Suggestion Box

[bebe777]

---

@HappyDaze wrote:

I have never even paid attention to anyone's ranking. I could not even tell you what one poster I know has for their ranking. It isn't like their ranking is in your face - it is even grayed out in a way- so I am not sure why you just can't ignore it. Sure it is silly and unnecessary but I'd rather the mods work on fixing other more important issues with the site then worry about this. You know, like the jumping pages, the error messages, etc, things that actually affect the functionality of the site.

---

@HappyDaze, lol, I know what you mean... but I think you know that I have a penchant for trying to figure out puzzles... and I'm usually pretty good at it. I just get annoyed when some authority figure essentially says some to the effect of: we don't have to tell you, and so we won't. lol, that's like a matador waving his red cape at me... and I like a challenge. -- That said, I pretty much lost all interest here until my ranking bumped at around 8,000 posts exactly... then I got a bit curious again. But that's just me. 

When the topic is raised, the main reason I talk about the ranking system is that I want the Q to remove it. Now. Or, at least, in the next five minutes. *s*

It's been my general observation that some folks are more attached to what their ranking is than other folks are. And that they don't understand why certain people are higher up the ranking ladder than they are. -- And I think that tends to be true in every aspect of life. So why aggravate that sentiment in the QVC forums?

Why create a situation that doesn't have an upside, but sure has one heck of a down side. -- I can't see one good reason for continuing a system whose only effect is to make some folks unhappy. Why continue it?

So I'd like to have the ranking system removed right now. Thanks for listening.

-- bebe

[bebe777]

---

@Krimpette wrote:

This is the list that I had seen on a thread some time ago.  Wonder if it still exists?  (My opinion of the "rankings"?  NONSENSE, pure NONSENSE.  No useful purpose.)

QVC Bulletin Board

Occasional Contributor
Contributor
Frequent Contributor
Regular Contributor
Super Contributor
Valued Contributor
Trusted Contributor
Respected Contributor
Esteemed Contributor
Honored Contributor
Outstanding Contributor
Acclaimed Contributor
Exalted Contributor

---

@Krimpette, while that ranking system is fairly accurate... someone was have a little fun with (making up) the top three rankings... because they don't exist... and they've become something of an inside joke.

Again, this is unscientific... when I was looking at the various ranking on posts last week, I wrote down the names of all the different categories I came across (see below).

QVC Bulletin Board

New Member 

New Contributor 

Occasional Contributor

Contributor 

Frequent Contributor 

Regular Contributor

Super Contributor

Valued Contributor

Trusted Contributor

Respected Contributor 

Esteemed Contributor 

Honored Contributor

And I also came across three additional designations which are probably for members. They are used infrequently and I have no idea what they are for:

Occasional Visitor

Visitor 

Senior 

And these two designations look as though they are for QVC hosts and vendors (hopefully I've gotten these two titles right, because I didn't write them down): 

QVC_Community -- QVC hosts 

QVC Community -- vendors

And that's all she wrote.

-- bebe

[dooBdoo]

---

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 an algorithm based on a combination of a couple of things, like number of posts and number of hearts.

      But it's relatively meaningless. 

      As an example, to get the title moved up to a so-called "higher level" all you'd have to do is start posting lots of images and getting hearts for them.  And there's nothing wrong with that -- I'm just pointing out that there are ways to "bump up" the ranking.

      As I've said since the new platform was launched, I like the hearts (as long as they keep the heart counts buried, since that's another issue that raises upset with some posters) but I don't like the "ranking" placed with our name.   

      It reminds me of the attempt the Q made to ask all of us to vote for our "favorite posters" -- that went over like a lead balloon.  Popularity contests, or anything that even seems similar, just don't end well.

      As far as I'm concerned, all of us are equal here. 

      Someone who posts infrequently, or whose posts didn't happen to generate lots of hearts, is just important to me as those who are active on the forums.

[dooBdoo]

---

gmkb wrote:

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.

---

"My view is just enjoy the experience and try to be kind to each other."

That's so kind, @gmkb!  I agree with that comment,  completely!

[violann]

LOVE your title, MadameQueen. That was a nickname my dad used to call me. 

Trivia- do you know where your title came from?

[MacDUFF]

@bebe777

Thank you for the kind words, bebe.

 

[febe1]

Somehow, a program that has all of these "TITLES" plus hearts, but somehow is unable to offer an IGNORE feature has unimportant features instead of some worth. Frankly, I've never been on a forum that did not have an Ignore feature.

[HappyDaze]

---

@bebe777 wrote:

---

@HappyDaze wrote:

I have never even paid attention to anyone's ranking. I could not even tell you what one poster I know has for their ranking. It isn't like their ranking is in your face - it is even grayed out in a way- so I am not sure why you just can't ignore it. Sure it is silly and unnecessary but I'd rather the mods work on fixing other more important issues with the site then worry about this. You know, like the jumping pages, the error messages, etc, things that actually affect the functionality of the site.

---

@HappyDaze, lol, I know what you mean... but I think you know that I have a penchant for trying to figure out puzzles... and I'm usually pretty good at it. I just get annoyed when some authority figure essentially says some to the effect of: we don't have to tell you, and so we won't. lol, that's like a matador waving his red cape at me... and I like a challenge. -- That said, I pretty much lost all interest here until my ranking bumped at around 8,000 posts exactly... then I got a bit curious again. But that's just me. 

When the topic is raised, the main reason I talk about the ranking system is that I want the Q to remove it. Now. Or, at least, in the next five minutes. *s*

It's been my general observation that some folks are more attached to what their ranking is than other folks are. And that they don't understand why certain people are higher up the ranking ladder than they are. -- And I think that tends to be true in every aspect of life. So why aggravate that sentiment in the QVC forums?

Why create a situation that doesn't have an upside, but sure has one heck of a down side. -- I can't see one good reason for continuing a system whose only effect is to make some folks unhappy. Why continue it?

So I'd like to have the ranking system removed right now. Thanks for listening.

-- bebe

---

@bebe777 but with that reasoning, things like the WEN forum would go bye bye. So it is one of those "be careful what you wish for" things. lol

[bebe777]

@HappyDaze, LOL!!! -- bebe  

[SunValley]

These titles sound like something dreamed up at a lodge meeting.  I especially chuckle at the "respected" ranking as there have been some posters with this title that I think could be more accurately titled wackadoo contributor.