what if serenes forest had an awards system?(now nominating for one award)

[Rehab]

Attempting to put aside that sf isn't the same forum it was in 2008-2009,* and that the same "elitism" argument arguably wouldn't be self-evident enough a reason to not have stuff like user awards and special titles and tassles and shit, the idea has always seemed, just, kinda artificial to me.

*(when fools was literally talking about their post count and join date/source like it meant something, like the stats themselves differentiated them somehow, which is part of why at the time I said I was in favor of throwing them out entirely (fairly satisfied with the current compromise on that, by the way))

By artificial, I mean, people accrue social clout/respect (or don't) naturally. Even if the only way to differentiate posters was by their names, if people saw somebody they respect a lot made a post they'd go "oh shit, (person), let's see what they have to say." And in the case that somebody's new to the forum, if they talk (or lurk) around a lot, then they'll eventually be able to form their own opinions on other posters, and they'll (usually) get some idea of what other people think (and/or are willing to express) of other people. Meaning, people obviously tend to know who they like, and people tend to at least be able to make reasonable guesses on who likes and dislikes them in turn, so most rep things feel unnecessary to add in.

In most situations, I worry whether things like rep specifically, even at their best, have a chance of inadvertently intimidating people into changing what they say just because of an arbitrary graphic with no weight to it, and don't do much visible good in return in terms of promoting healthy/interesting discussion. At worst, brrrr

Have you ever seen a forum split like a, like into some video game faction shit? People used to be friends, washing their hands of each other? Over way-too-specific minutiae, transformed into way-too-general sectarian snarkthink

Have you ever seen somebody use the term, "09'ers," pronounced "oh-nein-urs"

I seen that

Also specifically regarding "awards," we had those in 08 (I think? 09? whatever, at some point)

They turned out about like one might fear their high-school yearbook title process would turn out, far's I can remember

(bitter and childish)

(not the same forum as then etc yeah I know but the fear, she yet lingers)

[jiodi]

You are doing a great job.

I try. Also, I see what you did there.

[Florete]

on that forum did you win the award for most elitist anime viewer

Sword Art Online hadn't aired yet.

funny

we can't even have a visible post count because of "elitism"

an awards/badge system would look nice but i think the administrators are a bit lazy to implement it and/or may still be worried about elitism and such (which arguably did or did not exist back when post counts were visible)

however such a badge system would be intriguing, and i'd feel my own activity would increase were it to exist

right now i feel it's stale around here, and it needs something to make it fresh again

I like post counts, but I think an actual awards system would cause more controversy and elitism than that. Personally, I don't like the idea.

*(when fools was literally talking about their post count and join date/source like it meant something, like the stats themselves differentiated them somehow, which is part of why at the time I said I was in favor of throwing them out entirely (fairly satisfied with the current compromise on that, by the way))

Except for like, one person, this literally never happened. It's why I still don't understand Josh's insistence on keeping them removed, because that person has been gone for years.

[Rehab]

I'm assuming the posts have faded away at this point, so attempting to prove whether or not it was literally just that one person isn't an option, is that assumption right? Because I remember a bigger number than that, but I guess it's a moot point if it's just 5-6 year old memories.

In any event I personally am quite comfortable with not giving that one person, or any hypothetical yet-to-join person like them, even an inch on the matter, regardless of whether that's perfectly logical or not

Showing off the two of them next to posts also just seems like a pointless set of forum customs to me. Like, people seem to have accepted that post count doesn't mean much of significance about the character of the poster, so I've always wondered why keep it around, when somebody could infer out simple things one might get from it (like how often and over what time periods somebody posts), if not for a reason rooted somewhere in egotism? It seems like it has little more significance than number of times logged in, or times quoted, or any other arbitrary thing that could be measured.

(I do think it's neat that one can measure how large a share of one's posts are in each section, though, but I wouldn't think it'd actually be necessary to track post count itself to measure that)

And join date, which people can still check for specific posters, and which I almost certainly remember more than one person harping on, is something I've really definitely seen whinged about on other forums, and it still doesn't tell people that much about a poster that they couldn't either infer from regular posts, gather from looking at old topics if they felt like it, or just hear from asking somebody.

I mean I don't think they're so insidious that I'd leave in a huff if they were added to post sidebars again, but I prefer to keep them out of my mind and focus on getting to know people [e: by] the content of their posts.

Edited February 25, 2014 by Rehab

[Esau of Isaac]

Sword Art Online hadn't aired yet.

Yeah cuz then you would have gotten Most Likely to Froth at Mouth -o-

[Makaze]

I'm assuming the posts have faded away at this point, so attempting to prove whether or not it was literally just that one person isn't an option, is that assumption right? Because I remember a bigger number than that, but I guess it's a moot point if it's just 5-6 year old memories.

In any event I personally am quite comfortable with not giving that one person, or any hypothetical yet-to-join person like them, even an inch on the matter, regardless of whether that's perfectly logical or not

Showing off the two of them next to posts also just seems like a pointless set of forum customs to me. Like, people seem to have accepted that post count doesn't mean much of significance about the character of the poster, so I've always wondered why keep it around, when somebody could infer out simple things one might get from it (like how often and over what time periods somebody posts), if not for a reason rooted somewhere in egotism? It seems like it has little more significance than number of times logged in, or times quoted, or any other arbitrary thing that could be measured.

(I do think it's neat that one can measure how large a share of one's posts are in each section, though, but I wouldn't think it'd actually be necessary to track post count itself to measure that)

And join date, which people can still check for specific posters, and which I almost certainly remember more than one person harping on, is something I've really definitely seen whinged about on other forums, and it still doesn't tell people that much about a poster that they couldn't either infer from regular posts, gather from looking at old topics if they felt like it, or just hear from asking somebody.

I mean I don't think they're so insidious that I'd leave in a huff if they were added to post sidebars again, but I prefer to keep them out of my mind and focus on getting to know people [e: by] the content of their posts.

I feel the same way about the gender field...

[Lance Masayoshi]

Don't we already have an awards system? The judges are the mods, and they give people "points".

Too elitist for my tastes, tbh.

lol

[euklyd]

I feel the same way about the gender field...

Gender field serves a purpose in that some people do prefer to be addressed by gender-specific pronouns.

Post count can intimidating to some/many users (I know from experience, and others have mentioned it as well), and doesn't confer any similar sort of benefit.

of course you could just use the "Member Since" field to become intimidated instead

[Makaze]

Gender field serves a purpose in that some people do prefer to be addressed by gender-specific pronouns.

Post count can intimidating to some/many users (I know from experience, and others have mentioned it as well), and doesn't confer any similar sort of benefit.

of course you could just use the "Member Since" field to become intimidated instead

Gender specific pronouns are a flaw in language! Down with the system!

Might also have something to do with my liking using my gender compass without a cheatsheet.

[Parrhesia]

I'm pretty sure Post Count didn't count anything in FFtF, which cut down the spam-for-count motive since it was punished in every other forum. Neutral on it being brought back, but it's something to remember.

[Makaze]

Even so, it does have the potential of intimidating people. No value is gained by adding it. More against than for it.

Would be nice to be able to view post stats if I wanted to, though.

Edited February 26, 2014 by Makaze

[euklyd]

We've been over this a lot lately. Search someone's name:

and you find out that you have like no posts:

[Makaze]

Not the same as stats, but that's cool.

Would be nice to be able to see how much I've posted in FftF and things like that.

[euklyd]

Oh right. I fail at reading comprehension.

We even had a thread about that.

[Florete]

I'm assuming the posts have faded away at this point, so attempting to prove whether or not it was literally just that one person isn't an option, is that assumption right? Because I remember a bigger number than that, but I guess it's a moot point if it's just 5-6 year old memories.

In any event I personally am quite comfortable with not giving that one person, or any hypothetical yet-to-join person like them, even an inch on the matter, regardless of whether that's perfectly logical or not

Showing off the two of them next to posts also just seems like a pointless set of forum customs to me. Like, people seem to have accepted that post count doesn't mean much of significance about the character of the poster, so I've always wondered why keep it around, when somebody could infer out simple things one might get from it (like how often and over what time periods somebody posts), if not for a reason rooted somewhere in egotism? It seems like it has little more significance than number of times logged in, or times quoted, or any other arbitrary thing that could be measured.

(I do think it's neat that one can measure how large a share of one's posts are in each section, though, but I wouldn't think it'd actually be necessary to track post count itself to measure that)

I remember it being one person (maybe two) because when he did use post count for obviously elitist reasons, he got completely slammed for it; it backfired on him, really.

I don't need it next to each of my posts, but I would like an easy way to check, just for myself, because it's an easy, simple way to keep a record of my forum activity, especially if it comes with extra stats like average amount in a certain time period, or something.

[peener weener]

i bet sf awards would be worse than the grammies

[eclipse]

Why are we patting ourselves on the back on an online community?

[Makaze]

Because it's fun? Though I would hope self-nominating would be banned if any awards did happen.

[Rehab]

there also aren't any awards, so nobody's actually patting anybody

[Nightmare]

/me pats rehab

[KnightNight]

*Gives Nightmare the Royalty award* ;D

[Raven]

I'm sure well over half of my friends list is inactive. My award would probably be "has had the most friends come and go."

[Mikethfc]

Fear not everybody I have a way that will satisfy both sides:

Make awards for the people who want them, but make them so objectively bad that nobody would want to win it so it doesn't become over-inflated ego simulator 2k14.

Something like "Most likely to get caught shagging a goat." or answers from Cards Against Humanity.

[peener weener]

Something like "Most likely to get caught shagging a goat." or answers from Cards Against Humanity.

100% behind this goat

[Wist]

I may have misread the situation, but I don't think post counts being removed was a direct response to members referencing them to inflate their clout. I believe it was done to make sure that couldn't happen in future (with backing from secondary arguments, like those Rehab mentioned, about post counts being a pointless custom and a misleading metric).

From the beginning Jyosua was against special member rankings and privileges because he viewed them as contributing factors to FESS's perceived reputation as insular and hostile to new members. He wanted to avoid this with Serenes Forest. Somewhere along the line, post counts (and members titles indicative of post counts) were conflated with member rankings as, well, egotistical. It probably helped that Super Bus took a strong stance against them when he posted Serenes Forest (I don't remember the situation at FESS because I last lurked there in 2005), but I won't pretend to have a firm understanding of what ideas may have been exchanged between the two (and other prominent individuals of the time, I suppose).

Anyways, in short, Jyosua's reasons for insisting post counts remain hidden are (as I understand) ideological. It's to prevent the possibility of problems with elitism from arising, even though, as Red Fox of Fire said, demonstrable occurrences were rather rare. It's also to make the forum less intimidating to new members who might otherwise more easily see certain personalities dominating the forum's social culture (culture is the wrong word, but I'm sleepy - I hope my meaning still comes across). I have no idea if the position ultimately serves the goal, but the philosophy is consistent.

Actually, I was surprised when Jyosua created the "Retired Moderator" group; that struck me as antithetic.

Anyways, these are my understandings pieced together from what I remember Jyosua and a few others posting at the time. I could be wrong, and please let me know if I am, but I don't think I'm completely off the mark. Unfortunately, even if I could be bothered to try, I wouldn't be able to source what I've mentioned. Some of what I gleaned comes from long deleted private messages or the secret moderator board that nobody should know exists. You just have to trust I'm not crazy (or ignore me).