Discretion

[dummy_plug]

That sounds like a good pretty system you've described Grunyen. Definately sounds like a way to screen out people who add value to the board and people that just post a bunch of random, meaningless crap. I wonder how hard it would be to implement something like that here.

BTW, way to be subtle there.

[stogie bear]

I'm definitely against any labelling system of posters. I think it's rather lame to have a system of points or features based on how much you post or how much people like you. It's too easy to re-register to make a silly post and preserve your online reputation.

Also a persons popularity or integrity as a forum member is itself contentious and would probably need it's own forum!

Members here very quickly learn who to trust and single out as reliable or trustworthy or even salient! Aslo if incorrect or misleading information is posted there are enough people here to correct this without resorting to heavy handed sanctions and name-bashing.

Also - the poster alluded to in the above posts may well be contentious and unpopular but I have yet to see a post from him that is either deliberately mean-spirited or in any way a contravention of our rules.

[PigDogg]

There's also no evidence that those who are controversial on the Forum are the same people snitching to ladyboys.

[Guest]

I'm definitely against any labelling system of posters. I think it's rather lame to have a system of points or features based on how much you post or how much people like you. It's too easy to re-register to make a silly post and preserve your online reputation.

Also a persons popularity or integrity as a forum member is itself contentious and would probably need it's own forum!

Members here very quickly learn who to trust and single out as reliable or trustworthy or even salient! Aslo if incorrect or misleading information is posted there are enough people here to correct this without resorting to heavy handed sanctions and name-bashing.

Also - the poster alluded to in the above posts may well be contentious and unpopular but I have yet to see a post from him that is either deliberately mean-spirited or in any way a contravention of our rules.

Uh oh.

Maybe I better know what the rules are. I don't remember reading them.

I may have just violated some, and in relation to the entity so alluded to, that I was alluding to. Ahem. Err.... right.