Quantcast

Jump to content


Photo

Shiny Member Status


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
38 replies to this topic

#26 cara

cara
  • 56/m/mexico

  • 3364 posts


Users Awards

Posted 26 February 2006 - 11:25 AM

I can see the having a nice new status bar thing, I don't know if there'd be any point in having it's own seperate area, I think it would result in either that or General Chat becoming completely redundant.

What I think would be better would be increasing the amount of posts needed to become a "NeoCodex Member", at the minute it's 1, I think if we were going to do this we should just raise that. *Shrugs*


You're right Ali , they shouldn't need there own chat.
There will be no special privilages to the shiny members except the fact that they have there own active group.
It's not really somthing to state you're closer to private.
It's more along the lines of showing you're active.
To be a codex member you can be inactive.
To be a shiny member you must be active.

I don't wanna be a 'Shiny Member' thing, sounds fairly girly, unprofessional i lub my red thing ^_^
I agree with Ali, just raise the limit to become a normal NeoCodex member, instead of needing to get to this 'Shiny' status to be proud why can't people be proud reaching the state of normal member?
It will also detract from the glory of private if you add stepping stones.


Then what will the in-active members be?
' Pre-codex member '

That would be the same thing as Shiny member and codex member.

-Just different names.

#27 Silk

Silk
  • 6906 posts


Users Awards

Posted 26 February 2006 - 11:28 AM

Then what will the in-active members be?
' Pre-codex member '

That would be the same thing as Shiny member and codex member.

-Just different names.

Simply 'New Member' we already have that rank but it lasts only for 1 post, personally i don't think you can escape the rank of 'New Member' just by posting once.

#28 cara

cara
  • 56/m/mexico

  • 3364 posts


Users Awards

Posted 26 February 2006 - 11:29 AM

If we do this we're finding a better name than Shiny Member. :p


Stop replying so fast. :unsure: You scare me.


Well , it could be anything really ... A name that fits both genders.

-I think it should be a lime green color .... My favorite color. :)

Simply 'New Member' we already have that rank but it lasts only for 1 post, personally i don't think you can escape the rank of 'New Member' just by posting once.


Zufli ... that'll be the same exact thing as 'Shiny' Member and Codex member.

But you'll have different names.
Get rid of the new member newbie one and keep one status untill you reach 'Shiny' member.

#29 Gargar

Gargar
  • 4901 posts

Posted 26 February 2006 - 11:30 AM

lime green is already used by Jr. programers :p
I think just rasing the New member limit sounds good.

#30 cara

cara
  • 56/m/mexico

  • 3364 posts


Users Awards

Posted 26 February 2006 - 11:33 AM

lime green is already used by Jr. programers :p
I think just rasing the New member limit sounds good.


:( Damit.

What about yellow?

#31 Radiuju

Radiuju
  • 452 posts


Users Awards

Posted 26 February 2006 - 11:35 AM

Personally i'm sick of looking at 100000 billion active/inactive Red member statuses

How about this

The Idea I suggested with a better name.
No special areas.
Just the pride and new bar. Thats all I ask now. You could consider it a b-day present :)

Edit: oh, wait. 166 Pages of Neocodex members.

Edited by Radiuju, 26 February 2006 - 11:38 AM.


#32 cara

cara
  • 56/m/mexico

  • 3364 posts


Users Awards

Posted 26 February 2006 - 11:38 AM

Personally i'm sick of looking at 100000 billion active/inactive Red member statuses

How about this

The Idea I suggested with a better name.
No special areas.
Just the pride and new bar. Thats all I ask now. You could consider it a b-day present :)


Yep. ^_^

Maybe 'Golden Member' with a golden status bar. :o :funone:

#33 Archon

Archon
  • 2142 posts

Posted 26 February 2006 - 12:16 PM

Yep. ^_^

Maybe 'Golden Member' with a golden status bar. :o :funone:


Retired members are gold... I don't support the "Shiny Member," I do however think the post should be raised for Member.

#34 Frizzle

Frizzle
  • M'lord

  • 16889 posts


Users Awards

Posted 26 February 2006 - 12:31 PM

Psh, waste of time, you will get no more privilideges or "respect" with a higher status, some of our higher members aren't respected still (including me), we don't deserve or even earn respect with a higher status, it depends on the type of member you are.

It seems to me, you just want a tad more power then someone else ;).

Anyways, I agree Bicycle..I mean Ali, in raising the limit on post count for Neocodex member. It'll make people post more and create a more active community, and if the staff see spam, they'll deal with it, won't they? I mean, you do trust our staff to do a good job right?

M'kay?

#35 RandomNameIgnoreIt

RandomNameIgnoreIt
  • 1828 posts


Users Awards

Posted 26 February 2006 - 12:36 PM

I think the problem is that if you introduced a new status available to regular members solely by their activity,

1) Mass spam so people could get the rank
2) The number of regular members would be further divided, making the people that have red names sort of outcast. As it is tons of members of codex have special ranks, and creating a new rank accessible to everyone only serves to further degrade the positions of those in the regular member category.

As far as it being fair that active and inactive members have the same status, I'd be more inclined to think that the inactive members should be given a lower status, as opposed to the active regular members a higher status. That way the balance of the ranks is maintained, but the inactive members are still noted apart from the active ones.

#36 KillerPrince

KillerPrince
  • 327 posts

Posted 26 February 2006 - 12:37 PM

i think that's kinda cool. i mean i wouldn't mine like i been here for 2 and a half years, i would like to see i'm an elite member or old member some fancy name or something

#37 Bryan

Bryan
  • 4107 posts

Posted 26 February 2006 - 12:43 PM

I don't really like the idea. It's not that hard to seperate the "active members" from the inactive members. Just look at posts... If they joined a year ago, and have 40 posts, then they aren't active o-O. I think it's just a ploy to make it easier for people to have a "higher rank" and I really don't agree with it o-O

#38 KillerPrince

KillerPrince
  • 327 posts

Posted 26 February 2006 - 01:15 PM

then how about the admins/mods/and super mods pick who have been active and deserve to get a high rank. almost like trying to be a private member. they pick who deserves it

#39 Zero DeLocke

Zero DeLocke
  • 2087 posts

Posted 26 February 2006 - 01:30 PM

I do not think there should be a separation between inactive and active members. The ones who have respect, we already keep an eye on. Those who want it, will have to try just as hard to get our attention. Having a different colored bar will not influence me in any way. Begging for a position of higher power without showing any leadership qualities or any plan for the future is rather a turnoff. We all want to be recognized. I know the feeling. But having a different colored bar will not change a thing. Especially one that is automatic with hardly any work. Any monkey could come in here and get one in 5 days. Does that mean they are active? Perhaps for those 5 days they are. In a social setting such as this, I know the pain of feeling like noone reads your posts or gives a damn about what you think. A goal here is to become Private and seen as trustworthy. Having a post count of 500, 1000, or 1500 means very little in the way of trust.

I'm making a new paragraph because I didn't make a layout on the way I am thinking here. Stay with me here.

A point I am trying to make is this: If you want a new status to get the attention of Private members, you don't need to worry about it. I can say for most of us, that we keep an eye out for potential Private members all the time. Personally, there are very few members here that I have not noticed. You might feel insignifigant, but rest assured that you are not. A different tag means nothing.

I am willing to further reiterate what I have said, if any of it didn't make sense. *waves*


Edited for typos

Edited by Zero DeLocke, 26 February 2006 - 01:32 PM.



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users