[Greenback]

I am grateful, like everyone else I should think, and it won't stop me coming here, but I would like the rankings back!

[jonmorris0844]

I don't think anyone was threatening to leave the forum without getting the rankings back, or doesn't respect the people who run it... but I'd personally like to see something more than 'member'.

[blackfive460]

Since the number of posts is displayed anyway (which tells you more about the poster than ranking ever did) I'd say don't bother, just leave it blank.
Having a rank as 'Member' is pointless since you have to be a member to post.

[kentuckytony]

I would say that 'Member' is to distinguish from 'Administrator'.

[Ivo]

The thing is that it isn't as though this is the world's only forum to have used ranks in its member profiles. Anyone with experience of others would probably notice their meaning; those who don't could have been given some other indication. I agree that they are not worth fighting over, and certainly not leaving over, but they did give us an indication of our experience here. I just don't see the point in having "Member" as the only ranking of any note; it's kinda obvious. If most of us end up with it (whether they have 5 or 5,000 posts), then what is the point in it? Either return to the old system, albeit with alternate names that won't through potential confusion around, or do away with it altogether.

[Mojo]

The purpose of ''Member'' and ''New Member'' is to distinguish between the different rights and forum access levels granted to each category. Similarly if we removed ''Member'' and ''New Member'' then ''Administrator,'' ''Banned,'' etc. would also have to go for consistency, which would cause even more problems.

The situation is less than ideal but feedback will be taken on board.

[90019]

Perhaps a poll to find out how many people would like them back and how many prefer them as they are now?

[Ivo]

So presumably that 5-post requirement for sending PMs still applies, and the differentiation is there to show the newer members when you can first send one...?

I think most (if not all) of us had forgotten about that. It seems such a long time ago...

[Peter Mugridge]

I like the idea suggested earlier of progressing up through class numbers as a compromise, though it would have the slight inconsistency that units would come after locomotives, unless we all started off working through the DMU classes, then the EMU classes and finally the ultimate, the locomotives?

But then, that might not appeal to people who actually prefer units to locos?

Truth is, there is never going to be any one system of railway based rankings that would suit everyone.

Except...

Maybe....



Name the rankings after the time honoured footplate crew link system?

[blackfive460]

Originally Posted by Mojo

The purpose of ''Member'' and ''New Member'' is to distinguish between the different rights and forum access levels granted to each category. Similarly if we removed ''Member'' and ''New Member'' then ''Administrator,'' ''Banned,'' etc. would also have to go for consistency, which would cause even more problems.

The situation is less than ideal but feedback will be taken on board.

I was only thinking that the 'Member' rank should be blanked as it's meaningless. Other more informative ranks are still useful.
If we have to have something, perhaps we could just have a progress bar type of thing based on number of posts up to say 2000. After that it could say 'Should get a life'...

[trainfanatic]

I also liked the original titles, but they probably bore no resemblance to forum members actual jobs. I think this would be useful and interesting, as for example I'm an old retired Signalman (not that horrible replacement '[I]signaller' Other members might also bw proud enough to display their current job titles. Add this idea to any potential poll!

[Mojo]

Originally Posted by trainfanatic

I also liked the original titles, but they probably bore no resemblance to forum members actual jobs. I think this would be useful and interesting, as for example I'm an old retired Signalman (not that horrible replacement '[I]signaller' Other members might also bw proud enough to display their current job titles. Add this idea to any potential poll!

If you wanted to; you could possibly display this as your ''User title'' which you can set in the User CP. This appears in normal type directly below your username.

[trainfanatic]

Thanks Mojo.....

[Mysterium]

Well I'm a new member although have been a regular on another forum for quite a while, so perhaps I can give a different view to this discussion.
I did look at this forum a number of times before joining and noticed the job descriptions below each name. I just assumed that they were each persons job, so in that regard perhaps they were confusing to an "outsider".
However I do like the idea of some kind of ranking system other than the dreadfully boring member/new member titles.
If you're not going to bring back the job descriptions then I do like the engine class system, starting off as an 03 and perhaps working your way upto 89001 Avocet...!
I have another proposal though - how about getting together a list of stations from A-Y(Don't think there is a Z) and have members working their way through the alphabet.

Either way we're a railway forum so let's sort something out that's railway related and that adds a bit of interest to our postings.
Congratulations though on a great forum and I look forward to becoming a regular poster.

[generalvegitable]

or another idea could be progressing through historical classes or notable Locos/units up until one of the new state of the art trains that run the network today, for example, a new member would be "catch me who can" or "locomotion" then "rocket" and so on up to something like "class 395 Javelin"