What's going on?

Because you 'only' have 130 posts, they have probably set the amount of posts to become a player a bit higher(maybe accidentally while changing version of this forum...):confused:

If you go into your profile, you can change your description to whatever you like. Philler, I suggest you should be wallpaper expert, or dead man watcher. You might notice that images in sigs are switched off at the moment.
:D

I know but I just couldn't be arsed to change it in my profile:)

I was a veteran... :eek:

I'm not THAT old :D

I think it's OK to up with the post number status... there are a good number of >1000 posters, and the minimum posts to become a "Player" was about 75... which was very low.

Originally posted by PhiLLer
I know but I just couldn't be arsed to change it in my profile:)


Always slacking off :rolleyes: :D

Actually, we're requesting you guys to keep it to the default settings. We are thinking about using the descriptions not only as a post reminder, but as a way to tell people or notify people of violations or bans.

Waterboy
Bench Player
Player
International Player
Veteran
Legend

Hey Joe, I'm a Veteran, I've been here longer than you it seems! I have been here two years come the 25th!!!!!

How much posts do we need for Legend?

It goes by posts Celtic. And actually I was here back in 1999.....

I think the new system is wuite cool
being able to put in what ever you want !!

but true that the ranking style makes you know who other people are .. respectwise etc
but the post number only can do that I suppose

I think you get Legend status for something like 2,000 posts. I see Alenitchev is still classed as a "Veteran"...

Originally posted by ShearerM4
I think the new system is wuite cool
being able to put in what ever you want !!

but true that the ranking style makes you know who other people are .. respectwise etc
but the post number only can do that I suppose

I like the idea of a sort of ranking system. But I don't think posts should be the only thing that determines it. I think member rating should come into play also. I mean no offence to those that have a lot of posts but I know some members who can get to 1000 posts in two months and I know of others that 500 in a year :rolleyes: . Some people have a lot to say with no substance. Some pick and chose their battles. Doesn't mean someone should be a player and the other should be a waterboy. If member rating, is a factor this will more accurately place members. (make the next member rating out of 10 pls). Also number of bans or whatever other form of punishment is in the forum should be factored in. Or am I making this too complex?

The rating thing is crap. If you take a active role in the community, there will always be some newbie arses that will rate you "1" just for the fun on it if you say something they won't like. I could post a formula, but... that would be wasting time.

I know, i had 3 votes at 5 * and then some git gave me a 1*, all because i had a different veiw from him.