Different Ranks

I also think it is fine as it is. And the process of appointing senior members is clearly excellent - read almost any post by a senior member and you will appreciate why they have been selected.

For example, I noticed today (perhaps belatedly) that ajaxfetish has been promoted to Senior Member. When I joined the .org, he was among several people that made me feel very welcome, explained things, supported my stories and thoughts in the Main Hall and whose posts I always read with enormous interest. He epitomises the spirit of the .org and I knew I had found a place I would like to stay. Yet he has only some 550 posts.

His promotion is well deserved and demonstrates to me that the existing system is exactly what it should be.

It would be somewhat difficult to select new ranks -- This is a forum covering 4 (soon to be 5) games and 3 time periods, so the titles are not really the same in any...

Since I have first set foot in the Org, I've noticed most people who were there have either left or become Senior Members... or Asst. Mods... or Mods...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

Currently the ranks are Junior Member, Member, Senior Member, Assistant Moderator and Moderator.

---

In my opinion, there are only three member ranks - JM, M and SM. AM and Mod are staff positions rather than member ranks. Everyone has a member rank, some people also has a staff position as well. So for example, my member rank is Member and my staff position is Moderator.

But surely you accept that once someone is a moderator or assistant moderator this superceedes member / senior member.

I agree that these arestaff positions, but I would also say that they are ranks as they are cearly visable and different from other, normal ranks.

~:smoking:

They are visible, yes. But isn't that just because it's more important that a staffer be identified as their staff position rather than their member rank.

This doesn't mean that they are part of the same tree though. Should I stop being moderator, I would be identified as a member again. But I don't feel as though that would have been a three rank demotion - rather, as I say, that the staff position I had undertaken was removed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Epistolary Richard

So for example, my member rank is Member and my staff position is Moderator.

---

I think it's reasonable to assume that all AMs, Mods and Admins are de facto Senior Members, whether they had that rank prior to taking up the staff role or not.

I don't assume that at all. Staff members are often honoured as SMs after they step down but that's not always the case - so they must be members during their tenure (assuming they were beforehand) - otherwise those who were members would be being _demoted_ from being a de facto SM.

Well, perhaps. But Senior Member really isn't a rank per se. It confers no extra posting privileges, very much unlike the jump to Member from Junior. Yes, there are a couple of perks, but I don't in any way, shape, or form, "outrank" Tosa because I'm a Senior and he chose not to be.

In any case, Seniors are by selected by the Staff and granted by the Forum Admin, principally for helping out around the Org and generally being a good influence. Staff Members themselves are selected by the Staff in much the same process. I doubt the Forum Admin goes round and individually asks every other member of staff to vote on whether a resigning Mod or AM deserves to be a Senior. So I'd suggest that when you were offered a Staff position, implicit in the offer was the Senior Member "honorific".