Forum Rank Change Proposal

[Laura F.]

Hello Forum Users!

Sorry for our delay with updates to the forum ranks, I have been quite busy.  I continue to look forward to this project and we have come up with some ideas for how the new ranks would work.  We still plan to combine statistics from both ni.com/community and the Discussion Forums. 

The following graphic indicates the activities that would count in each section of the ranks.  To keep it easy to understand, our current proposal is to just have each activity in the separate sections count equally.  For example, in the engagement section, a tag would count the same as a Kudos.  We would sum all of the activities to get an overall score for that section.  Many of the items I have listed are from ni.com/community such as comments, rating, tags, answering polls, questions answered.

I am interested in your thoughts - especially about the activities included and ideas for names of the different sections. 

Regards,

Laura
Web Support & Operations
National Instruments

[Ben]

I like it and have nothing to add.

Q

Knight of NI status previously dropped the pre-fix (Proven) and post fix (Veteran).

So same pattern or will ther now be eight type of Knight of NI possible?

Either way bring it on!

Ben

[RavensFan]

I like them as well.

The next question is where certain breakpoints are reached like for age.  5 ranges are listed, but we only have 3 names.  I think keeping just the 3 names are fine.  My registration date is 2006, so in a few months I'll be at 3 1/2 years.  That puts me right in the middle of the middle range.

As for Knights, I don't think any other prefixes or post-fixes are necessary and can stay the same as it is now.  Any one who is a knight certainly has enough kudos and solutions to qualify as Obsessed.  And would certainly have to be up there in registration age in order to accumulate 10,000 posts or more.

[altenbach]

---

Ben wrote:

So same pattern or will ther now be eight type of Knight of NI possible?

---

"Obsessed Knight of NI" sounds a bit mental. 😄 I think a knight does not need levels.

[Cory_K]

Those metrics should work great. Nice work.

Maybe I'll finally get to rank above 'Trusted'

[Pnt]

---

Laura F. wrote:

in the engagement section, a tag would count the same as a Kudos. 

---

It does not looks fair.

Kudos should have a higher positition in hierarchy.

All others looks fine. I also agree that a Knight of NI, should stay as it is.

[Ben]

---

Pnt wrote:

---

Laura F. wrote:

in the engagement section, a tag would count the same as a Kudos. 

---

It does not looks fair.

Kudos should have a higher positition in hierarchy.

All others looks fine. I also agree that a Knight of NI, should stay as it is.

---

At first I agreed but then I thought about the long tem value of the two activities. Tags are used to help the serach engine find an answer but Kudos have no no long term value in the community. And since we can not "correct" "solution markings" (people often mark themselves thinking that will close the thread) again, no long term value.

Coming at this from the other side

Yes many noobs add a bunch of tags when they post a Q and some of them are just a cut-n-paste of their Q (oh bother). But for those who are not just cutting and pasting, they are entering teh key words that they thought should get them an answer. When someone answer their Q then we are putting the answer the tag without thinking about it.

So tags are probably one of the most helpful things we can do short of writting Nuggets, and answering Q's. It probably serve the community more than posting screen shots of code that other posted but did not include a screen shot.

So from the stand point of awarding the most recognition to those activities that are the biggest help, then tags are are gems that are just waiting to shine.

Yes tags are easy to post but that should not devalue them. A smile is also cheep but often appreciated when unexpected.

Ben 

[LabBEAN]

When I consider a comment or code snippet, I try to determine whether the source is credible.  Community participation is certainly one indication, so it seems logical that the new system be primarily based on participation.  My concern is that users that posted a handful of times in 2001, and haven't used LabVIEW since, are going to appear as Veterans.  I know I can look at the date of the post, but something about elevating someone's rank based on the passage of time seems misleading.

Ideally, imho, the last column would represent experience (i.e.  technology exposure and hours using the IDE).  But, there are obvious challenges to establishing someone's credibility in this way (e.g. why is Greg McKaskle a "Regular"?).  So, if a competency matrix is impossible, rankings are based solely on participation, and you want the last bar to represent "time" -- maybe it could have something to do with hours logged instead of years passed.

If you wanted to extend "hours logged" to the IDE itself, this could be a field where a user estimates his/her total development hours on their Profile page.

[Wayne.C]

I have to agree with LabBEAN.  We could end up with a lot of 'Senior Project' veterans.  I'll throw this out and then shut up. 

Perhaps  last column should be more about how many years a member has been active.  As long as you remain active you continue to advance ranking.  If you go inactive for a period of time you begin to lose ranking.  Some sort of running average to soften the decline?  Should be able to come up with some simple criteria to determine if someone has been active over a given year.

[muks]

Laura,

I hope you dont give trhe same weightage to tags and accepted solutions authored.