Development Cycle Archive
Thread: SWG Forum Ranking Changes...
Kaessa
Wed Aug 25, 2004 10:35 pm
#393
I like that you get rewarded for being a member of the community for a certain length of TIME, not just how much you post. I don't post a lot, but I do read a lot (swvault.com site manager, need to keep up on the news). I like that I will get recognition for being here from day one. 
OonaAngyl
Thu Aug 26, 2004 12:07 am
#395
I think making me wait another 6+ months to be purple is cruel and unusual punishment, even from a kitten killer.
GarVa wrote:
Just to answer a couple concerns....
The updated ranking list is VERY low on post count, look at the month vs. Post count. It is very low... ALSO This tree is more "time" oriented, because we do not want to encourage people to spam post just to get a title and also to not "punish" those that have been around a while but do not post that much.
The star ranked titles basically are the same as other similar titles you just get them faster (month wise) that is the only benefit. The whole system is intended to be over a long period so I am perfectly fine with it taking 4 years for people to get the highest rank.
Khaldun
Thu Aug 26, 2004 12:43 am
#396
Truth to tell, I'm far less concerned with the schema that the forum managers use to rank posters--though it might be best to have the default on unranked posts be a 4 or 5 rather than a 3--than I am with the overall management of the forums.
I think it's a good thing that the forums are on the whole on a tighter leash than they were in the first six months after launch. Though now that they're better organized, there's even less excuse for the developers to trash the forums as a source of information as they periodically do. But at least the devs can now get direct replies to direct queries, and so on.
What is more frustrating is that the need to organize information has also allowed a much more intolerant attitude towards criticism to slip in. The community and forum managers may think they're being skilled and subtle, following some policy guideline on community relations, but they're not. The truly foolish deletion of threads referencing the protests on Intrepid over the banning of players who received duped credits is only the tip of the iceberg. SOE seems to have no sense of how that makes them look in the outside world, and it certainly does nothing to rebuild SWG's credibility with many former customers who might otherwise consider returning to the game. (It probably doesn't help build a potential customer base for EQII, either.) More to the point, I find it really irritating that Thunderheart barely replies to criticisms, even more detailed ones, instead preferring to drop pollyanna one-liners on nearly content-less posts. These forums should be a place where information flows in a truly two-way fashion, where the future of this gameworld is shaped. That they're not impoverishes both the players AND the developers. Time to pack away the "community management" corporate manual and get back to some clear, honest, talking between players and developers.
CommanderKendall
Thu Aug 26, 2004 12:50 am
#397
Akaara wrote:
How do you know your star rankings? Is there a way to see this? Curious what mine would be...
Akaara, just click on the dashboard button up top of your forum page. That will give you your current star rating as well as various other statistics about your forum usage. You can also click on your own name on any of your poststoview your generic profile screen (which also includes your current star rating).
As to the new proposed ranking system with all the ranks in one tree with adjusted requirements I approve. It all looks good so far as the forum rankings go.
Message Edited by CommanderKendall on 08-25-2004 03:52 PM
FuryoftheStars
Thu Aug 26, 2004 1:29 am
#398
Jack... chill dude. It's already been said several times that Garva has nothing to do with the combat revamp and the devs have nothing to do with the forums. They are 2 totally different animals. Garva is paid to work on the forums, the devs are paid to work on the game. So leave him be.
HavelockVetinari
Thu Aug 26, 2004 7:36 am
#400
My account lapsed for a bit (was moving to my new job - [stupidity edited out - was gone so long I bought it when some guy told me elder was higher than leader] ) -will my initial 12 months count toward my cumulative total under the new ranking system?
Message Edited by HavelockVetinari on 08-26-2004 10:17 AM
GarVa
Thu Aug 26, 2004 8:08 am
#401
Forum account time goes from your start date on the forum regardless of lapses...
Yes I have read every page, I have been unable to take time to answer every question that is why I try to be general in my replies 
Zertz
Thu Aug 26, 2004 11:27 am
#402
I apologize if this has been said or somesuch, but doesn't this strike you as a monumental waste of time that could have been spent improving the forums like the dropdown cascade problem?
FuryoftheStars
Thu Aug 26, 2004 12:00 pm
#403
Arg0nus wrote:There's also the fact that people have been asking why their rank isn't what it's "supposed" to be.The reason is, that we are still on the old system. It's not been updated yet. Different system, different requirements.
Dunno if you were making that comment in reply to my post, but I do know we are still on the old system. That's actually my point. On the old (if I had heard correctly), it's supposed to take 6 months for Community Vet. I got mine a bit early for some reason....