WXforum.net

Administration => WXForum Bugs/Suggestions => Topic started by: WeatherHost on December 06, 2011, 06:51:23 AM

Title: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: WeatherHost on December 06, 2011, 06:51:23 AM
As more and more people come aboard, newer members may get the wrong impression of the rank of 'Forecaster'.  Shouldn't that be reserved for actual forecasters with appropriate training and not just anybody with a certain post count?  I know we have several Mets here.





Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: kray1000 on December 06, 2011, 10:31:47 AM
We could replace that designation with "amateur weather educated-guesser", but I don't think it will fit.
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: neondesert on December 06, 2011, 11:22:08 AM
Since a professionally trained "Meteorologist" is able to indicate this in their profile and/or next to their avatar, IMO it's a non-issue.

Besides, anyone can be a "Forecaster".

"Tomorrow will be sunny and dry here in Las Vegas"  There, I just made a forecast. 
And a darn good one I might add!  ;)
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: Farmtalk on December 06, 2011, 07:34:34 PM
I always thought the ranks should be more spread out...The top rank is 300 posts
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: neondesert on December 06, 2011, 07:49:15 PM
I always thought the ranks should be more spread out...The top rank is 300 posts

Personally, I don't see the need for them.  They really don't serve any purpose.
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: Farmtalk on December 06, 2011, 08:10:53 PM
Personally, I think the ranks should be better based on the amount of time on the forum...posts arent everything ;)
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: Sigdigit on December 06, 2011, 09:12:54 PM
I worked long and hard for my Forecaster moniker!  Don't strip me of my meaningless title, lol.  I thought the ranks were pretty cool when I first joined the forum.  And I was inclined to put maybe a bit more stock in the opinions of those who are so dedicated to this pursuit as to be active in our little community.  I'm sure the mets are not offended.  But if you must change it, make it "Doctor", lol.  Always wanted to be a doctor.
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: Scalphunter on December 06, 2011, 09:55:37 PM
Quote
I always thought the ranks should be more spread out...The top rank is 300 posts

 And neither does logging on. An no load is an no load. At least an posters is giving info or helping out some one.
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: SlowModem on December 06, 2011, 10:35:15 PM
Besides, anyone can be a "Forecaster".

"Tomorrow will be sunny and dry here in Las Vegas"  There, I just made a forecast. 
And a darn good one I might add!  ;)

 =D> =D> =D> =D>
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: SlowModem on December 06, 2011, 10:43:44 PM
Although listed as a Forecaster, in actuality, I am a peripheral visionary.  I can see the future, but only off to the sides.   :roll:

(My hindsight is pretty good, too!)
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: xykotik on December 06, 2011, 11:58:54 PM
As more and more people come aboard, newer members may get the wrong impression of the rank of 'Forecaster'.  Shouldn't that be reserved for actual forecasters with appropriate training and not just anybody with a certain post count?  I know we have several Mets here.

Awww.  And I was gonna use the badge on my website.  :-(

(http://mycompany.name/bucket/WXForumBadge.gif)
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: WeatherBeacon on December 07, 2011, 12:25:20 AM

Hey, folks.

Haven't been on in a while, but when I checked the forum just now this thread stood out.

Forums often use member ranking systems that pertain to the forum's focus. I think most members and visitors understand that the ranking categories are just for fun.

It's interesting that this question comes up now, because in the American Meteorological Society's Group on LinkedIn, a similar discussion is underway (the question there is: "Can we finally define who a `meteorologist` is?"), but there is a difference between that and this. The issue there is whether people in general (not just members of LinkedIn's AMS group) should hold certain credentials in order to call themselves professional "meteorologists" and whether the term "meteorologist" should be regulated somehow (like attorney, medical doctor, CPA, actuary, professional engineer (PE), etc,). The difference between that question and this one is that the term "meteorologist" is being used in professional settings by numerous people with very broad ranges of credentials, training, and levels of expertise. In contrast, since this is a forum for weather enthusiasts, the rankings are not intended, and I believe are not generally interpreted, to indicate legitimate titles but are used in jest.
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: neondesert on December 07, 2011, 12:48:01 AM

Hey, folks.

Haven't been on in a while, but when I checked the forum just now this thread stood out.

Forums often use member ranking systems that pertain to the forum's focus. I think most members and visitors understand that the ranking categories are just for fun.

It's interesting that this question comes up now, because in the American Meteorological Society's Group on LinkedIn, a similar discussion is underway (the question there is: "Can we finally define who a `meteorologist` is?"), but there is a difference between that and this. The issue there is whether people in general (not just members of LinkedIn's AMS group) should hold certain credentials in order to call themselves professional "meteorologists" and whether the term "meteorologist" should be regulated somehow (like attorney, medical doctor, CPA, actuary, professional engineer (PE), etc,). The difference between that question and this one is that the term "meteorologist" is being used in professional settings by numerous people with very broad ranges of credentials, training, and levels of expertise. In contrast, since this is a forum for weather enthusiasts, the rankings are not intended, and I believe are not generally interpreted, to indicate legitimate titles but are used in jest.

Well said, Kevin!  +1
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: SlowModem on December 07, 2011, 01:34:48 AM
I have found that if I only read the recent posts (which is what I do), the rankings and such never show.
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: SlowModem on December 07, 2011, 02:59:42 AM
I guess we need to give the crown to Andrew!  Long live the king!   =D>
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: mackbig on December 07, 2011, 08:35:10 AM
Greg,
How about the "king" gets the moniker "king bloviator".
I will stop posting in the regular forum, and post all my comments in chit-chat (which is not counted) until you catch up.

Andrew

I guess we need to give the crown to Andrew!  Long live the king!   =D>
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: Farmtalk on December 07, 2011, 08:47:05 AM
Lol Andrew, you are the king! But every king gets dethroned :twisted:
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: Sigdigit on December 07, 2011, 09:06:29 AM
Hey, whatever happened to our young friend Josh?  I swear he used to post threads just to reach forecaster status! :lol:
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: Farmtalk on December 07, 2011, 09:07:28 AM
Yeah he got off here right around when I joined :-k
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: SlowModem on December 07, 2011, 09:23:52 AM
Greg,
How about the "king" gets the moniker "king bloviator".
I will stop posting in the regular forum, and post all my comments in chit-chat (which is not counted) until you catch up.

Andrew

 :-#
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: Garth Bock on December 07, 2011, 09:55:34 AM
...uh, isn't the word 'contributor' just a contraction of 'contrite-bitcher'?

So who gets the Expert rank ?

('Ex' from the latin - former, no longer, has been)
('pert' pronounced 'spurt' from the plumber - fast leak, drip under pressure)
(Expert...ie.....'Has Been Drip Under Pressure')

Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: Farmtalk on December 07, 2011, 02:00:29 PM
I havent peed myself while i was presenting reports :lol: :lol:
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: SLOweather on December 07, 2011, 02:13:33 PM
Hey, whatever happened to our young friend Josh?  I swear he used to post threads just to reach forecaster status! :lol:

He hasn't been here since June 17, 2011, 08:37:37 AM PDT
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: Farmtalk on December 07, 2011, 02:16:11 PM
I thought he said that he was making a return as well :-(
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: mackbig on December 07, 2011, 02:22:18 PM
If you dont take another sabbatical, at your post rate, you will be crowned by Groundhog day.

Andrew

Lol Andrew, you are the king! But every king gets dethroned :twisted:
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: Farmtalk on December 07, 2011, 02:30:36 PM
No Im not into the post count, I just like to be a part of the discussion :-)
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: saratogaWX on December 07, 2011, 02:34:04 PM
Just for reference, here are the current settings for 'rank' based on postings
Code: [Select]
                    Stars     Members     Required posts
Newbie                *        2005             0     
Member                *        2577             1     
Senior Member         **       101              50     
Contributor           ***      43               100     
Senior Contributor    ****     44               150     
Forecaster            *****    73               300     
and yes, it is just for fun.. no 'quality' is indicated by the ranking, just 'quantity'.

And.. postings in Chit-Chat, Posting Games, and Test Zone do not count.

We'd set this up based on the original weatherforum.net settings and haven't changed it since June, 2006 when the forum started.

Best regards,
Ken

Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: Axelvold on December 07, 2011, 03:05:23 PM
As more and more people come aboard, newer members may get the wrong impression of the rank of 'Forecaster'.  Shouldn't that be reserved for actual forecasters with appropriate training and not just anybody with a certain post count?  I know we have several Mets here.

Or just remove the ranking, it does not serve any purpose.
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: Farmtalk on December 07, 2011, 04:27:19 PM
I dont think thats the answer....Why dont people just ignore them and let everyone have fun? 8-)
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: DanS on December 07, 2011, 06:57:06 PM
I don't even notice them anymore until people start talking about them. Same with post counts.
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: kray1000 on December 07, 2011, 07:00:00 PM
Just for reference, here are the current settings for 'rank' based on postings
Code: [Select]
                    Stars     Members     Required posts
Newbie                *        2005             0     
Member                *        2577             1     
Senior Member         **       101              50     
Contributor           ***      43               100     
Senior Contributor    ****     44               150     
Forecaster            *****    73               300     


I was so glad when I graduated from Seņor Contributor.  Made me feel a little younger.
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: Farmtalk on December 07, 2011, 07:17:30 PM
 :lol: :lol: :lol:

I could go with people as ranks, Like "Storm Master G (For Greg Forbes) as the top rank :grin:
Title: Re: Thoughts on Board Ranks
Post by: drstorm215 on January 03, 2012, 05:59:20 PM
As a relative "newbie" but "member", I can say that when scrolling through all the forums that I very much appreciate the ranks and post counts.
Maybe I'll learn not to put as much faith in you big posters :lol:, but I believe for those of us just getting around to this site, it helps seperate some of the "fluff" comments from those that have seen it all.
I do agree with the suggestion of being well read on the posts should count for something, but I also see the flip side of encouraging one to help by posting also....... =D>