# User Titles



## Krummhorn

The staff of Talk Classical has been discussing a change in User Titles used on this forum.

We have established this poll to query you, our membership, on what you think and invite your comments, too. 
Option #1


at 1 post: Initiate Member
at 25 posts: Member
at 100 posts: Senior Member (default) or Custom Title* after 2 years membership.
at 250 posts: Senior Member (default) or Custom Title* with no time limit.
Option #2 (carrying out a music theme)


at 1 post: pianissimo
at 10 posts: piano
at 25 posts: mezzo-piano
at 50 posts: mezzo-forte
at 100 posts: forte (default) or Custom Title* after 2 years membership
at 250 posts: fortissimo (default) or Custom Title* with no time limit
Option #3: Leaving the user titles the way they are.

The poll allows members to make multiple choices. Your vote in this poll is anonymous - no one will be able to see who voted for what

You will notice that the new options above do not include Junior Member. Enough said on that 

*Custom Titles* are subject to approval and cannot contain anything that would be in violation of our existing forum rules which include being obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, or threatening.


----------



## Aramis

Terms _senior_ and _junior_ have little to do with number of posts. Newbie user can quickly write more posts than some elder visitor that writes something only from time to time. Thats makes current system is not too logical. It doesn't really matter to me but changes surely would make it better.

Option 2 seems funny to me, summary of musical dynamics and how much one has to say (what often determines postcount) makes sense and is ingenious.


----------



## Boccherini

The idea of attaching an automatically-changeable label, which represents the level of membership/professionalism, is fundamentally inefficient, pretty useless, slightly inaccurate and rather meaningless.

However, it could be much more valueable, accurately informative and useful if you could _manually_ promote members by your own (Admins) perception. For example, informative/useful/valueable posts might motivate admins to promote members, while the opposite might motivate them to demote.

It worked in another Forum I was signed up to, and it should work here as well.


----------



## jhar26

1 post: Liberace (to motivate them to post more )
10 posts: Emil Gilels
25 posts: Sviatoslav Richter
100 posts: Vladimir Horowitz
250 posts: Martha Argerich

......but I also love option number two.


----------



## Boccherini

jhar26 said:


> 1 post: Liberace (to motivate them to post more )
> 10 posts: Emil Gilels
> 25 posts: Sviatoslav Richter
> 100 posts: Vladimir Horowitz
> 250 posts: Martha Argerich
> 
> ......but I also love option number two.


No one would post more than 249 posts, then. Not only because of Argerich, but also because of Horowitz.


----------



## jhar26

Boccherini said:


> No one would post more than 249 posts, then. Not only because of Argerich, but also because of Horowitz.


I would. What anyone else would do is up to them. Besides, I was only joking (never a good idea at a classical music forum where some people take themselves so seriously, I know).


----------



## Boccherini

jhar26 said:


> I would. What anyone else would do is up to them. Besides, *I was only joking* (never a good idea at a classical music forum where everyone takes themselves so seriously, I know).


So was I, so was I.


----------



## jhar26

Boccherini said:


> So was I, so was I.


Cool. I always figured that Boccherini was a guy with a sense of humour.


----------



## Boccherini

jhar26 said:


> Cool. I always figured that Boccherini was a guy with a sense of humour.


I don't know about his sense of humor, but he had a miserable life that ended in complete poverty.


----------



## Rasa

I believe a system of repuation given and ranks that reflect that is a better system of indicating which members are contributive to a board.


----------



## Argus

jhar26 said:


> I would. What anyone else would do is up to them. Besides, I was only joking (never a good idea at a classical music forum where some people take themselves so seriously, I know).


Everything I post is 100% serious.

As for the user titles matter, I'm with Garth.


----------



## jhar26

Boccherini said:


> I don't know about his sense of humor, but he had a miserable life that ended in complete poverty.


I know that his life ended in poverty and that he worked for a long time in Spain, and that's it. I like his music though.


----------



## sospiro

Option 2 seems good but it doesn't bother me what I'm called

One of my F1 message boards did away with post counts altogether because members were just posting rubbish - yeah including me :lol:


----------



## danae

I don't think it's so important what title we're given. Amongst us, the older members we all have an idea of our "status" in this forum. As long as we don't change our user names, of course.


----------



## Lukecash12

jhar26 said:


> 1 post: Liberace (to motivate them to post more )
> 10 posts: Emil Gilels
> 25 posts: Sviatoslav Richter
> 100 posts: Vladimir Horowitz
> 250 posts: Martha Argerich
> 
> ......but I also love option number two.


Seriously, Richter is below Horowitz and Argerich? He probably had a larger repertoire than the two put together.


----------



## Very Senior Member

I voted for keeping things the way they are. "Member" and "Senior Member" are perfectly adequate for this place.


----------



## jhar26

Lukecash12 said:


> Seriously, Richter is below Horowitz and Argerich? He probably had a larger repertoire than the two put together.


No, not seriously - as I pointed out in a previous post. You guys know from my avatar that Argerich is a big fave of mine, so I thought it would be obvious that my post was tongue in cheek.....apparently not. :lol:


----------



## Lukecash12

> No, not seriously - as I pointed out in a previous post. You guys know from my avatar that Argerich is a big fave of mine, so I thought it would be obvious that my post was tongue in cheek.....apparently not.


I'm not worried about Argerich on top so much as I am that Richter is no 3 on any list anywhere


----------



## World Violist

Wow, I'm the only one lazy and indecisive enough to have chosen the "You, the staff, choose for us" option. Props for everyone else! :tiphat:


----------



## Ukko

*urk*



Krummhorn said:


> The staff of Talk Classical has been discussing a change in User Titles used on this forum.
> 
> We have established this poll to query you, our membership, on what you think and invite your comments, too.
> Option #1
> 
> 
> at 1 post: Initiate Member
> at 25 posts: Member
> at 100 posts: Senior Member (default) or Custom Title* after 2 years membership.
> at 250 posts: Senior Member (default) or Custom Title* with no time limit.
> Option #2 (carrying out a music theme)
> 
> 
> at 1 post: pianissimo
> at 10 posts: piano
> at 25 posts: mezzo-piano
> at 50 posts: mezzo-forte
> at 100 posts: forte (default) or Custom Title* after 2 years membership
> at 250 posts: fortissimo (default) or Custom Title* with no time limit
> Option #3: Leaving the user titles the way they are.
> 
> The poll leaves out 'none of the above'. Either option 1 or 2 is OK without the 2 years membership requirement; 6 months would work. If I have to hunker down for 22 months I may be speaking in tongues, not 'talk classical'. Hmm. Far as I know, the Internet connection from the next world isn't working either.
> 
> 
> 
> :trp: (Gabriel)
> 
> or
> 
> :devil:
> 
> Who can know?


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

Hilltroll72 said:


> *urk*...If I have to hunker down for 22 months I may be speaking in tongues, not 'talk classical.'


I think it would get done sooner than 22 months.
Maintain your current posting rate, and 7 more months should suffice.
(I.e.: you're on pace to have 250 posts by c. April, 2011.)


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto

I don't really buy into any of this. I request for unique membership title. Moderators, please kindly change my title from "Senior Member" to "Imperial Kapellmeister". 

I think it would be more fun if we had our own unique titles (music related), granted to fellow members who have reached a certain level, whatever that is, you guys can decide. I just want my title changed to "Imperial Kapellmeister", uniquely mine.


----------



## Ukko

*[sigh]*



Chi_townPhilly said:


> I think it would get done sooner than 22 months.
> Maintain your current posting rate, and 7 more months should suffice.
> (I.e.: you're on pace to have 250 posts by c. April, 2011.)


Oh well, maybe you folks just don't get it.

A senior member is not much more useful than a senior moment. Possessing a senior member can be accepted with resignation; being labeled one is a much heavier burden.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

*Huh??*



Hilltroll72 said:


> A senior member is not much more useful than a senior moment.


Understood. However, under the system that's currently garnering the most votes, your current title would be "mezzo-forte." Then, it would pass to "forte" soon enough. Then, sometime next year, it would be whatever you want it to be (within bounds of good taste, etc.)


----------



## Ukko

Chi_townPhilly said:


> Understood. However, under the system that's currently garnering the most votes, your current title would be "mezzo-forte." Then, it would pass to "forte" soon enough. Then, sometime next year, it would be whatever you want it to be (within bounds of good taste, etc.)


Hmm. You are right. I just voted for option 2, and will lie in wait.


----------



## emiellucifuge

Aramis said:


> Terms _senior_ and _junior_ have little to do with number of posts. Newbie user can quickly write more posts than some elder visitor that writes something only from time to time. Thats makes current system is not too logical. It doesn't really matter to me but changes surely would make it better.
> 
> Option 2 seems funny to me, summary of musical dynamics and how much one has to say (what often determines postcount) makes sense and is ingenious.


So at first you reason that the number of posts is not indicative of the users seniority, then you proceed to contradict yourself and tell us that a user with more posts is senior because it means he has more to say?

I like option 2 also but think that it stops and accelerates to soon. How about spreading the promotions out a bit. Say:
100, 200, 500, 1000, 2000, 10000


----------



## Aramis

> hen you proceed to contradict yourself and tell us that a user with more posts is senior because it means he has more to say?


Where did I say that? I was referring to option 2 which makes no use of "senior".


----------



## jhar26

How about...

1 post: bass
10 posts: mezzo
25 posts: tenor
100 posts: soprano
250 posts: castrato


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

jhar26 said:


> 250 posts: castrato


uhg

(To borrow a line from one of my acquaintances from the South Side of Chicago ([the baddest part of town]):

I don't _want_ to be famous like *that*!


----------



## emiellucifuge

Aramis said:


> Where did I say that? I was referring to option 2 which makes no use of "senior".


Fair enough, apologies.


----------



## World Violist

jhar26 said:


> How about...
> 
> 1 post: bass
> 10 posts: mezzo
> 25 posts: tenor
> 100 posts: soprano
> 250 posts: castrato





Chi_townPhilly said:


> uhg
> 
> (To borrow a line from one of my acquaintances from the South Side of Chicago ([the baddest part of town]):
> 
> I don't _want_ to be famous like *that*!


Wow... these two posts just made my day.

Just for the record, I like the idea of a customizable title, even though I've got absolutely no idea what I would make mine...


----------



## Krummhorn

jhar26 said:


> . . . 250 posts: castrato


Ouch :lol: ... administrator castrato ... catchy, but I like my voice the way it is :lol:.


----------



## Sid James

Option 1 sounds okay to me, otherwise just leave things as they are...


----------



## Yoshi

I like option 2.
And I love the idea of a custom title


----------



## sospiro

Krummhorn said:


> Ouch :lol: ... administrator castrato ... catchy, but I like my voice the way it is :lol:.


And other parts as well, no doubt.


----------



## Krummhorn

Only two days left to vote :tiphat:. This poll will close on October 20, 2010, and we will start planning and implementing the changes.


----------



## elgar's ghost

I think all options could be flawed to a degree, but that isn't really anyone's fault. As I'm relatively new here I'm happy to go with the flow.


----------



## Boccherini

Krummhorn said:


> Only two days left to vote :tiphat:. This poll will close on October 20, 2010, and we will start planning and implementing the changes.


I wonder if my suggestion is being considered. If not, so be it, I could understand that - heavy burden on peaceful admins.


----------



## Krummhorn

Boccherini said:


> The idea of attaching an automatically-changeable label, which represents the level of membership/professionalism, is fundamentally inefficient, pretty useless, slightly inaccurate and rather meaningless.
> 
> However, it could be much more valueable, accurately informative and useful if you could _manually_ promote members by your own (Admins) perception. For example, informative/useful/valueable posts might motivate admins to promote members, while the opposite might motivate them to demote.
> 
> It worked in another Forum I was signed up to, and it should work here as well.





Boccherini said:


> I wonder if my suggestion is being considered. If not, so be it, I could understand that - heavy burden on peaceful admins.


Hi Boccherini,

Your input is valued and we appreciate the suggestion. Imho, it would require lots more moderation within the forum and would place the sole responsibility of who's post is better than so and so on the staff members, creating a 'teachers pets' if you will. It would also require the forum staff to continually check on someone who got elevated status to make sure they were keeping up their standards ... it would be a heavy burden, indeed.

On of the objects of the proposed status change is to promote more posting within this forum, and perhaps give members an incentive for advancing their post count. The old title system (junior, member, senior) seemed outdated and needed to be spruced up a bit. The options we gave on the OP were a collective decision amongst the forum staff after many months of discussion amongst ourselves, and taking into account previously submitted ideas from the members at large.


----------



## Michael-

Having been a Junior Member for about 30 mins and now reading this thread, I should have have called myself Most Senior Member when I registered (with deference to Very Senior Member already here)!

I don't really mind what the vote decides to call me.


----------



## Rondo

I would be fine with either options 1 OR 2, if any change is decided upon. Out of curiosity, was there any special reason for choosing the ranges (namely the 250 maximum), or is it just a common cut-off among other forums?


How many active members have fewer than 100, 101 to 249 and 250 or more? Is that information readily available?


----------



## bassClef

Seems I'm too late to vote but #2 for me


----------



## Krummhorn

bassClef said:


> Seems I'm too late to vote but #2 for me


Got it, and thanks . I've added your vote to the poll.


----------



## Hazel

What does rating people according to the number of posts they do say about anything? I am reminded of something said by Mark Twain (and a few other people): "It is better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid and to open it and remove all doubt." Sometimes, the wisest people listen more than they talk.

Now, I suppose I should have kept my mouth shut?


----------



## Krummhorn

Rondo said:


> . . . How many active members have fewer than 100, 101 to 249 and 250 or more? Is that information readily available?


Good question deserving of a good answer:

001 to 100 = 4,206

101 to 249 = 93

250 to Infinity = 94

(I did not include the 3,316 users with 'zero' post count)


----------



## Very Senior Member

Krummhorn said:


> Good question deserving of a good answer:
> 
> 001 to 100 = 4,206
> 
> 101 to 249 = 93
> 
> 250 to Infinity = 94
> 
> (I did not include the 3,316 users with 'zero' post count)


These figures show a highly skewed distribution, with the vast majority of members being of the hit and run type. I reckon that the true situation is probably even worse, given that the above data must surely include a lot of members who have left and are unlikely to return, in view of the long absences since their last posts.

For example looking at the 250+ category I can count at least 40 members who appear not to have posted anything in the last 6 months, or longer.

To get a more illuminating perspective on all this, it would interesting to see the figures for the following 10 categories:

0 posts, signed up more than a year ago 
0 posts, signed up less than a year ago

1-49 posts, with the last post made more than a year ago
1-49 posts, with the last post made less than a year ago

50-99 posts, with the last post made more than a year ago 
50-99 posts, with the last post made less than a year ago

100-249 posts, with the last post made more than a year ago 
100-249 posts, with the last post made less than a year ago

250+ posts, with the last post made more than a year ago 
250+ posts, with the last post made less than a year ago

I would accept that members who haven't posted anything for more than a year may possibly return one day, and therefore may be regarded as potentially active, but would suggest that the number of such people is very small.


----------



## Krummhorn

A member is a member ... people come and go all the time on discussion forums due to employment, moving from region to region, graduated school; the reasons are endless. 

We wish to not split hairs on all sorts of statistical figures ... the purpose of the user title change we will do on this forum will benefit those users who are the most active. And, who is to say that those 'inactive' users don't visit the forum? One does not have to log in in order to view its pages.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

That's a great idea! (the very first in this thread) The use of dynamics implicitly says how loud one's mouth happens to be on this forum (in input). 

But how informal do we want to be around here? Maybe it's better to be more formal, with titles of Junior and Senior.


----------



## Rasa

I say again, a user title system based on reputation giving is a lot more valuable.


----------



## sospiro

Option 2 got most votes.

Are our user titles going to change and/or can we sad souls who spend far too much time on here anyway, choose our own now?


----------



## Krummhorn

The changes are in the works ... when the release date is is uncertain as of this moment.


----------



## Vesteralen

Considering the fact that I (and other newbies) are still being listed as "Junior Members", I assume these changes never took effect? 

Not that it bothers me or anything...I was just reading through the topics systematically (I tend to do that) and came to this one.


----------



## Bix

Vesteralen said:


> Considering the fact that I (and other newbies) are still being listed as "Junior Members", I assume these changes never took effect?
> 
> Not that it bothers me or anything...I was just reading through the topics systematically (I tend to do that) and came to this one.


As you post more it will go onto member (methinks) and after 100 posts your title changes again - I'm not sure if the changes are still in the offing - you will have to speak to the administrator.


----------



## Krummhorn

We were waiting until the new software upgrade was installed and running for awhile. We should resurrect this project and will get the ball rolling once I return from holiday.


----------



## Vesteralen

Great.

Though, I see I am now a "Member".

Does this call for a celebration? 

(I seem to hear a collective moan out there in cyberspace...'There goes the neighborhood!')


----------



## regressivetransphobe

Setting up a post or time limit for custom titles might just encourage in upswing in low effort/white noise/badly composed posts. They should just be made custom from the getgo.


----------



## Ukko

Krummhorn said:


> We were waiting until the new software upgrade was installed and running for awhile. We should resurrect this project and will get the ball rolling once I return from holiday.


Holiday?

HOLIDAY?

[The family next door went to the White Mountains for a few days, leaving day before yesterday. Their basset hound, left in the care of the family patriarch, who feeds her and bring her indoors at night but is otherwise inattentive, has started her "I've been abandoned" howls today. The howling will continue sporadically until the family returns - from HOLIDAY!]


----------



## Krummhorn

Hilltroll72 said:


> Holiday?


It's a common term used by European countries meaning the equivalent of "vacation" to us the US. 
My friends in the UK have no idea what a 'vacation' is ... pleasure time off for them is holiday.


----------



## Ukko

Krummhorn said:


> It's a common term used by European countries meaning the equivalent of "vacation" to us the US.
> My friends in the UK have no idea what a 'vacation' is ... pleasure time off for them is holiday.


I could say that you missed my point... but I'm pretty sure you didn't. Are you back on the job now? Wandering about on holiday doesn't get the cows milked and the hay down.


----------



## Krummhorn

:lol: 

Oh yes, back on the job here again. Great to be home again after being on the road for two weeks.


----------



## Rasa

I'll state it again, a system based on amount of likes seems a lot better to me. It'll deal more with the quality then quantity of posts.


----------



## Ukko

Rasa said:


> I'll state it again, a system based on amount of likes seems a lot better to me. It'll deal more with the quality then quantity of posts.


Hah! I'm wondering what the 'titles' would look like. Maybe:

0-50 posts, 'giving the member a chance' - _Stranger_

50-[infinity] posts - probably should count likes as a percentage of total posts

0% likes - _anti-social member_
1-10% likes - _tolerated member_
11-30% likes -_ OK member_
over 30% likes -_ kiss-*** member_

Read good to you, _Rasa?_


----------



## Rasa

Nah, no percentage. Just amount of likes, possibly relative to the highest amount of likes on an account.


----------



## Vesteralen

I only know that, at 113 posts, I really don't *feel* like a _Senior Member_, no matter what it says above my avatar. Still feel like I'm tiptoeing my way around this forum.


----------



## Ukko

BTW didn't Plaxico Burress play doublebass for the NYPO? Before he shot himself with a stage prop gun?


----------



## Klavierspieler

Hilltroll72 said:


> BTW didn't Plaxico Burress play doublebass for the NYPO? Before he shot himself with a stage prop gun?


?!?


----------



## Ukko

Klavierspieler said:


> ?!?


Confused? So was Plaxico. But he's out of jail (can't shoot yourself in New York unless you are licensed), and has a job.

_Klavierspieler_, US citizens (and racists around the world) should know about Plaxico Burress. Incidents among his co-workers made him concerned for his safety, and he made a series of bad choices in an attempt to ease that concern.


----------



## Klavierspieler

Hilltroll72 said:


> Confused? So was Plaxico. But he's out of jail (can't shoot yourself in New York unless you are licensed), and has a job.
> 
> _Klavierspieler_, US citizens (and racists around the world) should know about Plaxico Burress. Incidents among his co-workers made him concerned for his safety, and he made a series of bad choices in an attempt to ease that concern.


Err... Ne'ermind.


----------

