aztimm

I agree. I also receive PM's from users who pop into the US forum, take a look around, but are a bit timid to actually post. There really is something about getting those first few posts out there...

When I visit a forum I'm not familiar with, the assigned titles help to give me a lay of the land. And sometimes I'll PM an ambassador or Mod to make sure I'm posting in the correct place first.

Exactly. Another forum I participate in tried to do something by number of posts, and suddenly there were many posts with just 1 letter each.

The ideal would be to have a method to rate the quality of the posts. I've seen a couple of users with just a couple hundred posts, yet each of those posts is extremely well worth a read.

travelkid

Could be any group, mods group, senior mods, TB, CD, whatever really. Making it some honorary title.

You picked the level and title for a reason

Dovster

My shrink recommended it.

goalie

Not bad ^ but as to the 0-100 Newbie, personally I don't like the term "newbie" so how about a simple thing like "General Member" or something similar the way the airlines do it. I know my example is not that good but it's better than "Rides in the Village"

oliver2002

+1 on the idea of removing the post count titles. If you are TB, CD, mod, admin or ambassador, you have the title, everyone else is 'just' a member. I would even eliminate the post count showing under the member name. It has no true value whatsoever. If anyone sees value in it, they can look it up in the member's profile.

Dovster

I agree except that I would also eliminate the TB, CD, Mod, Admin titles except when they are posting in the official positions. Frankly, if I want to know about a hotel in Tel Aviv, the fact that somebody is on TB or is the moderator of the CO Forum does not mean that he is any more qualified to answer my question than another person.

I would have no objection to the "Ambassador" title being used whenever that person is posting in the particular forum he or she is representing.

kokonutz

I actually like 'General Member' a lot.

I dunno about eliminating all titles. Or all titles except mods/TB/Ambassadors.

It's like post count: people SAY they dont care about it. But they do. They really, really do.

So let's give the posters what they want. ^

dchristiva

Agreed! ^

MSPeconomist

I find it ironic that some of the people here that advocate the elimination of non appointed and non elected titles themselves have appointed and elected titles.

oliver2002

Then if its important let people look for it in the profile.... I find the DKYWIA stuff to the left and bottom of each post distracting.

Mary2e

Same response to you.

SkiAdcock

As Mary2e noted, there's a reason for the official titles to be displayed. It helps FTers identify ambassadors, moderators, company reps, TB members, so if they need to contact them & don't know who they are it gives them the heads up.

Speaking as a regular FTer, I don't have a problem w/ the Evangalist title under my handle disappearing. I don't care about titles. FWIW - I rarely look at the info under anyone's handle. I note the handle & make any judgment of valuable posts based on the content they post. If they have 2 posts but they're good, then they get my respect. If they have 30,000 & their posts suck, they don't. Shrug.

I'd vote for eliminating titles, but as some of the other TB members have noted it is important to some, just as post counts are important to some, so I don't think there'd be enough support to eliminate them.

So, if there's a need for intermediate titles I'm ok with them, if we can figure out something that works for everyone.

Cheers.

kipper

Assuming he can work out the math, I rather like koko's suggestion, with the exception of changing newbie to general member.

SkiAdcock

I'd rather see shorter titles than his suggested long ones, and I agree w/ not doing the newbie thing.

Cheers.

kipper

Perhaps drop the "FlyerTalker" portion?