03-09-2008, 12:45 AM
|
|
Banned
Guru
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Evicted by the Landlords
Posts: 3,450
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenaxFlatulus
There's a system of ranking done strictly by number of posts you make. Think of them as levels. You start off as an Observer, move to Correspondent, Sr. Correspondent, Journalist, Analyst, Guru. (Those aren't necessarily in order or all of them... I'm just working from memory here.) The more posts you make, the more you move up in ranking/levels. The faster you post, the faster you move up. Once you reach the level of Guru, you continue to get higher post counts, but there are no more levels to achieve.
Reputation points are awarded or taken away by other members. If someone reads a particular post you've made and like what you said, they can give you reps and you get more green dots as an indication that your posts tend to meet with approval. These are done anonymously.
Reputation points are taken away by users who disapprove of what your posts might say. These negative rep points require the user to comment on why they don't like your post. Still, this is done anonymously.
Credits (as I understand it) are given to you through a series of factors such as: how long you've been here, your rep points, the amount of posts you've made, etc... So, I think it's more a cumulative aggregate number that represents a lot of things.
This is a fairly new system to us all, and I'm still learning all the bells and whistles that go with it. As mods, when we have to step in and correct someone, we take these ranks, credits, and reps into consideration. That's why newer members don't get as much leeway rules violations as users who have been here a while and has a proven track record.
I hope this helps you with your question about ranking and points, etc...
|
I am a Nihilist, do I get exemption from the above?
|
heh
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
