Post Count - Blu-ray Forum

BLUNT · 05-20-2008, 07:53 PM

Why do you have a post count on this site? Seems to be more trouble than its worth. Do you really get any better advice from someone that has posted 1000's of times or more (A jedi, a Guru, or the blu-ray Jesus) than someone that has posted 1-1000 times or less? (An Idiot?)
I mean I have posted about 200 times and know nothing........
Sure is alot of fun though.

guru.jpg

160038_169_avatar.jpg

David Mamet · 05-20-2008, 07:55 PM

Here is one more post for me. Quickly becoming the next Buddy Christ.

BStecke · 05-20-2008, 07:56 PM

Got anybody in mind?

Beta Man · 05-20-2008, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BStecke

Got anybody in mind?

I still would like mine hidden....

BLUNT · 05-20-2008, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BStecke

Got anybody in mind?

Hey, if the metal shoe fits..........
Naaaa........ just kidding.

Would never want to upset a guru.

JJ · 05-20-2008, 08:24 PM

Have you not seen my Avatar??!!?!

KingLeerUK · 05-20-2008, 10:13 PM

Postcount means absolutely nothing in terms of member quality, contribution or knowledge. The "titles" should be amended to reflect this.

Personally, I've always been in favour of ranking systems that use an "organic rating" based on member feedback of each others' contributions, a rating system for posts, if you will. Much as we have +/- votes for member comments to the news articles, we could have a +/- rating system for user thread responses.

This way, every time some jerkface decides that "+1" qualifies as a meaningful post the membership plebiscite can cast their decisions otherwise. In this sort of system the "cream" of the crop will be noted properly, perhaps by a percentage rating. This way, if you have only 10 posts and they are all at Blu-ray Insider knowledge and quality you could conceivably rate a 100%, conversely, you might have a forum regular that does nothing but post "+1" all day and they end up with an appropriate 5% rating for contributing nothing (and wasting air and skin).

Just my thoughts.

Beta Man · 05-20-2008, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingLeerUK

Postcount means absolutely nothing in terms of member quality, contribution or knowledge. The "titles" should be amended to reflect this.

Personally, I've always been in favour of ranking systems that use an "organic rating" based on member feedback of each others' contributions, a rating system for posts, if you will. Much as we have +/- votes for member comments to the news articles, we could have a +/- rating system for user thread responses.

This way, every time some jerkface decides that "+1" qualifies as a meaningful post the membership plebiscite can cast their decisions otherwise. In this sort of system the "cream" of the crop will be noted properly, perhaps by a percentage rating. This way, if you have only 10 posts and they are all at Blu-ray Insider knowledge and quality you could conceivably rate a 100%, conversely, you might have a forum regular that does nothing but post "+1" all day and they end up with an appropriate 5% rating for contributing nothing (and wasting air and skin).

Just my thoughts.

+1

KingLeerUK · 05-20-2008, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beta Man

+1

You sir, are a damn jackass.

Stephie_is_a_dork · 05-21-2008, 07:48 AM

-1

Jesterkeeters · 05-21-2008, 07:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephie_is_a_dork

-1

-1
Another post for my collection!!

Scripture · 05-21-2008, 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingLeerUK

Postcount means absolutely nothing in terms of member quality, contribution or knowledge. The "titles" should be amended to reflect this.

Personally, I've always been in favour of ranking systems that use an "organic rating" based on member feedback of each others' contributions, a rating system for posts, if you will. Much as we have +/- votes for member comments to the news articles, we could have a +/- rating system for user thread responses.

This way, every time some jerkface decides that "+1" qualifies as a meaningful post the membership plebiscite can cast their decisions otherwise. In this sort of system the "cream" of the crop will be noted properly, perhaps by a percentage rating. This way, if you have only 10 posts and they are all at Blu-ray Insider knowledge and quality you could conceivably rate a 100%, conversely, you might have a forum regular that does nothing but post "+1" all day and they end up with an appropriate 5% rating for contributing nothing (and wasting air and skin).

Just my thoughts.

Great post here, KingLeerUK. I agree with you wholeheartedly.

BLU for Blue · 05-21-2008, 09:26 AM

Just thought I would jump in

jrchisholm · 05-21-2008, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beta Man

+1

Saw that coming from more than a mile away.

Very Niiiiice.

gamer2600 · 05-21-2008, 03:43 PM

I agree that some people are egotistical sometimes with the number of posts that they have. I think it should be hidden so users don't jump to any conclusions. Just because you have a high post count doesn't mean you are the know all of Blu-ray or whatever the topic, it just means you are on here A LOT.

gamer2600 · 05-21-2008, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingLeerUK

Postcount means absolutely nothing in terms of member quality, contribution or knowledge. The "titles" should be amended to reflect this.

Personally, I've always been in favour of ranking systems that use an "organic rating" based on member feedback of each others' contributions, a rating system for posts, if you will. Much as we have +/- votes for member comments to the news articles, we could have a +/- rating system for user thread responses.

This way, every time some jerkface decides that "+1" qualifies as a meaningful post the membership plebiscite can cast their decisions otherwise. In this sort of system the "cream" of the crop will be noted properly, perhaps by a percentage rating. This way, if you have only 10 posts and they are all at Blu-ray Insider knowledge and quality you could conceivably rate a 100%, conversely, you might have a forum regular that does nothing but post "+1" all day and they end up with an appropriate 5% rating for contributing nothing (and wasting air and skin).

Just my thoughts.

+1

JJ · 05-21-2008, 04:09 PM

Trust me, King Lear, "Post Counts" are one of the more taboo subjects on this forum, right after "Sex" and "Cannibalism." And although a few of us have indeed mocked your statements by including the proverbial "+1" - I'm sure most of us will agree. Although, like I said somewhere else, anyone above 2,000 posts is a Blu-ray Post *****. Whoo!!!

And my immature side was planning on making a comment about your post count, somewhere along the lines of, "Oh, he's just jealous cuz he's barely cracked a hundred, if even" - then I thought better of myself and my conduct!!

A rating system would be nice though, then perhaps I can lose my own Post ***** moniker.

DetroitSportsFan · 05-21-2008, 11:36 PM

David Mamet · 05-21-2008, 11:43 PM

+

David Mamet · 05-21-2008, 11:44 PM

1

05-20-2008, 07:53 PM	#1
BLUNT Senior Member Member since:Jan 2008 Location:Canton, MI Trading Score:2	Post Count Why do you have a post count on this site? Seems to be more trouble than its worth. Do you really get any better advice from someone that has posted 1000's of times or more (A jedi, a Guru, or the blu-ray Jesus) than someone that has posted 1-1000 times or less? (An Idiot?) I mean I have posted about 200 times and know nothing........ Sure is alot of fun though. guru.jpg 160038_169_avatar.jpg

Similar Threads
thread	Forum	Thread Starter	Replies	Last Post
post count and Flamethrower ?	Feedback Forum	DJ Manyak	13	03-20-2010 03:31 PM
Whoa! What Happened to my Post Count	Blu-ray Technology and Future Technology	stockstar1138	1	05-22-2008 08:54 PM
Highest Post Count	General Chat	huntifosi	29	04-02-2008 01:02 AM

05-20-2008, 07:55 PM	#2
David Mamet Senior Member Member since:Mar 2008 Location:Los Angeles, CA Blu-ray collection:4	Here is one more post for me. Quickly becoming the next Buddy Christ.

05-20-2008, 07:56 PM	#3
BStecke Blu-ray Knight Member since:Jun 2007 4K collection:182 Blu-ray collection:567 DVD collection:1 Digital collection:1 iTunes collection:1 Blu-ray reviews: 1 Trading Score:6	Got anybody in mind?

05-20-2008, 08:24 PM	#6
JJ Blu-ray Count Top ranked HT gallery Member since:Jul 2007 Location:Miami, FL Home Theater Gallery:99 4K collection:619 Blu-ray collection:1293 DVD collection:31 Digital collection:5 Blu-ray reviews: 18 Trading Score:203	Have you not seen my Avatar??!!?!

05-20-2008, 10:13 PM	#7
KingLeerUK Member Member since:Feb 2008 Trading Score:2	Postcount means absolutely nothing in terms of member quality, contribution or knowledge. The "titles" should be amended to reflect this. Personally, I've always been in favour of ranking systems that use an "organic rating" based on member feedback of each others' contributions, a rating system for posts, if you will. Much as we have +/- votes for member comments to the news articles, we could have a +/- rating system for user thread responses. This way, every time some jerkface decides that "+1" qualifies as a meaningful post the membership plebiscite can cast their decisions otherwise. In this sort of system the "cream" of the crop will be noted properly, perhaps by a percentage rating. This way, if you have only 10 posts and they are all at Blu-ray Insider knowledge and quality you could conceivably rate a 100%, conversely, you might have a forum regular that does nothing but post "+1" all day and they end up with an appropriate 5% rating for contributing nothing (and wasting air and skin). Just my thoughts.

05-21-2008, 07:48 AM	#10
Stephie_is_a_dork Blu-ray Samurai Member since:Jan 2008 Location:So Cal Trading Score:2	-1

05-21-2008, 09:26 AM	#13
BLU for Blue Banned Member since:Jan 2008 Location:New York	Just thought I would jump in

05-21-2008, 03:43 PM	#15
gamer2600 Active Member Member since:Jul 2007 Blu-ray collection:101 Trading Score:7	I agree that some people are egotistical sometimes with the number of posts that they have. I think it should be hidden so users don't jump to any conclusions. Just because you have a high post count doesn't mean you are the know all of Blu-ray or whatever the topic, it just means you are on here A LOT.

05-21-2008, 04:09 PM	#17
JJ Blu-ray Count Top ranked HT gallery Member since:Jul 2007 Location:Miami, FL Home Theater Gallery:99 4K collection:619 Blu-ray collection:1293 DVD collection:31 Digital collection:5 Blu-ray reviews: 18 Trading Score:203	Trust me, King Lear, "Post Counts" are one of the more taboo subjects on this forum, right after "Sex" and "Cannibalism." And although a few of us have indeed mocked your statements by including the proverbial "+1" - I'm sure most of us will agree. Although, like I said somewhere else, anyone above 2,000 posts is a Blu-ray Post ***. Whoo!!! And my immature side was planning on making a comment about your post count, somewhere along the lines of, "Oh, he's just jealous cuz he's barely cracked a hundred, if even" - then I thought better of myself and my conduct!! A rating system would be nice though, then perhaps I can lose my own Post *** moniker.

05-21-2008, 11:36 PM	#18
DetroitSportsFan Hot Deals Moderator Top contributor Member since:Aug 2007 Location:Michigan 4K collection:439 Blu-ray collection:2226 Trading Score:93

05-21-2008, 11:43 PM	#19
David Mamet Senior Member Member since:Mar 2008 Location:Los Angeles, CA Blu-ray collection:4	+

05-21-2008, 11:44 PM	#20
David Mamet Senior Member Member since:Mar 2008 Location:Los Angeles, CA Blu-ray collection:4	1

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals