Garbo

Guidelines that go along with each members fish rankingthat allow the member to participate at different levels. Such as a member that not reached a certain level or fish ranking, could not post on the "For Sale" section. The idea doesn't have to stop there either, there may be other restrictions that members have to "earn" their right to as well. I know the Mods work hard to try and keep things out of the ditch, and it would seem that some form of earned access would limit the spam and possible junk. And hopefully by the time a member participates to the next level, they would be more aclimated to the forums character as well as they membership would have grown to know them as well.

Jist a thought.

Sig

Hey Garbo,

I appreciate what you are trying to do but I for one don't agree with the fish ranking as your status for access on the forum. I have been a forum member since September of 2005 which is a little over a year longer than you. I just don't choose to post a lot. I do however log onto the forum almost everyday if not several times a day. I have become a better fisherman and better informedabout our hobby/sport because ofmembers who do like to post a lot. The fish ranking is pretty cool and a great way to identify the members who are vocal and highly active on the forum, just don't limit my access because I am just a trigger fish.

Sig

Garbo

Great Post, and I agree.

I have to think that the fish ranking is adjustable, and could be adjusted to consider different criteria such as "time of membership", number of log ons as well as number of post. I think the members, like you, that have been members for a very long time or since the begining and don't have a lot of posts should carry more weight than someone like me that "just talks alot".

All said, the idea should be adjustable, and I do agree with your thoughts and for the idea to work and make the Mods jobs easier, it would have to be adjusted to accomidate the most respected members such as yourself.

Thanks for contributing to making the idea a better one.

Snagged Line

Dont worry sig, the progressive post count rewarding process could max out once a poster has reached a certian high number ( say 2000 posts maybeoke ) then as the post count continues to rise the restrictions can begin to reoccur in a reverse order. then we can look for posts like " what was your most regretable post??? Eventually the poster could reach a "read only" status. ( Garbo, just kidding, I am intertained by most of your posts and end up reading the rest)



Kidding aside, I agree W/ SIG on thyis one. I am registered on annother work / trade related fourm and I have posted nothing in the three years since I registered because of the system that was described here.

It Is a great resorce for read only learning, but the few times I would have contrubited to somthing to a thread I could have contrubited to. I was locked out due to a zero post count. Therefore I gain from reading, but contribute nothing and refuse to post "Wow" just to raise a post count on this petecular fourm.

atlast740

how many more post i have to make before i go to next level

Garbo

Hold up.

No offense meant, but it is already part of the forum, just manually enforced and not completely enforced. If you read the subtitle in the "For Sale" section, there is a rule that states you have to be a member for a certain period of time and have a certain number of post before posting something for sale in that section. The rule is not completely enforced and also has to be enforced manually by a Mod. So the structure is in place in the rule already.

If the fish ranking was adjusted to be based on all criteria of membership and not just post count it could benefit the Mods, the Forum and all the members, and mostly limit the Crap.

I can only think of what the mods on this site have to do to monitor it at times, and don't know why they do it.

fishingfromagunship

I agree here. I often avoid posting for two reasons: I expect ridicule from certain members on what I post, and to be honest, a lot of you guys are a lot more informed on certain topics than I am and often reflect my thoughts on a particular subject with much greater articulation than I could ever muster. Just my thoughts...

Garbo

That's why Length/Time of Membership is so important and should carry value in ranking.

TCAT

I would strongly disagree with any type of pecking order. I've been a member since inception...Was a long time member of fish the bridge. I normally only post fishing reports or fishing related topics. I don't like the what if, political, or rhetorical posts but I mind my own business and surf the maze picking only what I'm interested in. There are several members who I feel refrain from posting because of such ideology and frankly its sucks because there is a wealth of knowledge amongst some of these members. As you can see I only have 107 posts but I can guarantee you that most are first hand reports. I like Scott's idea regarding anonymity, there shouldn't be any. If you're are not willing to give your name and e-mail address then you shouldn't be allowed to post. Many other fishing forums do this.My 02 cents.

Garbo

Try forgeting about Post Count as a rank, if you can. Not trying to recreate the BCS, but try this:

** Post in fishing reportsadds value and Post in Off Topicor non fishingsections don't.

** Length of time as a member adds value and Post count don't

** Number of replies to athread adds value and Threads started don't.

Keep in mind that these are just ideas and Assuming there is an option of adjusting the ranking system, it could be a really great idea.