Custom rankings?

[Nawdic]

Owen,

Just another one of my wierd and wacky thoughts that never seem to go past the starting line...

Would it be possible that rather than "Tycoon" or "General Manager" etc rankings, could forum members create a simple sort-of rank that overrides the inbuilt one, such as for me... Errrr..... SuperSpammer, for example...
I know this can be done, but I don't know if this is a worthy idea.

[orudge]

It's not going to happen, no.

[Hyronymus]

It's not going to happen, no.

Maybe you can add a slight explanation why not .

[FooBar]

Regardless of any explanation, I don't see the added benefit. There's already a signature and a location field where one can put all kinds of nonsense. No need to have a third place to do that. Personally I would be in favour of dropping ranks completely (except for moderators/administrators of course), as they have no real meaning anyways. The amount of post doesn't say anything about the quality of them (no, I'm not advocating a rating system, those are stupid).

[orudge]

Maybe you can add a slight explanation why not .

Hey, my first response was going to be a plain old "No", but I decided I should at least avoid breaking rule 1k.

Technically, because it'd require a phpBB mod of some sort.
Administratively, because it could lead to all kinds of fun situations (people attempting to fake being moderators, people putting abusive or just plain stupid stuff in there - the suggested "SuperSpammer" above being a prime example). Obviously the (genuine ) mods and admins could deal with that, but it's hassle we don't need.

Ranks are supposed, in my opinion, to reflect official positions on the forums. The TT-style post count rankings were added to make it a little more fun, and I don't see that there's anything wrong with that system as it stands. A few newbies occasionally ask how to achieve higher ranks and so on, but mostly people seem unconcerned by it.

[Purno]

A few newbies occasionally ask how to achieve higher ranks and so on, but mostly people seem unconcerned by it.

Achieving the top rank wasn't much of a challenge TBH.

[Lord Aro]

I must say, something above Tycoon/1000 would be fun

[XeryusTC]

I must say, something above Tycoon/1000 would be fun

Maybe just multiply the posts needed for every rank by 10. That should keep you busy for a while

[Nawdic]

I suggest maybe re-doing the rankings so that "Tycoon" cannot be reached before the 2500 post marker...

But meh, it's Owen's decision.

[orudge]

The ranks match the performance ratings in the game itself. I could change it, but I kind of like that they match.

[Purno]

The ranks match the performance ratings in the game itself. I could change it, but I kind of like that they match.

I like Xeryus's suggestion;

Maybe just multiply the posts needed for every rank by 10. That should keep you busy for a while

You'd still remain decently close to the original TT ratings this way. Originally it requires 960 ratings/posts for Tycoon, is'nt it? Multiplying that by 10 sounds fine by me, but I guess the Tycoon rank would become for the 'happy few', considering there's only 13 people with over 9600 posts, and a few of them have custom ranks. (This problem may slowly fix itself over time, as more long time members will eventually hit the 9600 milestone.)

But well, I like the idea of multiplying the postcount needed for every rank, and a factor 10 would make most sense to me.

The current 'Tycoon' rank is a bit silly if over 90% of the posters is a 'Tycoon'

[orudge]

There are currently 190 Tycoons (or moderators and administrators with over 960 posts who would be Tycoon were they not moderators or administrators). This is compared to 17,700 users with at least one post - so 16,740 non-Tycoon ranks. Out of that 16,740, 15,949 are Engineers, with 791 being Traffic Manager to President.

If we bumped them all up by 10, there'd be 13 Tycoons, 1 President, 4 Chairmen, 2 Chief Executives, 7 Directors, 15 Route Supervisors, 26 Transport Coordinators, 84 Traffic Managers and over 17,500 engineers. That's quite unbalanced if you ask me.

In theory it could be bumped up by 2 or 3 or something, but I do like the fact that it matches TT, and it makes it "achievable" for those who haven't been around for 10 years.

[Purno]

There are currently 190 Tycoons (or moderators and administrators with over 960 posts who would be Tycoon were they not moderators or administrators). This is compared to 17,700 users with at least one post - so 16,740 non-Tycoon ranks. Out of that 16,740, 15,949 are Engineers, with 791 being Traffic Manager to President.

True, but since Tycoons make a lot more posts than the lower ranks, most of the posts are made by Tycoons. If you take a look at the average percentage of Tycoon-made posts in a topic, numbers are quite different. Most of the people I work with are Tycoons.

If we bumped them all up by 10, there'd be 13 Tycoons, 1 President, 4 Chairmen, 2 Chief Executives, 7 Directors, 15 Route Supervisors, 26 Transport Coordinators, 84 Traffic Managers and over 17,500 engineers. That's quite unbalanced if you ask me.

Aye, quite unbalanced, but the current ranking isn't ideal too. Dilemmas...

In theory it could be bumped up by 2 or 3 or something, but I do like the fact that it matches TT, and it makes it "achievable" for those who haven't been around for 10 years.

Hey, becoming a Tycoon should require some investment
I agree that bumping it by 10 is quite high, but it's the only way to still have a match with the TT-rating system. Though I wonder how many people (especially non-Tycoons) would make a link between post-ranks and TT-ratings.

[XeryusTC]

If we bumped them all up by 10, there'd be 13 Tycoons, 1 President, 4 Chairmen, 2 Chief Executives, 7 Directors, 15 Route Supervisors, 26 Transport Coordinators, 84 Traffic Managers and over 17,500 engineers. That's quite unbalanced if you ask me.

Well, it represents a company better. It would be quite silly if a company would have 100 presidents and a few hundred chairmen

[Badger]

I love how this has become quite an intense discussion about something that, when you step back for a minute, really doesn't matter or make any differnce to anything at all.

[Purno]

Not intense, but indeed, all about the details

[Illegal_Alien]

Badger can i get your title instead?

[JamieLei]

If we bumped them all up by 10, there'd be 13 Tycoons, 1 President, 4 Chairmen, 2 Chief Executives, 7 Directors, 15 Route Supervisors, 26 Transport Coordinators, 84 Traffic Managers and over 17,500 engineers. That's quite unbalanced if you ask me.

Well, it represents a company better. It would be quite silly if a company would have 100 presidents and a few hundred chairmen

I actually burst out laughing!

[Jacko]

Well at least im a Tycoon
Im not sure who its could be bumped up, maybe 2 or 3 is best

[Born Acorn]

It's not a really useful feature.

So why not make it require a donation per year, minimum $5? That way those that really care enough can pay for it, and it will go to pay for the server costs, not for orudge's next hat. Whether or not this demeans the odd fund-raising drive would remain be seen.

Perhaps throw in some other benefits (larger avatars? I note the current limit does not fill the user info space fully), and bam.