topic Re: Classifying contributors (posters) in Suggestion Box

Classifying contributors (posters)

GingerPeach — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 00:30:57 GMT

I am not chomping at the bit to be a supercontributor or any other sort of contributor. Why do we have to be classified? Why do we even need avatars? Yes, some people like them, but they are basically just more clutter on the page to me.

Some of these software programs being used now seem to be for those who need constant reassurance and hearts and notifications of responses to posts and all the rest. (Yes, I have changed my preferences.) My point is why do we need these in the first place?

What adults need are simple basic categories and subcategories like we had before as well as simple (and not EXPANDED with lots of white space) pages PLUS the ability to find our own last posts (and this means responses to posts, not just original posts).

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

SaRina — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 00:37:06 GMT

I agree Homegirl. To top off the visual and navigational horrors in this new forum....titles, hearts, tags, avatars all create a junior high environment. I've been complaining all day. Maybe it's time to throw in the towel.

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

Sylanne — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 00:42:49 GMT

I'm actually embarrassed to be called a supercontributor. Yes, I have been a poster since the very old Shop Talk days, so what.

I do have to say I like the heart button which is akin to the like button on Facebook, b/c there are many posts that could have been posted by me & I would rather do a heart/like rather than do a post w/ITA to the poster.

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

lolakimono — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 00:45:37 GMT

What comes after super?

Super Duper?

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

SHIRAZ — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 00:47:51 GMT

I totally agree! It seems to be turning the whole forum into a popularity contest. Why do we need "most hearted" contributors??

And I know the posting history is all messed up now, but if somebody couldn't look at the number of posts attributed to a member, and know that somebody with 35,000 posts is a "super contributor" without having it pointed out to them, well then I don't know . . . . .

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

JustJazzmom — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 00:50:10 GMT

I feel its more 'goodies' to make us feel good about ourselves. I don't need a title below my nick indicating that I am Super or a Contributor.

The avatars are a nice touch and I do like the autosave feature on the threads.

I dislike that my spell check isn't working with firefox browser.

I kan tiepe lyke this and the red line doesn't show my errors!

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

jackthebear — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 01:05:40 GMT

@JustJazzmom wrote:
I feel its more 'goodies' to make us feel good about ourselves. I don't need a title below my nick indicating that I am Super or a Contributor.

The avatars are a nice touch and I do like the autosave feature on the threads.

I dislike that my spell check isn't working with firefox browser.

I kan tiepe like this and the red line doesn't show my errors!

spell check is working in Firefox for me,

doesn't work the way it did before though, click on the abc icon using the rich text format and the spelling errors will be underlined in red,

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

SHOPR — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 01:14:47 GMT

@lolakimono wrote:
What comes after super?
Super Duper?

Super Dee Duper comes to my mind. And I visualize all of us in Super Woman costumes.

I kinda like the hearts from the standpoint of letting a poster know that I agree with or like what they said, without having to reply each and every time which becomes repetitive. I view the hearts from a functional standpoint, not as a popularity thing, but maybe it's just how I think.

Slinking back to Home forum now, since I'm still pretty clueless how to navigate this place at this point.

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

dooBdoo — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 02:00:33 GMT

I like the idea of the hearts (although I'd rather see a different icon) in that we can let someone know we agree with their post, because it simplifies the thread and eliminates all the quotes and "ITA's."

But I say that with an emphatic proviso: I like the option being there within the thread... but not as something to be added to some sort of "tote board" or "leaderboard" popularity contest. I think that's a bad idea.

The displays of who's tagged the most, or "hearted" the most, or the "contributor" notations make me extremely uncomfortable, and I wish we had the option to opt out of all of those.

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

tsj178 — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 04:35:21 GMT

I think this is due to some super posters always attacking some posters for have low #'s. If you have a low number, you can't have an opinion?

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

JGalt — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 18:58:38 GMT

This heart business is deeply offensive. It is contrary to the "Community Standards" as I read them. I truly find the whole business immoral.

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

icezeus — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 19:10:14 GMT

I don't understand what you mean when you say that you find it immoral?

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

Vickiv — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 19:23:34 GMT

I am new to these boards but back in the early 90's I was on the QVC boards. So easy and fun. No bashing of posters. We valued everyone's opinion. I have been watching these boards for a long time and if you are new some people get nasty and think your opinion means nothing. Sad. I love the different topics and comments. Some are funny and some are very interesting. It's nice to see other peoples views on things. Maybe not how I think but that's ok I'm not perfect . I am not young but I am not old. I respect everyone on these boards after all we have a right to our opinions and give the poster respect which they deserve.. Who cares how many posts the best of the best made. If you made hundreds and hundreds of posts or a newbie like me just enjoy and maybe you can learn something new here. I know I did!!

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

Harpa — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 19:40:25 GMT

@JGalt wrote:
This heart business is deeply offensive. It is contrary to the "Community Standards" as I read them. I truly find the whole business immoral.

I take what you've said to mean that the hearts and even the classifications shows some kind of favortism, the very thing they (at least on the surface) seemed like they were attempting to avoid.

To me there isn't much point to know why certain people have tagged things, how many hearts they got, and what kind of contributor we are. Are they going by dates or how many posts? Or, maybe someone judged how many helpful other contributions we've made? It is just all a little bizarre.

The old Board simply stated member since (date) and # of posts, But who really cared about that? Except for us to recognize the low posters & shills who've continually slipped in their advertisement.

This is a small potatoes complaint, but I do wish they would eliminate all those non-important things.

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

suzette — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 20:37:57 GMT

It doesn't bother me one way or the other; if someone wants to be a super contributor so be it. Apparently I'll never fall into that category. I've been on these boards for many years. I usually read for the most part and post.only occasionally.

That being said they changed the amount of my posts to three, it was probably closer to 1003, I hope I won't be shunned for such a low amount of posts. LOL I'm kidding!

What a disorganized mess they've created and the amount of frustration they're causing everyone.

Hopefully with all the complaints they will do a little reorganizing.

Suzette

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

deja vu — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 21:13:20 GMT

@dooBdoo wrote:
I like the idea of the hearts (although I'd rather see a different icon) in that we can let someone know we agree with their post, because it simplifies the thread and eliminates all the quotes and "ITA's."

But I say that with an emphatic proviso: I like the option being there within the thread... but not as something to be added to some sort of "tote board" or "leaderboard" popularity contest. I think that's a bad idea.

The displays of who's tagged the most, or "hearted" the most, or the "contributor" notations make me extremely uncomfortable, and I wish we had the option to opt out of all of those.

"I you and ITA".....seems they are wanting to be a FB type of forum now. We were content, or I was content with the less is more type of forum that we had. Not sure what is going to change from this point..

Guess I'll just ride it out and watch to see if any familiar changes are made, and then make my decision of how I will participate with the new forum.

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

sunshine45 — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 21:17:25 GMT

tsj178 wrote:
I think this is due to some super posters always attacking some posters for have low #'s. If you have a low number, you can't have an opinion?

actually, i have seen it BOTH ways.......others who attack posters with high #'s is quite frequent also.

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

British Grl — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 21:28:29 GMT

@tsj178 wrote:
I think this is due to some super posters always attacking some posters for have low #'s. If you have a low number, you can't have an opinion?

Or even worse (and I have seen this happen a few times here), if you have a "low" (define "low") post count, you are labled a troll. Not cool.

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

IamMrsG — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 21:39:15 GMT

With fewer than 2,000 posts over a number of years, I don't have a clue how I rated as a "Super Contributor." In truth, I'd much rather be considered a "Reasonable Contributor." They're more rare, you know.

Re: Classifying contributors (posters)

British Grl — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 21:40:09 GMT

@sunshine45 wrote:
@tsj178 wrote:
I think this is due to some super posters always attacking some posters for have low #'s. If you have a low number, you can't have an opinion?

actually, i have seen it BOTH ways.......others who attack posters with high #'s is quite frequent also.

I've seen that too sunshine45. Some posters with high post counts are sometimes singled out and told to "get off the computer", "go outside and get some fresh air", "you must not have any friends" and...wait for it: "get a life". I don't think post count has anything to do with it; I think it has to do with a poster who has an axe to grind with another poster.