Forum updated to SMF 2.0

[Mulreay]

Really though, I think that kind of a label should be left to the judgement of the moderators, not necessarily the number of thanks one might have.

I have to say that makes more sense to me as well.

[Computer Hope Admin]

I think accepted helper should be earned through moderator approval, not simply thanks.
...

Quaxo, should never have to feel that you're ranting. I want this to be a community driven forum, so value all comments and never treat any comment as a rant. I can see where you're coming from on your views, my only concern with having a moderator / approved system is that it is just another task for someone to have to do. I thought by having this community driven that it would be easier for me to maintain. I could easily create a custom profile section, like the F@H icon that can be enabled by simply checking a box, but would require someone to check it. Also I think if we were to do a system like this we'd need some type of test or checklist the user would have to complete before being added. But I think it's definitely something we can hash out.

Like I mentioned earlier, I spent very little time doing this addition, so my feelings wouldn't be hurt if it disappeared. But we could also customize it more to how the CH community wants it.

p.s. I gave you a thanks.

[quaxo]

I gave it some more thought on my way home from the shop today.

Perhaps it's just the wording "Accepted Helper". Maybe something a little less official sounding, so it doesn't sound like CH is necessarily endorsing their advice, but still acknowledges the time people put into offering free assistance here. Perhaps "Community Contributor" or something like that. That way it shows appreciation to those who contribute substantially to CH.

As a way of preventing abuse of the voting system, if it's possible, it might be considered to count both their thanks and their post count, something like 50 thanks and 1000 posts. I think the majority of regular contributors here would fall into that category. Someone would have to spam heavily to get that many posts quickly and their activity would most likely be picked up.

[patio]

Well i thanked Quaxo as well for an excellent point....so he only needs 3 more....

C'mon Folks....

[CBMatt]

I'm really torn when it comes to this.  I like the idea of moderator approval, but there are a few issues with that.  The act of checking a box isn't a big deal, but I could see there being a lot of accusations of favoritism (or perhaps more than just accusations...?).  There are a lot of people who help on a regular basis but likely wouldn't fit the criteria because their knowledge is either borderline or they simply don't have the best attitude.  Such a person would likely get upset.  I could also see us getting tons of requests to become an Accepted Helper, much like we do for current "positions of power".

Of course, as I stated, basing it on postcount is problematic as well.  We've banned several members who had over 1000 posts and 100 thanks.  Some people are able to just barely glide by for a while.

It seems to me that there isn't a really good way of doing this.  Whatever method is used, there will be drawbacks.  The only thing I can think of (aside from scrapping the idea altogether) is to set it up as a ranking system.  That way, someone would have to work their way up to Accepted Helper, Trusted Helper, Sponsored Helper, or whatever (the highest rank would need approval).  But then, do we really need two ranking systems?

I'm basically on the fence here and just throwing out thoughts/ideas.

[quaxo]

I like the idea, because at least it points out the difference between people like Patio and your average <insert annoyance's name here>. And Chris is right, we have had people over the 1000 post mark who have had to be asked nicely to leave (a.k.a. banned) because of inappropriate behavior.

[Allan]

On my other site giving members a "trusted" title (we call it either Forum Adviser or Senior Forum Adviser) is strictly a staff decision. Moderators recommend those members they feel have been the most helpful and I approve the request and change the member's title. I dislike calling someone a trusted adviser based solely on either the number of posts or, at CH, the number of "thanks". Let's remember that we already know of one or more members who have multiple accounts and use those accounts to thank themselves.

[quaxo]

Let's remember that we already know of one or more members who have multiple accounts and use those accounts to thank themselves.

Exactly my point. 

"Thank me. Thank me very much. Oh, I'm very welcome, don't even mention it."

[patio]

Need 2 more Thanx for Quaxo......

[Computer Hope Admin]

Heh yeah afraid that it could turn into something like that, with people asking to be thanked so they can get the title.

[patio]

Actually i was serious....he deserves it as he's a most qualified contributor...

[quaxo]

Well, I got my title, so I don't care anymore. Drop the issue...


Haha I'm kidding. It really wasn't about me, but thanks for the thanks. I was just using myself as an example because it was the first name I came across.

Like I said, I think it's a good idea to point out people who are really a part of the community here, who take their time to help others and get no reward other than knowing they helped. I just don't want to see that system abused which will completely devalue the meaning of "Accepted Helper" or any other term.

[kpac]

One other thing separate to above,

The two "progress bars" underneath the username...the second one needs to have a
 before it because for someone with a wide screen (i.e. me), they are both beside each other rather than one being under the other.

[quaxo]

One other thing separate to above,

The two "progress bars" underneath the username...the second one needs to have a
 before it because for someone with a wide screen (i.e. me), they are both beside each other rather than one being under the other.

Interesting. All I have anymore is widescreens and I haven't had that. What's your resolution?

[Computer Hope Admin]

The two "progress bars" underneath the username...the second one needs to have a
 before it because for someone with a wide screen (i.e. me), they are both beside each other rather than one being under the other.

Indeed it does. I have a widescreen as well but obviously low resolution since it wasn't happening to me during testing. Will look into fixing it.