Do you want ranks introduced?

Had a couple of requests for this.
Do members want ranks introduced based on number of posts one has made.
Instead of going for players name I was thinking more along the lines of
Reserve Team
First Team Squad
First Team Bench
First Team Starter
Manager
Cult Hero
Legend

Yeah Chris, I agree, I think that's an excellent idea, and is certainly better than my original one!

this might make people post a lot of shit just to get to starter and above though.

On the other hand it might encourage more activity.

We'd have to introduce rules on posting (without being too restrictive). I mean it can't be worse than some of the garbage that was posted in the FB discussion group.

Chris Chan wrote:On the other hand it might encourage more activity.

We'd have to introduce rules on posting (without being too restrictive). I mean it can't be worse than some of the garbage that was posted in the FB discussion group.

Yeah, I'd hope this wouldn't be a problem. Also, for better or for worse, we have far fewer members than we had on Facebook.

I do think its a good idea and I am pro this idea... Not much that can go too wrong i suppose considering the moderators' powers here.

Yes, since I've already amassed quite a number of posts and am sure I'll get a decent rank unlike some of the other forums I've been on

yeah why not, its a bit of fun and like you say if it encourages decent activity then all good

absolutely.as long as admins handle it in a controlled way

Every how many months should the number of posts change? If let's say 500 posts now=starter, surely a year later it must be a 10000?

Or we just set high (but not impossible targets).

Yeah ranks will be awesome.

I think it will be good. Maybe make it quite easy to move up a couple of ranks. Say 50 posts to get out of bottom level.

Then more spaced out as you move up.

I think Youth Team could be lowest rank?

Jonathan Prendergast wrote:I think it will be good. Maybe make it quite easy to move up a couple of ranks. Say 50 posts to get out of bottom level.

Then more spaced out as you move up.

I think Youth Team could be lowest rank?

Nah we'll start with Squillaci, Arshavin, Almunia and then goes on to the reserves

Samritpal Singh wrote:

Nah we'll start with Squillaci, Arshavin, Almunia and then goes on to the reserves

Once a person gets ranked Squillaci, you'll see more activity from them in an effort to get rid of that rank.

oh god, the shame of being squillaci would definitely make me up my activity!!

I wish there were a way to make only the worthwhile posts count (like, not this one.)

I agree Joey. Some people in the Facebook group were very active on the board but spent most of their time on Random or discussing TV shows, Religion or Cricket rather than Arsenal topics. So an Arsenal rank of 'Club Legend' might be unwarranted and any bragging rights associated with it diminished.
Not that I'm against people discussing non Arsenal related topics or anything..
The great thing about the Facebook group was there were so many differing views and opinions on everything not just Arsenal.

Yeah, how weird would it be for someone to gain the status of club Legand for discussing cricket when they could be jerking their knees all over the place and asking for Ramsey to be sold instead? (Not aimed at the above poster). There are no bragging rights associated with making a lot of posts, regardless of what the posts are about.

David Hogan wrote: There are no bragging rights associated with making a lot of posts, regardless of what the posts are about.

So wouldnt that make the ranking system utterly pointless then?

I think it's a bit pointless. But it's harmless. If people want it, I don't care.

It's good for new people on the forum to know who to pity most..