Purlox

RE: [split] New Community Layout Discussion - From #2856

Recommended Posts

In the thread Goldsmith wrote that, I also wrote that there should be member category (between newcomer and Elite) for people that have been in community for certain amount of time (maybe 1 month?).

 

and perhaps we can change "elites" to simply "experts", people that have helped and have knowlege with tulpae.

I agree.

 

@waffles: I was thinking about the rank system being like what Goldsmith said. What are your thoughts on it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apart from the standard rank being 'newcomer', I think the main problem would, thinking about it, be how the ranks are allocated. Assuming administration would choose the first 'professors', you have already seeded the ranks to come, as the preferences of those initially promoted may not include all valuable members. In other words, the promotion by nomination of other professors has the potential to be biased.

To counter this, there should remain the ability for standard members to nominate standard members to the upper tiers once in a while, and for them to flag the upper tiers for review if they are deemed to be unsatisfactory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would we even need mentors? I've been thinking about it and I've come to the conclusion that, while the guides section, tulpa.info channel, the pm function and Questions and Answers board are active, there is really no need to have Mentors, or any related new ranks or sections or what have you.

 

I think this whole concept was created by people who wanted some recognition for being versed in this area. You want to create a title that you can assign to yourself and proudly show off. We all know that one piece of advice from one person is just as good from the next, depending on how the receiver functions.

 

I'm not trying to point fingers or accuse anyone, but I just don't see how this is necessary. It just seems like grooming now. An excuse to add a badge to yourself or get people to respect you more.

 

What would the Mentors do anyway? Regurgitate guide information? Spit up general knowledge? Give out "hang in there"s and "don't stop believing"s?


frt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other words, quality posting and contribution shouldn't be rewarded, Avalanche? People crave ranking and titles, so why not use that to encourage behaviour that is beneficial to the community? It gives newcomers a chance to see who is respectable, and encourages people to become respectable. In that sense, it doesn't matter if it's what respectable people want because it serves a purpose anyway.

 

Mentors can help in a huge number of ways; explaining concepts, giving advice from personal experience, and encouragement are all things that help immensely. If you want to see this in action, take a look at what goes on in current progress reports; there members often help others out in their endeavour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other words, quality posting and contribution shouldn't be rewarded, Avalanche? People crave ranking and titles, so why not use that to encourage behaviour that is beneficial to the community? It gives newcomers a chance to see who is respectable, and encourages people to become respectable.

 

I agree with this, and I also understand your concern Avalanche, but I think this is something we can at least experiment with for awhile; if it works, then Great! if it doesn't, then nothing was lost and We can revert back to the old system.


pix: Link

Diary: http://ponystasha.tumblr.com

Koomer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm up for experimentation, but;

 

Quality posting shouldn't be rewarded. How would you define quality? One guy could be on every day, posting helpful comments and helping people with worries and being a general good guy, and then there's another guy who has just been at this for much longer, has a tupper, wrote a few guides but doesn't really care for all the annoying questions a newb asks. Are they both good mentors? I would say not.

If we rewarded quality posting, both would get the marks, but only one would be a good mentor. Being a mentor is half experience, half personality. Some people just don't have the personality to help train newbs. They /could/, but it wouldn't be a worthwhile experience- the newbs would get facts and not much personal input, which is the same as looking through the guides or asking the crowd.

 

You say mentors can help by explaining concepts, giving advice from personal experience, and encouraging members.

I would say that everyone here can do the latter, anyone who has been here a while (referencing the two types of people I was talking about) can give advice and anyone can explain a concept.

Explaining concepts to people is down to the person you are explaining it to, not always the person explaining.

 

You remember maths class? The teacher could waffle on and on about how to do an equation, and you would just stare at the board and draw a blank. You would then lean over and ask you friend how to do it and you would pick it up like that. It's the same concept. It's not about the explainer, it's the explainee.

 

 

That being said there are a few people I personally know who I think would make great mentors; for me. I couldn't say that they have the most experience or that their explanations would work as well on someone else. This is why I think handing out badges or rewarding quality posting isn't just facts and figures, it's down to opinion. One person's quality post is another person's annoying, bigotted, opinionated shitpost


frt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to clarify, I don't think that the mentor system and user ranking overlap. Although the roles require similar traits, you would not become a 'professor' on the strength of your mentorship, and being a 'professor' would not require being judged as a good mentor. You seem to be posting on the assumption that the two are part of the same system, but I don't think they are - or they should be.

 

Given the role of a 'professor' here - an authority figure to newcomers - it tends to be clear whether or not someone is suitable. Your first example misses something important out: is he knowledgeable? In other words, are his 'helpful comments' insightful and personally informed, or is he just regurgitating what others have said previously? The former would make him a suitable professor. Your second example, too, lacks some definition of 'annoying questions'. I would sympathise if it were "I haven't read any guides or the FAQ but what's a tulpa?" because that's just stupid. If he, however, is not inclined to answer a slightly more justified question like "When people say 'vocal', does that mean their tulpa has a hallucinatory voice?", then he is probably suited to neither role.

Given the context of the reward - elevation to a point where they are expected to be helpful - 'quality posting' and the like takes on a meaning more towards 'helpful posting'.

 

And again, being a mentor is a different story. The prerequisites I would suggest would be personal experience, and willingness to be helpful. In this context, the first example would be suitable - assuming he has personal experience - and the second may be suitable - depending on the definition of 'stupid question', as above.

 

While explanation of complex concepts can be difficult, the sort that some would truly struggle to grasp would probably be explained by 'professors' anyway. A prerequisite for that post would presumably be teaching ability. The sort of concept that would be explained by a mentor would probably be simpler, and less likely to be difficult to explain or understand.

 

I don't think that a 'quality post' is so subjective if you define what one is. Asking around what would be defined as a quality post, you would likely find differing opinions in that regard; some would prize detail, others concision, others clarity, others readability and so on. However, defining 'quality post' by context leads to a definition of clear and helpful, as well as informed. Along these lines it is harder to go wrong through subjectivity. Moreover, while nomination to the 'elite' rank is down to one person, the 'professor' rank nomination would be cross-checked by others, and thus there any subjectivity would likely be cancelled out by the influence of others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright. Another issue however I see is that if this was such a good idea or it has a high potential, how has it not developed naturally over time?

There are a few people who I would call mentors to the general community, and even some I would call mentors to me. But over time I have come to realise my own methods were the most successful. That is beside the point though.

 

I still believe a quality post is subjective enough to not be a desirable measure of whether an author should be elevated up a rank or not. Come to think of it, I may be against a ranking system altogether. The moderator and administrator titles are there for a reason, but a professor title? A mentor title? With a moderator title, you know that person will banhammer you or is knowledgeable in the forum rules. With a professor title, is it because they have been here a long while (I have been here since the creation of this site minus two weeks, would that make me a professor?) or they have written a guide, or have a certain post count?

If it's nothing quantifiable, then the decision is down to, at best, a group opinion on someone elegibility, which to me won't work as well as you would hope.

 

Still, I'm up to see how it would work if we test this.


frt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mentors wouldn't have titles, I think.

 

I don't think people would be elevated on the strength of one post. Rather, their posts and actions over a period of time would be deemed to be helpful and informed enough. It could be subjective still, but everything is subjective to an extent, and the group vote would likely remove most of it.

 

It is obvious why a kind of ranking system has not evolved, or been implemented. There is obviously no system in place for such a thing to happen, and the collective unvoiced desire of the community would not change this. What would change this would be administrator action, but Pleeb and Amadeus have been somewhat busy with other aspects of site redesign for some time now.

 

Judging by Goldsmith's words, a professor would be chosen on the strength of their being willing and able to help. An obviously requirement would be that they themselves are not a newcomer, but bear in mind that join date doesn't always equal experience. Post count is even less helpful; you could have 1000 off-topic posts and be completely unsuited. Judging by guide count is probably more suitable, but still not always accurate; there are plenty of rehashes and guides that are more like a few tips in the guides section of the forum.

 

Concievably, I think that the initial professors would either be hand-picked by administration, or voted in by the community. Given the scrutiny that they would be given, I don't think any difficulties regarding suitability would arise there. As Goldsmith said, new professors would be picked on 'knowledge and experience', and, may I add, helpfulness. Given a few minutes of looking into post history, it wouldn't be too difficult for others to assess suitability, and while not quantifiable, I think suitability is typically not that hard to grasp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thing is if you left it to a vote, most of the community doesn't know the rest. There is a totally different online community when America is asleep, consisting of european/middle eastern/asian countries.

A guy who is a total jackass but posts alright stuff on the forums could be voted a mentor because everyone not from Yankeeland would go "um, ok, fuck it, sure, vote him in".

 

I don't think Goldsmith's words are the best to follow. Someone may be willing to help and able to all hours of the day, but that doesn't mean they aren't misguided and they actually spread month old "facts" that have been disproved, for example.

I agree, join date doesn't equal experience. If that were the case, I would be more experienced than you, but we all know that there are some members who join late but have been at this for months, even years.

Post count obviously only means the user has time to spare. I believe Fede-lasse has the highest post count. Would you say he is an acceptable mentor?

Plenty of people have made rehash guides or guides outlining useless trash, so that can't be counted, I agree.

 

As it stands, neither a hand pick nor a vote would do anyone favours. Why should the admins and/or mods or whomever get to choose who we should listen to? And a global vote is equally misguided as the community is so large that there isn't a single person who is standout to everyone. Aside from Pleeb, I wouldn't say there is a single member who is known to everyone on this forum.

 

The only way I see, is if we make a board or section where people post up their own threads (much like progress report) in their own name where they vouch for themselves. They explain how they learned, what they learned, how they will teach and what they will teach. It is then up to the individual member whether or not they want to even reply to that thread. For the sake of privacy, it can be arranged through pm's, so that there isn't a lonely mentor thread, thus embarrassing the would be mentor, nor will people applying for a mentor get singled out and ridiculed for needing help (although I very much doubt this will happen.)


frt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.