# Seniority



## redcogs (7 Jul 2007)

In my place of origin, i had a certain standing in the community. Over 3000 doctrinally pure posts of exceptional quality ensured that appropriate privileges were automatically available. 

Here, i find that i am reduced, not even regarded as a 'new member'..

i notice that Stevens's seniority rating is already considerably in advance of my own, which is clearly ridiculous, especially when one takes into consideration the lower quality and often semi pornographic nature of many of his offerings.

i protest at the evident injustice involved in this situation, and insist that appropriate steps are taken - perhaps a degree of positive discrimination (in favour of those from the unprivileged Moray Firth region) might be in order?


----------



## Yorkshireman (7 Jul 2007)

I think that if you whip in another 10 posts you might become a New Member (I think I became one on the post I made before this one).


----------



## Keith Oates (8 Jul 2007)

redcogs, they say you can't keep a good man down so I'm sure you will soon be climbing the ladder!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Rhythm Thief (8 Jul 2007)

For the first (and probably the only) time, I've got more posts than Keith Oates. Now that is worth a few !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Noodley (8 Jul 2007)

The same thing happened with Stalin


----------



## Cycling Naturalist (9 Jul 2007)

redcogs said:


> In my place of origin, i had a certain standing in the community. Over 3000 doctrinally pure posts of exceptional quality ensured that appropriate privileges were automatically available.
> 
> Here, i find that i am reduced, not even regarded as a 'new member'..
> 
> i notice that Stevens's seniority rating is already considerably in advance of my own, which is clearly ridiculous, especially when one takes into consideration the lower quality and often semi pornographic nature of many of his offerings.



The output in a capitalist society is far higher than in a socialist one because people work harder. Furthermore, suppliers have to supply what the people want. Hence my 13,000 posts of smut, filth and innuendo in "the other place."


----------



## Yorkshireman (9 Jul 2007)

Patrick Stevens said:


> redcogs said:
> 
> 
> > In my place of origin, i had a certain standing in the community. Over 3000 doctrinally pure posts of exceptional quality ensured that appropriate privileges were automatically available.
> ...



Being unencumbered by the need to `work` to put bread and jam on the table, the `upper classes` have more time for `other things` (a bit like being retired)  .


----------



## Cab (9 Jul 2007)

Might I suggest simply removing the 'seniority' thingy and post count? They don't really mean a great deal.


----------



## alecstilleyedye (9 Jul 2007)

Cab said:


> Might I suggest simply removing the 'seniority' thingy and post count? They don't really mean a great deal.



unless we can make a cunning pun (like we could on C+). ooh and how impressive is it that our top poster is a "junior member"


----------



## Sore Thumb (9 Jul 2007)

You could always change your name to 'The Most Senior Member'. Then you will always be the most senior member.


----------



## Yorkshireman (9 Jul 2007)

Cab said:


> Might I suggest simply removing the 'seniority' thingy and post count? They don't really mean a great deal.



You may  ... Here :-
*link removed by admin - reference to old forum software*


----------



## bonj2 (13 Jul 2007)

I can't help thinking there's two problems with this.
One, in that you have a number of stars, some of which are filled in presumably more as you make more posts. But this implies that there is a 'target' - i.e. once you have got all the stars filled you will have 'arrived', when I can't really see how this is the case.

Secondly, surely a much more meaningful indicator of how active someone is would be their average post count per day *over the last week/month*?
That way if people stopped posting so much they would rightfully go down, and people would get an indication of who's currently the most active, as opposed to being a system akin to 'caps' in football.


----------



## bonj2 (13 Jul 2007)

and why am I now 'new' member when only half an hour ago I was 'active' member with three stars?


----------



## Shaun (13 Jul 2007)

... because I'm changing the ranking system and images.

You should think of ranking in terms of how _active_ someone is, rather than how clever or expert they are.

I'll try to change the ranking names to reflect that :?: 

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## Yorkshireman (13 Jul 2007)

Administrator said:


> ... because I'm changing the ranking system and images.
> 
> You should think of ranking in terms of how _active_ someone is, rather than how clever or expert they are.
> 
> ...



I have it on good authority (The Wife) that I am neither `active`, `clever` nor`expert` ... I`ve no chance then.

Er ... While I`m here, what make and model are those little bikes?


----------



## Yorkshireman (13 Jul 2007)

bonj said:


> and why am I now 'new' member when only half an hour ago I was 'active' member with three stars?



Stars?


----------



## giant man (14 Jul 2007)

*


redcogs said:



In my place of origin, i had a certain standing in the community. Over 3000 doctrinally pure posts of exceptional quality ensured that appropriate privileges were automatically available. 

Here, i find that i am reduced, not even regarded as a 'new member'..

i notice that Stevens's seniority rating is already considerably in advance of my own, which is clearly ridiculous, especially when one takes into consideration the lower quality and often semi pornographic nature of many of his offerings.

i protest at the evident injustice involved in this situation, and insist that appropriate steps are taken - perhaps a degree of positive discrimination (in favour of those from the unprivileged Moray Firth region) might be in order?

Click to expand...

*_
Don't worry about it man. I had over 4000 posts and I'm not moaning about it. Take it on the chin and get those posts up!_


----------



## Intelligenthamster (21 Aug 2007)

I don't have Internet at work which is why I've gone from three figures in C+ to little now. In my old job I was on C+ several times a day. I can also go days without using the 'net at home... often because I'm out on the bike instead!


----------

