allow a profile to only earn activity from one category at a time.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean with this, and how this is going to be better than earning activity thoughout the forum?
Topic: Proposal - Upgrade of the rank system (Read 683 times)
I'm not sure I understand what you mean with this, and how this is going to be better than earning activity thoughout the forum?
If there is such a new rank, it should be a rank for oustanding guys, so I suggest this new rank requires 4000 merits at least, not 2000.
Lofty goal, but for the foreseeable future, will contain few users.
Right now there are only five members above 2,000 merited.
Whatever/whenever new rank is implemented in Epochtalk, I hope the categorized activity above that new rank will decay over time. Break the forum into x categories and allow a profile to only earn activity from one category at a time.
Always the most important was the activity and not, how many years one is on the forum.
If I am not wrong, three years are needed to be a Legendary, if you post one post a day during this time.
Activity is a perfect measure and from start was never changed (I think), so why to repair something which isn't broken and work for so long?
I am here from 6 years and just 2 months ago, I was still a senior member, because like I said, not the time, but activity is important.
The merit system was introduced, as an additional quality measure and works just fine, because keeps spammers low ranked for years.
Maybe there are not enough merits on some boards, but with every week, there will be more and the situation should improve slowly.
If I am not wrong, three years are needed to be a Legendary, if you post one post a day during this time.
Activity is a perfect measure and from start was never changed (I think), so why to repair something which isn't broken and work for so long?
I am here from 6 years and just 2 months ago, I was still a senior member, because like I said, not the time, but activity is important.
The merit system was introduced, as an additional quality measure and works just fine, because keeps spammers low ranked for years.
Maybe there are not enough merits on some boards, but with every week, there will be more and the situation should improve slowly.
Well, you can start by learning the difference between two, too and to.
That guy should consider my topic, as one of place to start learning and improving English skills.Collections for someone who would like to improve English skills
I Hope A Someday Be A Legenergy Member Two!!
Well, you can start by learning the difference between two, too and to. I can understand someone confusing too and to, but using two in your above sentence is just inexcusable.
(Using 2 would have been acceptable, I guess.)Furthermore, I reviewed your short post history. If you want to become a legendary, you are going to have to provide a bit more content than insubstantial one liners... Of the 5 posts that you posted so far, I couldn't even find one that I'd consider giving even one mercy merit to.
If there is such a new rank, it should be a rank for oustanding guys, so I suggest this new rank requires 4000 merits at least, not 2000. Someone hits that rank will be a precious asset of the forum. I discussed about the more common words in the forum, self-made here. There might be no extra benefit for users at such rank, but they will enjoy it as a honor for their huge contributions here.
I made that mistake myself a few weeks ago thinking the same but a user corrected me in saying that self-made Legendaries are those users that reach Legendary rank from Newbie rank.
I knew it, but I still would prefer to use the name-calling, self-made, because I think we should not make things become overcomplicated like this. Self-made, half-self-made, and so forth. Basically, the implications behind the self-made name-calling is to disclose that such users have made good contributions in the forum, and they received enough merits to move up from lower ranks to higher ranks. That's all. There is LoyceV, whom received nearly 3000 Merits till now. LoyceV is clearly not a self-made Legendary, but probably worths more than most of upcoming self-made Legendary users.
| Self-Made Legendary: | Activity: 800, gets 5 gold coins under his name of which the last is half DarkTurquoise(For example) |  | 2000 |
Oh please I couldn't even call them "self-made" if you have lowered the activity requirements for them in order to get into that position. And by my understanding a "self-made" Legendary are the ones who only ranked up to the that position after the merit system was introduced so I don't get why you have to double the merit requirements for that kind of rank, it only means you really don't know what you are talking about. This is what I call a solution for a non-existent problem, most users here have to deal with earning merits and not their activity.
I know exactly what I'm talking about. It was a proposal to introduce a new rank for users with 2000+ Merit. What kind of doubling are you talking about?
I would add just one rank namely Legendary Hero (+2500 merits earned) to what forum has right now.
neither had been adopted. Perhaps there are some reasons for that. One of them - low priority task, but nonetheless, that involves extra coding.
@OP,
Theymos like to give surprises by not fixing the activity number. but in any case difference is still less than a year if some is promoted in minimum activity and someone promoted in max activity, provided they remain active,=.
And by my understanding a "self-made" Legendary are the ones who only ranked up to the that position after the merit system was introduced
No... the "self-made" moniker is used by some folk who have earned 1000 merit after the airdrop happened.It's basically a claim that even without the airdropped merit, they would still be a Legendary today... as opposed to some of the Legendary accounts which ranked up prior to merit... and now have like 1001 merit
Thirdspace gave a good example: nullius! He made great posts and made many posts per week, but was active for less than 5 months. Staying for many years shows prolonged dedication.
Pretty much this. And you don't have to be extremely technologically knowledgeable like nullius was (I'm certainly not) to rack up a large amount of merit in a short time.Speaking as someone who would have become a legendary member months ago without the activity limit, I don't think removing it would have any great benefit to the forum. To reach legendary you should be able to prove you can make good posts and you are interested/dedicated enough to stick around for a couple of years. There isn't even a difference between hero and legendary in terms of what signature they can display, or in the pay rate for most (all?) signature campaigns.
| Self-Made Legendary: | Activity: 800, gets 5 gold coins under his name of which the last is half DarkTurquoise(For example) | | 2000 |
Oh please I couldn't even call them "self-made" if you have lowered the activity requirements for them in order to get into that position. And by my understanding a "self-made" Legendary are the ones who only ranked up to the that position after the merit system was introduced so I don't get why you have to double the merit requirements for that kind of rank, it only means you really don't know what you are talking about. This is what I call a solution for a non-existent problem, most users here have to deal with earning merits and not their activity.
I don't feel that way. If there's going to be a new rank above Legendary, I expect to need at least 1.5 years (@2k Activity) or 4.5 years (@3k Activity) before I reach that.
Why should time even be relevant to this?I'm just saying that since 90%+ of users reach activity before merit, the activity barrier is somewhat redundant.
It's probably closer to 99.9% of all users, but I see your point
I'm not saying they do need it.
I'm just saying that since 90%+ of users reach activity before merit, the activity barrier is somewhat redundant.
It's not like I am actively protesting for that change to happen. Just a healthy discussion
Thank you for your input.
I'm just saying that since 90%+ of users reach activity before merit, the activity barrier is somewhat redundant.
It's not like I am actively protesting for that change to happen. Just a healthy discussion
Thank you for your input.
Quick example: There are users that have 500+ merit but only like 200 activity. Why would they need to wait for the Hero rank.
It's always been like that: good posters always needed to earn Activity before their rank went up, even before we had Merit.lets be honest, most people that complain a lot about rank & merit are those with 'a motive'
and their ulterior motive is to join signature camp and get higher pay rate
"500+ merit but only like 200 activity"
I think you are referring to nullius Full Member 168 Activity and 776 merit
he has enough merit for Hero Member rank but I don't think he ever complained about it
why? because rank isn't important for him, he bought copper membership instead
I 'd love it if they could stand out more by becoming higher rank faster. Admittedly this is only about a small share of users.
high merited user having lower rank is even more stand out, like nullius as example It's always been like that: good posters always needed to earn Activity before their rank went up, even before we had Merit.
I'd say you are too young to use such sentences, but I have no clue what your actual age is.
A better way to make them stand out could be lowering the airdropped Merit, raising the bar for everyone instead of lowering it.
I'd like that too, but what is done is done, I don't see anyone getting demoted anytime soon.
Introduction of merit already rose the bar for everyone. Decreasing activity would only lower the bar to a very low amount of outstanding members. Not unlike yourself.
I don't feel that way. If there's going to be a new rank above Legendary, I expect to need at least 1.5 years (@2k Activity) or 4.5 years (@3k Activity) before I reach that.
Why should time even be relevant to this? I can see why it should be relevant in some extent, avoiding farming accounts, and or being of value for just a short amount of time before stopping and starting to shitpost, but 1000 days are a long time for the best among us.
I 'd love it if they could stand out more by becoming higher rank faster. Admittedly this is only about a small share of users.
Quick example: There are users that have 500+ merit but only like 200 activity. Why would they need to wait for the Hero rank.
It's always been like that: good posters always needed to earn Activity before their rank went up, even before we had Merit.Quote
The added value they provide to the forum is already the one of a Hero member or even above.
A better way to make them stand out could be lowering the airdropped Merit, raising the bar for everyone instead of lowering it.Quote
I have the feeling that you want the highest ranks to be as elitist as possible
I don't feel that way. If there's going to be a new rank above Legendary, I expect to need at least 1.5 years (@2k Activity) or 4.5 years (@3k Activity) before I reach that.Quote
Do you need to be part of the 1%?
When I look at my wallet, I know I'm not This is the opposite of "the usual discussion" about ranks: usually the suggestion is to add a new rank, for instance with 2000 Activity and 2000 Merit.
Lowering the requirements for Legendary will only lead to more users with the same rank, while adding a new rank will make some users stand out again.
Lowering the requirements for Legendary will only lead to more users with the same rank, while adding a new rank will make some users stand out again.
Both don't need to be exclusive.
And I get the utility of activity requirements from when it was the only requirement.
Now that you need merit, and that it is almost impossible to cheat your way up with merit abuse, activity's added value is fairly low.
This doesn't change your point that a new rank can be relevant.
Quick example: There are users that have 500+ merit but only like 200 activity. Why would they need to wait for the Hero rank. The added value they provide to the forum is already the one of a Hero member or even above.
I have the feeling that you want the highest ranks to be as elitist as possible, and I am wondering why. The ranks aren't exclusive. If a lot of members get enough merit/activity to reach it, why would that be a bad thing? Do you need to be part of the 1%?
2 years to become legendary (700 activity) seems to be more than enough to me.
This is the opposite of "the usual discussion" about ranks: usually the suggestion is to add a new rank, for instance with 2000 Activity and 2000 Merit.Lowering the requirements for Legendary will only lead to more users with the same rank, while adding a new rank will make some users stand out again.
What I retain from this proposition is that the activity is now secondary IMHO.
Now that usually merit is way harder to get than activity, why not loosen up a little the activity required.
2 years to become legendary (700 activity) seems to be more than enough to me. IF the user manages to get 1000 merit in that timeframe, he surely deserves it :=)
Now that usually merit is way harder to get than activity, why not loosen up a little the activity required.
2 years to become legendary (700 activity) seems to be more than enough to me. IF the user manages to get 1000 merit in that timeframe, he surely deserves it :=)
In any case, all this "self-made" stuff is just nothing more than 'peacocking'.
Actual Legendary members don't (and shouldn't) care.I don't think the total is important, but the merits for individual posts and threads are useful. They give the poster a feel for community opinion about his comments. I've stopped posting about several topics and ideas because they don't receive any merits or replies.
The idea behind the merit system is to encourage posting that is of benefit to the community, and rank should not enter into it. However, most members still seem to consider merits as a ranking aid, and not as a tool to help them to improve their posting.
Being one of the members mentioned in the OP's post I don't really mind waiting. Feels like a lottery, you are waiting for your magic numbers to pop up.
I did see that thread that was created a few weeks ago where users asked theymos what their magic number was, I didn't ask him - it is more fun this way.
A question though. Why is this magic number only applicable to the Legendary rank while other ranks have a fixed activity number?
I did see that thread that was created a few weeks ago where users asked theymos what their magic number was, I didn't ask him - it is more fun this way.
A question though. Why is this magic number only applicable to the Legendary rank while other ranks have a fixed activity number?
Yes, now it is 65 profiles. In a month there will be 70, in 2 months 100, etc.
This statement is inaccurate from a statistical stand point, there is absoulitly no guarantee that the number of users who have enough merit but suffer lack of activity is going to increase.
There is a good possiblity it is going to decrease, remain somehow the same, or simply follow your prediction.
By all means i don't think any changes are required for now, despite the fact that i always have more merits than activity, i personally think it's fun, i will most likely be a legendary merit wise before becoming hero activity wise which is fine by me as long as i get all the privileges a legendary gets
Both users have more than 1000 Merit, more than 900 Activities, but still remain Hero Member's. Maybe it's time to change the ranking system a bit?
~
I propose to revise the ranking system and lower the minimum activity for higher ranks. This will contribute to the fact that especially honored users will receive ranks faster and it will motivate all users to write high-quality posts, rather than stuffing activity.
it works as designed, ranking up to Legendary always happen at random activity point but guaranteed before 1030 ~
I propose to revise the ranking system and lower the minimum activity for higher ranks. This will contribute to the fact that especially honored users will receive ranks faster and it will motivate all users to write high-quality posts, rather than stuffing activity.
imo, lowering requirement doesn't count as an upgrade, on the contrary it would degrade the significance of ranks
rank is basically a time-based achievement while merit shows quality of the rank holder
this combination makes it somewhat harder for account farmer to game the current rank/merit system
That would make the Legendary rank so much easy to achieve even with the merit system in place.
If my math is right, with your implementation, it would take a regular poster just 602 days to 2 year to achieve legendary rank and with in a time of 3 to 4 years, the Legendary rank will just be flooded and it will definitely lose it's respected community status.
I think the current model is okay.
If my math is right, with your implementation, it would take a regular poster just 602 days to 2 year to achieve legendary rank and with in a time of 3 to 4 years, the Legendary rank will just be flooded and it will definitely lose it's respected community status.
I think the current model is okay.
legendary
Activity: 2450
Merit: 4295
eXch.cx - Automatic crypto Swap Exchange.
No I'm comfortable with the way it is, infact if there was a reason for any change, it should involve increasing the activity requirement for each rank. The only reason why someone will be interested in lowering the activity requirement is just to rank up quickly to get better pay via signature campaign. I'm not in a hurry to rank-up via activity.
Your rank should reflect how long you have been active on the forum. With the current activity requirement it'll take a newbie just approximately 4years (with required merit) to get a legendary status which is too soon if you ask me. 6/7years seems fair. Lets put some respect on the ranks.
Your rank should reflect how long you have been active on the forum. With the current activity requirement it'll take a newbie just approximately 4years (with required merit) to get a legendary status which is too soon if you ask me. 6/7years seems fair. Lets put some respect on the ranks.
| Self-Made Legendary: | Activity: 800, gets 5 gold coins under his name of which the last is half DarkTurquoise(For example) | | 2000 |
I see no reason to lower Activity requirements, before the Merit system users had to "wait" for years to earn Legendary status too.
There are not that many people in the situation indicated in the OP (enough merits but not enough activity to rank-up). I make it (as of last Friday):
- 8 Heroes, lacking at least the minimum current value of the range necessary to become Legendary.
- 19 Sr. Members lacking activity for Hero.
- 15 Full Members lacking activity for Sr. Member.
- 23 Members lacking activity for Full Member.
I've seen a few users with loads of Merit and low Activity, that makes it very likely their posts are worth reading. - 8 Heroes, lacking at least the minimum current value of the range necessary to become Legendary.
- 19 Sr. Members lacking activity for Hero.
- 15 Full Members lacking activity for Sr. Member.
- 23 Members lacking activity for Full Member.
The point is Legendary rank does not have same activity requirements for all users, each user has own lucky number, at which the account will be ranked up to Legendary. I remembered that around less than one month ago, I read a topic from some Legendary users or Hero Members whom ask theymos for their lucky numbers. There are some reasons, that I believe Hero Members whom collected enough at least 1000 merits won't care too much about when they will become Legendary members. Firstly, two ranks have same payment rates in campaigns. Secondly, from Hero to Legendary ranks are a very far journey, and people whom made it (collecting enough merits) actually love their works in the forum, they do their works because they love it, so ranking up later one or two months does not a matter with them.
The core currently "affected" is only of around 65 profiles (Member rank onwards), which is not significant enough to suggest a need for a change in the activity parameter in relation to the merit parameter.
Yes, now it is 65 profiles. In a month there will be 70, in 2 months 100, etc. I do not call to change the system today, I suggest just to think about this issue.
<...>
There are not that many people in the situation indicated in the OP (enough merits but not enough activity to rank-up). I make it (as of last Friday):- 8 Heroes, lacking at least the minimum current value of the range necessary to become Legendary.
- 19 Sr. Members lacking activity for Hero.
- 15 Full Members lacking activity for Sr. Member.
- 23 Members lacking activity for Full Member.
- 460 Jr. Members lacking activity for Member. (*)
- 3618 Newbies lacking activity for Jr. Member (*)
- 185 Brand new lacking activity for Jr. Member (*)
The core currently "affected" is only of around 65 profiles (Member rank onwards), which is not significant enough to suggest a need for a change in the activity parameter in relation to the merit parameter.
(*) The lower ranks have a larger base, but activity is trivial to reach for them in a short period of time. Numbers are larger here, but many of these account (not all) correspond to demoted accounts by means of deleting posts and/or accounts that have been inactive for a while.
If the majority of users here cared a little less about merits and rank, and a bit more about actually contributing in a meaningful way, simply because it helped the community, we'd be a lot better off.
I think both objectives can be accomplished together.
I want to rank up and to contribute to the forum. The more you contribute, more merit you get and faster you rank up.
I don't think activity requirements should change, as it would not be fair with old users.
Also the activity is whats most difficult cause its taking time and some members just want it to happen fast....
So if one wants to be contributing then he will not mind of spending time in here and doing so.
You're missing the point that if a user account was created today, when they get 1000 merit, they are a so-called "self-made" legendary...
In any case, all this "self-made" stuff is just nothing more than 'peacocking'. Actual Legendary members don't (and shouldn't) care.
If the majority of users here cared a little less about merits and rank, and a bit more about actually contributing in a meaningful way, simply because it helped the community, we'd be a lot better off.
In any case, all this "self-made" stuff is just nothing more than 'peacocking'.
Actual Legendary members don't (and shouldn't) care.If the majority of users here cared a little less about merits and rank, and a bit more about actually contributing in a meaningful way, simply because it helped the community, we'd be a lot better off.
Being early in BTC and contribute in this forum when all of the rest still didn't hear of BTC should already make the legendary members a little more legendary for just being the first to believe in BTC and start discussing the matter that early...
I would suggest to give the real older accounts an extra colour of shield, so people can easily see that those guys are some real community builders.
"just some thought"
If the majority of users here cared a little less about merits and rank, and a bit more about actually contributing in a meaningful way, simply because it helped the community, we'd be a lot better off.
I think both objectives can be accomplished together.
I want to rank up and to contribute to the forum. The more you contribute, more merit you get and faster you rank up.
I don't think activity requirements should change, as it would not be fair with old users.
You're missing the point that if a user account was created today, when they get 1000 merit, they are a so-called "self-made" legendary...
In any case, all this "self-made" stuff is just nothing more than 'peacocking'. Actual Legendary members don't (and shouldn't) care.
If the majority of users here cared a little less about merits and rank, and a bit more about actually contributing in a meaningful way, simply because it helped the community, we'd be a lot better off.
In any case, all this "self-made" stuff is just nothing more than 'peacocking'.
Actual Legendary members don't (and shouldn't) care.If the majority of users here cared a little less about merits and rank, and a bit more about actually contributing in a meaningful way, simply because it helped the community, we'd be a lot better off.
The users have the merit requirement already but the activity requirement is different for all users to hit Legendary status.
Legendary: Activity: the Legendary membergroup has no universal activity requirement.
You are guaranteed to become Legendary somewhere between 775 and 1030 activity,
but the exact point in this range at which you become Legendary is random per user.
Gets 5 gold coins under his name of which the last is half dark blue.
You can find the requirements HERE
Legendary: Activity: the Legendary membergroup has no universal activity requirement.
You are guaranteed to become Legendary somewhere between 775 and 1030 activity,
but the exact point in this range at which you become Legendary is random per user.
Gets 5 gold coins under his name of which the last is half dark blue.
You can find the requirements HERE
Hi Bitcointalk community!
A little more than 7 months ago, I created and lead a topic: ⭐ Forum chronicle - UP Rank List - Congratulations! (BPIP Merit stat, Trust) ⭐
Lately I've noticed that the limit activity honoured prevents users to obtain a new rank. For example:
Both users have more than 1000 Merit, more than 900 Activities, but still remain Hero Member's. Maybe it's time to change the ranking system a bit?
As of may 31, 2109, we have such a system of ranks:
A little more than 7 months ago, I created and lead a topic: ⭐ Forum chronicle - UP Rank List - Congratulations! (BPIP Merit stat, Trust) ⭐
Lately I've noticed that the limit activity honoured prevents users to obtain a new rank. For example:
| User name | Merit Now | Activity | Rank | ||||
| Pmalek | 1040 | 952 | Hero Member | ||||
| bob123 | 1031 | 910 | Hero Member |
Both users have more than 1000 Merit, more than 900 Activities, but still remain Hero Member's. Maybe it's time to change the ranking system a bit?
As of may 31, 2109, we have such a system of ranks:
Quote
Rank
Jump to:
|