D
DelJo63
At various times and threads, the value of post counts and/or user titles has been
aired. Personally, I think that the post counts lead to childish pseudo-status that invites poor behavior, ie
trivial comments and follow-ups with little substance.
Even the use of titles leans in that direction (imo).
The intent of both is clear (and somewhat useful), but
the big egos seem to use/abuse them. I wonder what would
happen if both were withdrawn (pure academic curiosity!)
Someone else commented in a P.M;
After many years in the corporate world, I observed that those with recognized titles
(eg Chief Scientist, Software Architect, Marketing Director) can and frequently intimidate others
in public meetings, sometimes unintentionally and sometimes not so!
When titles and status are not obvious to the participants, comments
get to be evaluated by there content, applicability, utility, and effectiveness rather
than the defacto credence that is applied to titled persons. It is then that
the informal leaders (ie: those without formal titles) rise to the occasion and their
comments are evaluated equally on the field of ideas.
With a population of naive users with little experience seek help online,
CLEARLY there is a need to identify those with experience from others with little.
Posting our background info in our profiles may not be sufficient for someone less familiar with the industry.
It's an imperfect world and public forums mirror the population they serve, so it's
unlikely that there's another solution that would avoid the appeal to authority that comes from time to time.
Please pardon the rant if you're offended. I hope we can ask ourselves
"Am I attempting to solve the user's problem" before we click Post Reply.
aired. Personally, I think that the post counts lead to childish pseudo-status that invites poor behavior, ie
trivial comments and follow-ups with little substance.
Even the use of titles leans in that direction (imo).
The intent of both is clear (and somewhat useful), but
the big egos seem to use/abuse them. I wonder what would
happen if both were withdrawn (pure academic curiosity!)
Someone else commented in a P.M;
Hmm.. personally, I find that it mimics life in a way.
Post count and titles are alike status in society, where people seek designer
goods, branded good looking digital gadgets, cars and apartments etc.
As such, perhaps this is like an extension of life in a way; removing it may prove to
lead to some unforeseeable detrimental circumstances.
Post count and titles are alike status in society, where people seek designer
goods, branded good looking digital gadgets, cars and apartments etc.
As such, perhaps this is like an extension of life in a way; removing it may prove to
lead to some unforeseeable detrimental circumstances.
After many years in the corporate world, I observed that those with recognized titles
(eg Chief Scientist, Software Architect, Marketing Director) can and frequently intimidate others
in public meetings, sometimes unintentionally and sometimes not so!
When titles and status are not obvious to the participants, comments
get to be evaluated by there content, applicability, utility, and effectiveness rather
than the defacto credence that is applied to titled persons. It is then that
the informal leaders (ie: those without formal titles) rise to the occasion and their
comments are evaluated equally on the field of ideas.
With a population of naive users with little experience seek help online,
CLEARLY there is a need to identify those with experience from others with little.
Posting our background info in our profiles may not be sufficient for someone less familiar with the industry.
It's an imperfect world and public forums mirror the population they serve, so it's
unlikely that there's another solution that would avoid the appeal to authority that comes from time to time.
Please pardon the rant if you're offended. I hope we can ask ourselves
"Am I attempting to solve the user's problem" before we click Post Reply.