Community Rank ..........

TOBYJUG posted:

#6.   Mike B.

Ahh a blast from the past,  the excellent "The Prisoner",  must see cult viewing of my yoof.    Those dastardly Rovers were everywhere, but escape I must.     

Adam Meredith posted:

I have an embittered policy of deleting my posts when they aren't greeted with universal acclaim. Along with those deleted by Richard I wouldn't have thought enough remained to register on an electron microscope. 

We will try harder.

https://forums.naimaudio.com/t...609#3678285645783609  

Surely you can google endless album cover images as quickly as anyone Adam?

Or maybe, like sensible people who can read, you cannot see the point. 

TallGuy posted:

At this rate of announcement I expect to see myself listed around mid-July.

Not sure I really care as a high rank just says you post a lot,it doesn't say anyting about the usefulness of the postings (and here I'm not saying mine are any more useful than anyone elses).

What I do find interesting is that I don't recall seeing postings by most of the Hot-100 (or however many it is) so where are they posting so frequently ? (Must be where I don't look often, but where's that ? Home Theatre and Padded Cell I guess.)

Not just the quantity of posts, you really need QUALITY posts.  

Bruce Woodhouse posted:

This thread really confuses me

Some people are acting as if a high rank is a good sign.....

bruce

Those people are misguided Bruce.

But don’t worry, you have dropped three places since last year, so are steadily heading in the right direction ! 

I think you get more points if a non follower likes, than if a follower likes.

A good idea for ranking in my mind would be that any member who posts an insult or a personal attack on another member that the moderator elected to remove will go down 250 slots in ranking and stay there for at least a year without a possibility to advance. In extreme cases of repeating offenders we can award them sub-zero ranking.

Sounds a bit like a ‘swear box’! But surely extreme cases of insulting or personal attacks should result in removal if the member? 

“Removal of the member”  would be a Saudi-esquely extreme punishment n’est-çe pas?

From the few moons being online, I have noticed a lot of posts have become less clunky and more slick and polished.

Grammar policing from those awesome individuals has obviously payed of.

rodwsmith posted:

“Removal of the member”  would be a Saudi-esquely extreme punishment n’est-çe pas?

!

TOBYJUG posted:

Grammar policing from those awesome individuals has obviously payed of.

I see what you did there 

Don, without meaning to pester you, you only have a few hours left - not even the top (or is it bottom?) 100 yet, and so many more to to do...

Responding to Innocent Bystander's request, and for the benefit of posterity on the eve of moving to the new forum, I've had a go at a snapshot of the top 65 this evening. Some of the points totals might be out as I cobbled this together over the weekend and may have misread or keyed. Anyway I think the ranking is accurate to today, though Richard Dane may well have the authoritative list from which he may correct things.  

Hail king, Kuma!

Just missed out

Last Visit: 1 second ago
Joined: 11 November 2013
Points: 37,924
Community Rank #67

Curiously “rank” seems unrelated to points.

well, goodbye to it , as I gather there are no rankings in the new forum

So rank is not just determined by points, I wonder how that works? I take it all with a pinch of salt, not least because I once jumped up about 10 places in one go, to about 35, I think, and a couple of weeks later, jumped down even further, so I’m not sure they even work properly. 

How much does any of this matter? On a scale of 1 to 10, I’d say about 0.

ChrisSU posted:

So rank is not just determined by points, I wonder how that works? I take it all with a pinch of salt, not least because I once jumped up about 10 places in one go, to about 35, I think, and a couple of weeks later, jumped down even further, so I’m not sure they even work properly. 

How much does any of this matter? On a scale of 1 to 10, I’d say about 0.

I see to remember Richard Dane saying that it was all worked out by some algorithm of Hoopla's which wasn't revealed.  On the rankings not being in direct correlation to total activity points I had assumed that some points are discounted over time. Anyway, as you say, it doesn't really matter.  

Some points are bigger than others.

ChrisSU posted:

So rank is not just determined by points, I wonder how that works? I take it all with a pinch of salt, not least because I once jumped up about 10 places in one go, to about 35, I think, and a couple of weeks later, jumped down even further, so I’m not sure they even work properly. 

How much does any of this matter? On a scale of 1 to 10, I’d say about 0.

-10

TOBYJUG posted:

Some points are bigger than others.

It’s not the size of your points that matter, but the way that you use them.

Just missed out then - I’m 68 but I’m not a number, I’m a free man

Adam Zielinski posted:

Just missed out then - I’m 68 but I’m not a number, I’m a free man

 

Funny, I hadn't anticipated your awareness of The Prisoner, being such a quirky cult British TV series. I'm impressed!

I am ashamed to say I know nothing of Polish TV, and am embarrassed to say that unlike your very good command of English only know a few words of Polish, learnt against my will as a child.

Anyway, your points are fixed, and end here: apparentl we'll all be equally pointless from tomorrow...

Innocent Bystander posted:

Adam Zielinski posted:

Just missed out then - I’m 68 but I’m not a number, I’m a free man

Funny, I hadn't anticipated your awareness of The Prisoner, being such a quirky cult British TV series. I'm impressed!

I am ashamed to say I know nothing of Polish TV, and am embarrassed to say that unlike your very good command of English only know a few words of Polish, learnt against my will as a child.

Anyway, your points are fixed, and end here: apparentl we'll all be equally pointless from tomorrow...

Thank you for the compliment. Much obliged.

Must have been my formative years that helped - A-Levels and the Uni... Ok a bit later than late 60-ies (when The Prisoner was aired). For me it was most of the 90’s and 00’s.

Innocent Bystander posted:

Curiously “rank” seems unrelated to points.

well, goodbye to it , as I gather there are no rankings in the new forum

..as long as they cut down on the rankling as well.

Adam Zielinski posted:

Just missed out then - I’m 68 but I’m not a number, I’m a free man

 

Don’t worry about it, Adam, we need quality, not quantity! See you on the dark side.....