topic Re: Moderators-Why titles? in Suggestion Box

Moderators-Why titles?

ECBG — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 06:55:52 GMT

The titles, Contributor or Respected contributor really need to be deleated. Just because someone has a lot to say doesn't make them "respected". Some of these so called "respected" personalities can get down right nasty and are not respected in any way!

I'd just as soon have number of posts.

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

Deb1010yetagain — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 07:00:56 GMT

@ECBG wrote:
The titles, Contributor or Respected contributor really need to be deleated. Just because someone has a lot to say doesn't make them "respected". Some of these so called "respected" personalities can get down right nasty and are not respected in any way!

I'd just as soon have number of posts.

I agree. And the levels don't all make sense. For example, when you're at "frequent contributor", the next level up is "regular contributor". I'd think it would be the other way around.

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

Kachina624 — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 07:06:55 GMT

Ah shucks ladies, come on, this is the only place I'm "honored". Don't take that away.

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

Deb1010yetagain — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 07:15:19 GMT

@Kachina624 wrote:
Ah shucks ladies, come on, this is the only place I'm "honored". Don't take that away.

You better watch your step or we might have you bumped up to "esteemed"! lolol

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

Desertdi — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 07:31:36 GMT

@Deb1010yetagain wrote:
@Kachina624 wrote:
Ah shucks ladies, come on, this is the only place I'm "honored". Don't take that away.
You better watch your step or we might have you bumped up to "esteemed"! lolol

I wanna be "chairman of the board"........do they have that one?????

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

Deb1010yetagain — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 07:48:21 GMT

@Desertdi wrote:
@Deb1010yetagain wrote:
@Kachina624 wrote:
Ah shucks ladies, come on, this is the only place I'm "honored". Don't take that away.
You better watch your step or we might have you bumped up to "esteemed"! lolol
I wanna be "chairman of the board"........do they have that one?????

Oh yeah! That'll look great on your resume! Better than chairman of the bored

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

Desertdi — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 11:07:41 GMT

@Deb1010yetagain wrote:
@Desertdi wrote:
@Deb1010yetagain wrote:
@Kachina624 wrote:
Ah shucks ladies, come on, this is the only place I'm "honored". Don't take that away.
You better watch your step or we might have you bumped up to "esteemed"! lolol
I wanna be "chairman of the board"........do they have that one?????
Oh yeah! That'll look great on your resume! Better than chairman of the bored

I've never had a real title........so I'll take anything (!!)

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

wilma — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 11:20:59 GMT

I like the hearts, but I don't think we need the "rankings" either.

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

Goldengate8361 — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 12:05:11 GMT

I don't mind them...I just don't understand why they assign different labels. I don't know why I'm "trusted" instead of respected or esteemed. I just assume that the labels are randomly assigned. Does anybody know if that's true?

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

sallybusky — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 12:14:47 GMT

ooh! ooh! Can I be the Queen of the Board??

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

violann — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 12:23:02 GMT

Why on earth is this a life changer?

For myself, I prefer the title (self proclaimed) Grand Poobah, but I find very few who are willing to address me as such.

Even so, it makes SO LITTLE DIFFERENCE IN MY LIFE.

I also liked the title "Sheriff of The Kindergarten" (also self-proclaimed) but that one lost its zing when I moved on to First Grade.

I also don't give a hoot if referred to as Miss, Ms. or Mrs. I do get a little cranky if someone looks at my gray hair and wrinkles and calls me "Girly" or "Hunny", but I'm quick to get over it.

For those of you who are title sensitive, I hope you find quick and ongoing relief.

If anyone wishes to join me in the corps of "Grand Poobah", WELCOME IN!

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

gmkb — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 13:43:50 GMT

I like it all - hearts, titles, moderators. It's a fun thing, has no lasting implications. My view is just enjoy the experience and try to be kind to each other.

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

Deanie — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 13:58:23 GMT

@ECBG wrote:
The titles, Contributor or Respected contributor really need to be deleated. Just because someone has a lot to say doesn't make them "respected". Some of these so called "respected" personalities can get down right nasty and are not respected in any way!

I'd just as soon have number of posts.

Why do you care? I have had a title that I do not use, but, I would not certainly take it away from my colleagues. This argument reminds me of the case that was taken up regarding changing Miss and Mrs to Ms. The sound of which reminds me of a slurpy going through a straw.

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

Lipstickdiva — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 14:13:55 GMT

I rarely pay any attention to that title and honestly didn't even know what I was until I posted this and looked. LOL I never look at the titles under anyones' names.

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

Winkk — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 14:48:02 GMT

@Goldengate8361 wrote:
I don't mind them...I just don't understand why they assign different labels. I don't know why I'm "trusted" instead of respected or esteemed. I just assume that the labels are randomly assigned. Does anybody know if that's true?

@Goldengate8361- It's based on the number of posts you have. There are increments for each title. But, I don't know what the increments are. I don't really pay attention to the titles.

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

bebe777 — Mon, 08 Feb 2016 23:22:22 GMT

I just got bumped up to "Honored" (which is their highest ranking) and it seems to have happened about the time that I hit 8,000 posts.

Initially the rankings seemed to have been based on the number of hearts that folks received, but I think they're completely eliminated that association based all all the (very well deserved) backlash created by this methodology.

Based on what others have posted in the interim, I'm guessing that they experimented with determining rankings by trying out several different version of posts plus hearts for a while.

When I got bumped up recently, I got curious and did a quick rankings check based the rankings of other posts that i read. -- My very unscientific deduction is that I think the ranking are now solely based on the number of posts that a member has. Below are my general unscientific observations:

* valued -- 500 to 999 posts

* trusted -- 1,000 to 1,999 posts

* respected -- 2,000 to 3,999 posts

* esteemed -- 4,000 to 7,999 posts

* honored -- 8,000 posts

The designations before Valued Contributor are for various types of contributors and new member levels, which sound less special (for lack of a better word). Those also seem to be determined by the number of posts that someone has, but I have no idea of what those levels are.

I've also seen "Senior" and "Visitor" designations but I have no idea what they mean. If I remember correctly something like QVC_Community is for hosts, and QVC Community is for vendors.

About the hearts feature...

I love the hearts feature and heart posts to my hearts content. I'm really glad that, at this point, the hearts no longer seem to have any tie to the ranking system.

That said, I wish that they would just eliminate the ranking system. Since they list the number of posts that each poster has, that information is common knowledge. -- The current ranking system just seems to reaffirm this information which makes it redundant and unnecessary.

At this point, the only purpose of the ranking system serves is to upset some members... and I can't see any good rational for doing this.

I've never been in favor of any sort of ranking system and I'd really like to see it eliminated.

-- bebe

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

ChynnaBlue — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 16:09:17 GMT

@ECBG wrote:
The titles, Contributor or Respected contributor really need to be deleated. Just because someone has a lot to say doesn't make them "respected". Some of these so called "respected" personalities can get down right nasty and are not respected in any way!

I'd just as soon have number of posts.

Can't you just ignore them? I don't even know what my own title is because I don't pay attention.

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

wonderfulworld — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 19:04:44 GMT

I am logging on to see what I am.

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

wonderfulworld — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 19:10:40 GMT

I kind of agree...it is dumb. You can look at the number of posts to see how frequently some one responds.

Wonder where these ideas come from. Are the powers that be trying to get us to post more often? Is this a competition?

Personally I was on the boards much more frequently before the format changed. I do not find them as interesting as before...maybe a good thing?

I miss some of the regular old regulars who don't seem to be around any more.

Re: Moderators-Why titles?

MacDUFF — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 19:13:26 GMT

@Desertdi

Chairman ain't all it's cracked up to be...where's my $50?