular member that this came up. To be honest, this was my idea and I had it in mind for a long time and since then a lot of people have been taking the ranks for granted.
Don't misconstrue this as being punishment. Mik, it is not a situation where we are implementing this as a last resort because "things were getting so bad". But, coincidentally with the implementation of the ranks, content in posts started to drop yet the amount of posts started to rise. I (we) found this to be quite peculiar so I investigated and quickly found out why this was happening. Members started posting just to post, and some were even quoted on the fact they were posting to "raise their rank" or "raise their amount of posts". Along the standards imposed by these forums and by common sense, one might immediately conclude that this was not hockey talk, something this website thrives on.
A common myth throughout this website is that anonymous posting has diminished the quality of these forums more than members. Now guys, I'm not "scolding" you or anything, but this is actually quite far from the truth. Sure some Guests post some absurd stuff that may not be related to hockey but to be honest, that's easy to control. Guests that do that are often just one-time visitors that post something stupid to try to be funny and never visit again. With a click, that's gone. But when members continuously post useless banter and "I agree"s, my job gets a lot harder. Also remember that some of our more regularly-visiting members started out as Guests who posted in the forums. Simply put, it's a double-edged sword.
The ranks are another double-edged sword. Of course people liked them because it gave them "status", it set them apart from other members. We don't want to take away people's sense of feeling to this website, but what was lost in all this was the fact that at their very roots, these forums are for hockey discussion, not moving up the Pickup Hockey ladder. I know this may have been easier for me to say because I have a different sense of feeling to this website (I'm not a better member because I'm a moderator, but I feel that when I received duties to moderate, I became part of Pickup Hockey, if that makes any sense), but as Saku and Ripley (and others) eluded to, this site is for discussing hockey. Even though I have the most posts on this website (for now), I became and stayed a member because of the fluent hockey discussions that were going on, and I love to hear people say that that's the reason they post too. Mik, if we are a unique forum compared to those on the web, then I say good, because it sets us apart and well, makes us better ! By the way Ripley, it's nice to see you back and I honestly was starting to wonder where you went. What can I say, I always show concern for my Sharks brethren!
The ultimate goal of the elimination of the ranks is to weed out the "post-for-rank"ers and to maintain the genuine, quality hockey discussions that this website is so great to provide us with. We want EVERYONE to keep posting and if post amounts go up, then great! But now, we are hoping that the discussion will be your motivator and not the ranks.
Mik, one last thing. Yeah, I wish the post numbers went down when the posts are deleted, but just doing that wouldn't solve the problem, it would just be a band-aid solution.
Keep the comments coming! You are all members so all of your opinions matter!
|
| PainTrain |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 19:47:54
For me i just want to voice my opinion and see what you guys think. The member ranks i though we're pretty cool and showed the people who really like this site. But i agree with people just trying to get up in the member ranks and whatever Babs and Admin chose it won't matter to me i'll still voice my opinion. |
| Ripley |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 19:12:33
If what babs is saying is true then I completely agree with their decision. To be honest I stopped coming to the forums a couple months ago because I felt the quality had gone way down (and I got my butt kicked in my regular season pool)
But mostly I got tired of wanting to have a good hockey conversation and ending up having to sift through garbage to get to any good posts worth discussing. People were posting with out thinking, going WAAAAYYYY off topic, and generally talking about the incredibly childish things like "this is my 300th post, yay me!" or like the lastest one I found today "finish this sentence..." Come on!!!! Lets talk about real hockey issues. Obviously this is not everyone, some people have great insight and I will always be willing to talk to them but too often it was too hard to find them in all the clutter. Did anyone else notice that very few quality posters were joining but the "yups" and "i agree's" and "hey everyone, my favorite colour is beige" were joining like crazy? The crap was winning over the substance so I stopped posting.
Oh, and I have been posting here for years and I only have a few hundred posts, that's because I usually only posted when I felt I was bringing some insight and value (a few exceptions of course) some people are now approaching a thousand posts in a few months? It's impossible if you are writing more than a sentence!!
Am I being harsh? Yes! I realize my opinions may not be popular but admin should know why a long time poster decided to "go on a break".
Take away the member ranks until people start to respect the forums! |
| tctitans |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 18:28:19
I agree with Admin that something must be done. There are far too many posts that people put out there for no other purpose but to get a +1 on their number of posts, and then there are those who do that consistently.
That being said, I'll wait for the announcement about the changes and make my opinion (and subsequent actions) up then.
|
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 17:46:23
What would really help would be if you could make it so that your number of posts goes down when you delete them, so then moderators could delete useless posts and you could still keep rankings but move up them more fairly. |
| jbraiter |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 16:41:45
quote:
Originally posted by Mikhailova
PickupHockey sure is the oddball of online forums:
1. All other forums have member rankings
2. No other forums allow anonymous posting
Of course "all" and "no" are overstatements, but that's the general trend. I can see the anonymous posting side of it, but taking away member ranks? C'mon, I don't think we were getting that ridiculous.
I agree with Mik I liked the member rankings |
| leafsfan_101 |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 16:37:33
Well we don't know what Admin and Babs have in mind so let lets hold off the critisizm a little. And to follow up what Saku said, i person comes to the forefront of my mind, but there are some that i think only try to get up the ranks. Taking out I agrees was huge, but now i think we need to cut out the people who just say the same thing another member said just to get posts.
EG. Bertuzzi hit was really dirty. It was really bad.
Next person Ya I know. It was a dirty cheep sho and was horrible.
If we can get rid of these then I think the quality of the forums will increase drastically.
When life gives you lemons throw them at the Ottawa Senators and their fans and hope it gets them in the eyes ;) |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 16:15:15
PickupHockey sure is the oddball of online forums:
1. All other forums have member rankings
2. No other forums allow anonymous posting
Of course "all" and "no" are overstatements, but that's the general trend. I can see the anonymous posting side of it, but taking away member ranks? C'mon, I don't think we were getting that ridiculous. |
| Saku Steen |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 16:06:48
No I think this is good. Only one person comes to mind about the wanting posts. 99 percent of the people make educated posts but there are still the people who are here to make it up the rankings. It dsent really matter about how many posts, I just love this site because of the good hockey talk!
Viktor Kozlov is also my hero!!! |
| 1 Crosby fan |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 15:45:46
Didn't even becaome an All-Star  
Viktor Kozlov is my hero |
| bablaboushka |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 14:43:00
The Admin and I have had a lengthy chat about the state of the forums over the last little while. Even though he will be delivering a more formal and detailed message to you guys soon, I can tell you that some changes will be made to the forums. Changes that we believe will help improve the quality of the forums.
One of the changes that is rather obvious and that most of you have already noticed is that the forum ranks have been removed. We felt that the forums were getting too cluttered with posts that were being made just to "increase one's rank". While we obviously encourage and value people's opinions about hockey and the subsequent discussions that arise from them, we felt that too often the quality of posts was being sacrificed for quantity. While we also realized that I helped fuel this by "glorifying" my milestone posts, I think my achievements were taken out of context.
Anyways listen, I don't know how much, if anything, I was supposed to tell you guys but I just wanted to give you all a heads up that changes have been/are going to be made.
Don't bother asking too many questions about these changes just yet because like I said, the Admin will be clearing everything up for everyone sooner than later. |
| Saku Steen |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 14:20:56
I wonder what they are doing....
Viktor Kozlov is also my hero!!! |
| jbraiter |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 13:57:34
i thought it was just my comp, but i guess i was wrong |
| 1 Crosby fan |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 13:40:05
No we just have to much posts and it's too much to keep up with and yea naw i dunno ans is this going to change again?
Viktor Kozlov is my hero |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 12:53:49
Uhhh....what happened to all our stars? And our ranking? Is it being re-done again? |
|
|
