Re: Moderators - please explain "Contributor" desi... - Page 4

kittymomNC · ‎08-09-2012

I just received an email from moderator Beth about the contributor designations (I posted earlier that I took a chance and emailed asking them to give some explanation).

She said that the designations are helpful to people new to the Community and trying to get to know other posters. She also said that the designations are based on a mixture of actions, and that no one action will improve a person's contributor status. That's all she could tell me now, but said they will be posting something in the forums after the July 4th weekend.

Apparently the PTB have reasons for doing this, and hopefully the moderators will be able to post something to explain the reasoning behind it.

TY · ‎03-10-2010

I pretty much ignore those contributor designations since a lot of people simply are lurkers and may just browse and read threads when they don't want to be logged in. I do that a lot, I may read threads but don't want to participate, so what? It doesn't make me feel less valuable. I've been here since March 2007 and more than 4000 posts but I think I was here before then because there have been several upgrades where I "lost" posts. Who knows why my post count went down quite a bit...maybe older threads were purged and not migrated over to the new platform.

I doubt the public will be privy to the QVC metrics but I will guess that by the time this new Lithium powered board has been operating a month, they will see an across the board drop in numbers in both the number of posts and unique visitors.

SaRina · ‎04-17-2015

I'm surprised that anyone even cares about an "explanation". IMO these features contribute to the overall immature tone of these boards and should be dismissed....much like grade school children at 3 pm. lol.

kittymomNC · ‎08-09-2012

Just to be clear, I don't care what QVC wants to call me... I just appreciate the option of "contributing" to the discussions here if I so choose.

That said, there have been MANY people questioning these designations on so many threads (both ones remaining and ones gone), including one that had posters fighting so much if they could have hit each other through their computers, I think they would have. Others have speculated and tried to find out what the designations mean, and then some apparently just have simple curiosity. In any case, people are continuing to make it very clear that they DO WANT TO KNOW, for whatever reason.

I thought since the moderators are apparently so busy trying to deal with the forums, maybe they haven't seen all the questions that have been posted. So I decided I might try emailing them to see if they would explain and it would give everyone the answers they apparently want. All I was trying to do was help... but maybe I should have just stayed out of it, since now there seems to be even more consternation on two different threads about what Beth the moderator said. I will bow out and leave it to individual posters to get whatever information they want... maybe something will be posted after the weekend.

I guess whatever they decide to tell us, it will not make everyone happy, and some posters who have accused others of trying to "game the system" will probably still be at it (and yes, some did make those accusations).

stevieb · ‎03-10-2010

@Spurt wrote:
I agree with the OP. I could care less about Contributor Ranks (yes most forums have them, but some don't). It seems that QVC put their emphasis on changes that most don't care about, and eliminated a lot that we did like about the Forums. . One example is the sub forums --- a few have been restored but not all of them, then there are the horrible emoticons, and format....It's kinda like they created a Frankenstein Monster---the worst of the Forums and they adopted what was the worst of Facebook into this current forum.... Other than that the Moderators are doing a fine job and have made some revisions that have been suggested.

I agree, Spurt, more 'style above substance' and more bells and whistles from the Q... And doesn't it just speak volumes that they have these designations out there and now they have to get back to us as to what they mean... Why am I not surprised... Yea, I think we could all live without them. It appears they were somehow integrated into the software and no one gave them much thought until the question was asked.... Again, why am I not surprised...

In my pantry with my cupcakes...

shoekitty · ‎03-10-2010

@kittymomNC wrote:
I just received an email from moderator Beth about the contributor designations (I posted earlier that I took a chance and emailed asking them to give some explanation).

She said that the designations are helpful to people new to the Community and trying to get to know other posters. She also said that the designations are based on a mixture of actions, and that no one action will improve a person's contributor status. That's all she could tell me now, but said they will be posting something in the forums after the July 4th weekend.

Apparently the PTB have reasons for doing this, and hopefully the moderators will be able to post something to explain the reasoning behind it.

Shoekitty says

Kittymom. Thanks for the relaying of Beth's response.I appreciate it. I didn't see a response after the 4th. Was there one? Lately I am more offended than ever. I have been here since 2006. Then due to board changes, we lost posts and nick names in 2006 and I started over. So since 2007 I had over 20,000 posts. I am on the boards often. But I have seen posters with less posts, less time move up and up with" ranks", like some of us don't matter. It makes many of us feel like we are not important,it is hurtful like someone is choosing people at their will to be favorites. That is how I feel about the ranking system. It means the rest of us are not valued, respected or trusted. What were they thinking? Truthfully, those that say they don't care are highly rated.

I do not know how to email them and express how I feel, or I would.

I do know that friendships will continue and the ranks mean nothing among us. But they could have had a clearly posted ranking system. That way I would know why they rank me as I have been, and not left to guess.

Thanks for letting me vent. This really bothers me

HappyDaze · ‎06-13-2012

I honestly never even noticed them.

Moonchilde · ‎05-23-2010

It's a combination of # of posts and hearts. It doesn't take many posts to get to Super. Then a step up due to # of hearted posts. Then a step up due to # of posts again. Probably the next involves hearts *and* # of posts. I haven't seen anything to indicate there is something else at work. They can't quantify anything besides # of posts snd # of hearts.

Life without Mexican food is no life at all

dooBdoo · ‎06-27-2010

I didn't notice the designations until I began to see multiple threads/posts questioning them, complaining about them, and mocking them, along with doing the same thing regarding the "Hearts" feature.

I've always felt these things only have the meaning we assign to them ourselves. If it mattered a lot to me, I'd question why I cared in the scheme of things. At this point, however, I'm beginning to wish they'd remove the designations to eliminate some of the consternation. I like the hearts, which are not even the tiniest bit different from Facebook "likes," Twitter "re-tweets," or any other thumbs up system on social media. I can say "ITA" or that I appreciate a post rather than adding more responses to a thread. And they're functional in that they do leave a "breadcrumb" trail in our Notifications to allow us to find threads we've posted on.

Few things reveal your intellect and your generosity of spirit—the parallel powers of your heart and mind—better than how you give feedback.~Maria Popova

gardensla · ‎03-09-2010

@dooBdoo wrote:
I didn't notice the designations until I began to see multiple threads/posts questioning them, complaining about them, and mocking them, along with doing the same thing regarding the "Hearts" feature.

I've always felt these things only have the meaning we assign to them ourselves. If it mattered a lot to me, I'd question why I cared in the scheme of things. At this point, however, I'm beginning to wish they'd remove the designations to eliminate some of the consternation. I like the hearts, which are not even the tiniest bit different from Facebook "likes," Twitter "re-tweets," or any other thumbs up system on social media. I can say "ITA" or that I appreciate a post rather than adding more responses to a thread. And they're functional in that they do leave a "breadcrumb" trail in our Notifications to allow us to find threads we've posted on.

Always the voice of moderation, sanity and reason. I too find the hearts a useful tool.

Fortēs fortūna adjuvat