Reply
Honored Contributor
Posts: 17,476
Registered: ‎06-27-2010

Re: Moderators - please explain "Contributor" designations... ?


gardensla wrote:

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. 


 

 

Thanks, @gardensla, for the kind words...  but I'm far from being "always" those things.  Sometimes I have to walk away and "peace out" myself for taking things too seriously here!Robot LOL

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
Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 6,286
Registered: ‎03-09-2010

Re: Moderators - please explain "Contributor" designations... ?



 

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


 

 

Thanks, @gardensla, for the kind words...  but I'm far from being "always" those things.  Sometimes I have to walk away and "peace out" myself for taking things too seriously here!Robot LOL


 

Note to self: remember this!

Fortēs fortūna adjuvat
Honored Contributor
Posts: 10,820
Registered: ‎03-10-2010

Re: Moderators - please explain "Contributor" designations... ?

DooBdoo,

I like the hearts as well and find them handy.  They get the job done most of the time, rather than quoting and quoting pages!.  My personal feeling is this If they are going to rank posters, I feel they should let us know what the system is.  The one explaination from Beth, that it helps new posters, I am a bit baffled by.  I am to believe new posters should not hang around with the esnes?  LOL!  I'd put in an emotion but I do not like the faces on the new emoticons.  Scary!

 

 

 

 

Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 6,221
Registered: ‎08-09-2012

Re: Moderators - please explain "Contributor" designations... ?


@shoekitty wrote:

@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


Shoekitty, I agree with you, it bothers me a lot too. I have disliked this ranking system since the beginning and said so.  I know a lot of posters have been here way longer than I have and their post counts were so much higher - I don't know why those counts didn't transfer over & I think it was unfair. I can't do anything about how they choose to "rank" me, and I posted a little while ago when someone asked me about it, that I feel like I have a target on my back.  There are some here who can be pretty mean in their comments.  

 

When I realized a while back that there was so much upset about it, I just decided to take a chance and email the Social Team.  I posted about the response, but after that, I was treated by a number of posters in, shall we say, an "unkind" manner.  Also, some posters talk about "certain posters" being favored, because they don't have their posts or threads deleted, and I feel like in their eyes, it has to do with the "ranking".  (Apparently they don't understand that some of us simply choose not to do or say flagrant things that will get something deleted.)

 

After all that, I posted that I was taking myself out of the conversation about the designations, and anyone who wanted information would have to ask for it themselves.  I was trying to help, but I just wasn't in the mood to be criticized for it.  I haven't seen anything anywhere about the designations since the 4th - I haven't looked on the Welcome Get Started forum, so I don't know if there is anything there.

 

I am hoping that they will decide to just do away with these designations... I guess I can understand what they mean about it might help new posters trying to learn the forums and the people, but I wish they would find another way to do it.  Too many people feel hurt by it, and I hate that.  And I don't like feeling that people consider anyone who has "ranked up" as being favored in some way... I haven't been treated any differently than anyone else that I can tell.  And I wouldn't want to be.

Honored Contributor
Posts: 10,820
Registered: ‎03-10-2010

Re: Moderators - please explain "Contributor" designations... ?

[ Edited ]

Kittymom

Thank you and amen to that (the content of your last post).  I realize totally posters have nothing to do with the "ranking system" themselves.  It is a QVC PTB secret society thing at this point. I post almost everyday, but not as much as some, but that shouldn't matter.  If others didn't post a lot, I would have nothing to read. I do enjoy the posts, and actually have taken quite a bit away with me, and made some great, great friends.

 

Regarding the deletion of posts. I think before we post, we know the rules.  Those boundaries should be respected.  I do admit to one wild moment of political frenzy during one particular election, I threw caution to the wind.  Luckily I was not the only one, and the whole thread was rightfully deleted. Other than that moment, "rules is rules!" I am in someone elses home. LOL!  .

 

 

QVC Customer Care
Posts: 2,923
Registered: ‎06-14-2015

Re: Moderators - please explain "Contributor" designations... ?

I haven't forgotten about a more detailed explanation of the Contributor designations; our group is still working on that as well as numerous things. I do believe that these are really meant in a light hearted way not really to be competitive. It does assist new posters to get into the "swing of things" especially when some of our posters have been with us for years! (which we thank you for!)  Woman HappyWoman LOL

Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 6,221
Registered: ‎08-09-2012

Re: Moderators - please explain "Contributor" designations... ?


@Beth-QVC wrote:

I haven't forgotten about a more detailed explanation of the Contributor designations; our group is still working on that as well as numerous things. I do believe that these are really meant in a light hearted way not really to be competitive. It does assist new posters to get into the "swing of things" especially when some of our posters have been with us for years! (which we thank you for!)  Woman HappyWoman LOL


Beth, thank you for noticing that this is still an issue.  I took myself out of it for the reasons I posted above, but there are still a lot of mixed feelings among posters.  I've read that the post numbers that were lost for a lot of long-time posters just can't be restored.  If there were some way their numbers could be put back to what they were, I think it would make a lot of people feel better.  I think that many posters truly don't care about the designations, but I also think there are many who do. 

 

Thanks again for your response.

Valued Contributor
Posts: 798
Registered: ‎06-27-2010

Re: Moderators - please explain "Contributor" designations... ?

The new forum is less than a month old, and I have witnessed so many contributors "ranking up" multiple times within this pretty short time period.  Within a year I forsee 75% or more reaching "Exalted" contributor status.  It's hard to see how this is going to help newbies feel like they fit in.

 

On another thread I said that it has to be determined by some computer algorithm that factors in all of the posts, hearts, etc.  I think the "answer" so far confirms this.  They have to figure it out before they can explain it to us.  If it were simple, they could just tell us.

"It doesn't matter if the glass is half-full or half-empty as long as you still have the rest of the bottle."
Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 7,829
Registered: ‎03-18-2010

Re: Moderators - please explain "Contributor" designations... ?


@keithsmom65 wrote:

If anyone is "acting up" about the designations I believe they are being childish. I don't think any of us should give it a second thought. Of what importance is it, and what difference does it make to our daily lives on this earth ?

 

Sounds, trite, silly and very immature to me. It has absolutely no importance whatsoever. Some people will get into a snit about anything.


 

I agree with you. It isn't something that is even on my radar and I will have to click on my profile to even see what level I am at. I am sorry, but for me, I can't imagine caring about something so ridiculous. I am not trying to offend, that is just my opinion.

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
JFK
Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 6,221
Registered: ‎08-09-2012

Re: Moderators - please explain "Contributor" designations... ?

Apparently this is bothering people, whether they all want to admit it or not, or everyone would just stop posting about it.  That hasn't happened.  And there was one thread that was so contentious, if the posters could have come to blows through their computers, they would have.  Many of us have said we wish they would just get rid of it, but it seems there is a purpose for it.  Maybe we will find out.

 

And no one has to look at their profile to see their designation, as it's very visible right under your nic on your posts.