# Member, Senior Member etc.



## Bill Gates (15 Oct 2010)

Is there a list which gives the criteria for reaching these milestones anywhere?


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Oct 2010)

I've noticed that of those with the annotation Senior Member, some have a lower post count and a later date of joining than me. It doesn't make sense to have any annotation at all if there is no structure behind it.


----------



## Shaun (15 Oct 2010)

The default ones are:

Newbie - *0*
Junior Member - *50*
Member - *100*
Senior Member - *500*
Executive Member - *2500*
Vice President - *5000*
Executive Vice President - *10000*
Senior Vice President - *25000*
President - *50000*
Chairman - *100000*
GOD! - *250000*

However, there is an option within your account settings to change this to whatever you want. 

Can you point me to a few members who's rank seems to be outside of the default scope - there may be a problem with the whole ranking system that needs a deeper look.

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Oct 2010)

It's probably just mine then as from your list I should be a senior member. I'll have a look later at my profile to get around to changing it. Thanks Mike


----------



## Shaun (15 Oct 2010)

It's not your profile - it's the importer!!!

It seems there's a bug in the converter for when you move from vB to IPB - the member title should be made blank so the new (IPB) system can assign the respective rank.

Where it isn't left blank it assumes a custom title and doesn't apply the default ranks.

I may be able to write a query that fixes this for everyone ... leave it with me. 

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## gavintc (15 Oct 2010)

Shaun, I am continually amazed at the amount of work you do in the background on stuff which I have no understanding. Just a random, thanks from a user.


----------



## Shaun (15 Oct 2010)

Ranks now fixed.

All previous custom modified ranks remain in place, and the imported rank names have now been "nulled" so the software will apply the appropriate default rank.

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## Shaun (15 Oct 2010)

gavintc said:


> Shaun, I am continually amazed at the amount of work you do in the background on stuff which I have no understanding. Just a random, thanks from a user.




Thank you - much appreciated. 

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## Crackle (15 Oct 2010)

Admin said:


> Ranks now fixed.
> 
> All previous custom modified ranks remain in place, and the imported rank names have now been "nulled" so the software will apply the appropriate default rank.
> 
> ...



I notice you've also modified the who's online list at the bottom of the forum page to display in alphabetical order. That's much appreciated too.


----------



## Shaun (15 Oct 2010)

Yes - I'm slowly working through things.

Before the forum move I had quite a bit of time on my hands and envisaged a great run at putting everything right after the initial move, setting up the new features, and then cracking on with expanding the site.

The move didn't go as smoothly as I'd expected, and with hindsight I shouldn't have changed the look 'n' feel at the same time - that put a lot of people off (who are hopefully now coming back and finding the "Classic" theme ... ).

I've also had to spend quite a bit of time working on the server to get it back up to speed (the new software does lots more than the old one, but it does impact on the server more and I've had a steep learning curve to get things back to how I want them!!).

I've also had a fair bit to do at home recently too, which has slowed progress a bit. However I'm now trying to focus on specific things and working my way down the hit-list; each little thing helps so in time we'll be back on a level and I'll be able to get back in to _using_ the forums, instead of fiddling with them.

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## 661-Pete (15 Oct 2010)

Blimey!
Just realised that I'm now 'executive' - or would be if I hadn't over-written my 'rank' with something else... 
Memo: must get out more...


----------



## Stephenite (15 Oct 2010)

661-Pete said:


> Blimey!
> Just realised that I'm now 'executive' - or would be if I hadn't over-written my 'rank' with something else...
> Memo: must get out more...




What does that 'something else' refer to, Pete? I've wondered if it is the furthest thing you have seen with a telescope, but I could be way off the mark. 

Edit: BTW Shaun, thanks for all the work you do.


----------



## Shaun (15 Oct 2010)

Yes - in your settings you can override the default title, with your own comment.

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## 661-Pete (18 Oct 2010)

Stephenite said:


> What does that 'something else' refer to, Pete? I've wondered if it is the furthest thing you have seen with a telescope, but I could be way off the mark.


Ooh errrr! Don't get me started on my fave subject!

Too late. OK, yes, more or less as you say, I think it's the furthest thing I've _photographed_ as the _primary subject_ of a piccie: the rather loose, fuzzy, backward-'S' shape galaxy in my avatar. Try googling "NGC 7479" for some much better images!

This doesn't mean it's the furthest thing there's ever been in my photos. Most images of galaxies abound in what we call 'faint fuzzies' - just small fuzzy blobs of even more distant galaxies in the background of your main subject. Indeed there are several in the original uncropped version of NGC 7479 I did, though they don't show up in my avatar.

Back to topic - thanks Shaun for putting up that table. Though what it _says_ about someone is ... well ...


----------

