Group/Rank Promotions based on more than just post count?

[cheatmaster30]

Could IPS make an option to do this in future? Because at the moment, I have to say the whole 'promote member if they've posted X amount of times' thing is kind of too easy to abuse, and I think the solution would be to have a system sort of like how Lithium does usergroup promotions.

How did they do this?

They made it so you could set users to be promoted based on things like days registered, topics/posts/content viewed, time online, etc as well as posts, and so you could mix different criteria for each promotion. So for instance, on the official Nintendo forums, to reach the rank of Fox Brigade you'd need to have:

21418 posts, 41602 minutes, 402447 Page views, 831588 messages read, 16957 board views, 694 logins, 243 Days since registration

Rather than just 21,418 posts.

That's kind of how IPB should do things in my opinion. Make it so you have all these different possible criteria for rank ups, and the option to either use just one or multiple criteria to go up a group/rank. Here are some things I think should be possible 'level up' criteria:

• Post count
• Reputation/likes count
• Days since registration
• Time spent online
• Topics/posts viewed
• Page views
• Logins
• Blog entries posted
• Gallery images uploaded
• Files uploaded
• Gallery images viewed
• Files downloaded
• Time spent in chat room
• etc

That way, each site can have a rank up/level up/promotion system that suits the needs of its members and admins rather than just a boring old 'post this much to get a new rank' one. You could mimic the Nsider/Lithium forum rank structure. You could mimic GameFAQs and its karma system (1 karma per day you log in, then promotions at every few hundred/thousand karma). Even the systems on sites like Reddit or the like based on your reputation and what not.

So yeah, I want to see something like this in a future version, does anyone else?

[cheatmaster30]

So, guess there's no interest in updating the ranks system then? Okay I guess. Never knew people wanted everything purely post count based.

[MMXII]

It is not a bad idea to improve auto-promote options. However, I guess most people are just waiting for IPS 4 and first want to see, what this major upgrade has to offer. And who knows... maybe they included some new auto-promote features? ;)

[Izaya Orihara]

I am bumping this thread up a bit to see what the staff's thoughts are on implementing this?

[Tracy Perry]

Yep... being able to promote just based upon two factors is rather weak in todays day and age of promotions in scripts. Even myBB 1.8 has 7 or 8 criteria you an use.  It is very limited in what you can use it for after you get used to promotions in other packages.

The package I use currently as a primary one has MANY more than that.  In fact, some get easily confused by it's complexity - but that complexity brings a real power to promotions for use in different aspects.

One example I gave was using custom fields. 

I have a site that members are frequently participants in a specific group (Gold Wing Riders Association, HOG, Patriot Guard, etc).  During sign up they are asked if they are a member of any of those groups.  If they elect Yes then a promotion runs which adds them to a secondary group and grants them access to that group forum (which nobody else can see).

[esquire]

I mentioned this a while ago. A problem I have with IPS 4 is that it doesn't seem like the parts for promotion and reputation are connected nor do they work together congruently, e.g

Reputation =  Best Answer, Up/Down (perhaps the same as Likes) or Liked Post, etc.

Content Count = individual content contributed, blog post, article, new forum topic, forum reply, file, calendard date, etc.

IMHO, all of these should have an admin assignable importance level. The admin should also have a choice to promote based up either or both metrics. Haven't heard a plan to implement either.

[Lindy]

I've added this to our internal tracker for further consideration. In the grand scheme of things, I don't see it being a high priority item (I haven't seen this come up since the creation of the topic and that was in 2013.) I would think this would be an opportunity for a marketplace developer, but we can certainly look at enhancing the core functionality. 

 

[Tracy Perry]

I don't know how familiar you are with the XenForo promotion system - but I'd be concerned that the complexity involved in interfacing with the promotions at a very high level would end up in the add-on being rather pricey - not to mention I'd rather be dependent on the core than paying for another package for what should be native.  For something like this, most people I know would rather have the feature as core.  It's just an area that is rather weak in the core of the script.  That's not a "bad" thing - but if someone who has used other scripts with those features moves over to this one  then they really realize how big of a weakness it is.

 

Those that have used nothing but  IPS or those that used other scripts but not promotions do not realize how powerful that function/feature is.  The prevalent attitude seems to be "Well those two types work fine for me" - and granted, they might.  But the possibilities of doing more are not apparent to them since they have had no exposure to it and don't know what promotions are really capable of.

 

It appears that most are concerned with using it for rank.  My desire is to use it for actual programmatic promotions based upon criteria that allow certain functions/features for that group.

[Lindy]

Yes, it's understandable if you're used to something, move to another platform and it doesn't exist. Likewise, if you were to move from IPS to something else - you'd experience the same. 

I would suspect, if anything, we can make improvements to the core functionality. Others may have had feedback through other mediums (managed client feedback, sales, etc.) that are not prevalent here, which is the purpose of our internal discussion tracker, but as it stands, I've not seen this come up. Given the complex nature of what you're describing, I would say the cost to develop vs benefit ratio probably isn't there, but we've been surprised before. These types of topics are important for vetting feature requests in addition to our other channels.

[Kevin Carwile]

I'd be concerned that the complexity involved in interfacing with the promotions at a very high level would end up in the add-on being rather pricey

Here's an application that's already in the marketplace for IPS4 that can do everything described... and it's free.

 

[Tracy Perry]

Here's an application that's already in the marketplace for IPS4 that can do everything described... and it's free.

 

And as the famous rallying cry of a rabid IPS supporter I know ... why should it depend on an add-on that may not get updated?  

 

Something like this should be core - it is in every other script I've used or evaluated.

By making it core, add-on developers can easily link their add-ons into the promotion criteria.  And to top it off, that is limited to 10 rules.  Heck, one of my other sites I have 23 criteria based promotions.

[Lindy]

And as the famous rallying cry of a rabid IPS supporter I know ... why should it depend on an add-on that may not get updated?  

 

Something like this should be core - it is in almost every other script.

We're not "every other script" and aren't aiming to be - I assume that's why you chose IPS. As said, if a request becomes popular or something we feel we could expand on to be of greater benefit than what's being asked for, we have no issue adding it. We have 8 complex applications - we're not just "a script" so we do need to be very mindful of adding things just because. 

If it becomes a popular request or again, something we're getting feedback on through other channels, we'll definitely give it consideration. It seems like a cool idea to me personally, but that alone doesn't mean it's worth adding. It needs further evaluation and consideration and since October 2013 when this topic was started, there doesn't seem to be strong demand compared to more pressing things that many more can benefit from, such as social groups.

By and large, after having done this for so long, most either: simply want to ensure someone is active before they get promoted to full member status -or- they use commerce and sell membership levels. Is there a need for more complex promotion criteria in the stock product? Perhaps! That's the purpose of feedback such as this. 

 

[Tracy Perry]

We're not "every other script" and aren't aiming to be - I assume that's why you chose IPS. 

No, that's not the reason why I did.  

And you are using circular logic.  Just because it doesn't exist in the script people don't use it and aren't cognizant of how it can be used therefore they aren't as apt to input on it since they don't use it and don't need it.

And yes, comparison to other scripts ARE valid as promotions are a basic function that has been around for a while and have been based on various default criteria.  What's really weak about the current is you can't even restrict approved media.  

Generally the ones that HAVE had exposure to other scripts recognize the way the current lacks power.

It will work for my current site, but like I have said - there is no way it could work on my other 2 due to the promotion requirements.  And one shouldn't have to spend another $35 and then $25 a year just to have the ability to perform simple promotions other than how many approved items you have submitted or how long have you been a member.  

Hopefully it will be something that gets addressed.  If not, all it does is limit it's use on any additional projects I have.  

 

[Kevin Carwile]

why should it depend on an add-on that may not get updated? 

My goodness. You can use the add-on for free... it was built to do exactly what you are trying to do... and it was updated less than a week ago. Sounds like this may not be a technical problem and more of a philosophical one.

[Tracy Perry]

My goodness. You can use the add-on for free... it was built to do exactly what you are trying to do... and it was updated less than a week ago. Sounds like this may not be a technical problem and more of a philosophical one.

So, if I end up with 23 promotions based upon criteria (which is what I use at one of my forums and 18 at the other) it's free?

[esquire]

The concept of rewarding users for their contributions have been around for as long as I can remember. After all, these are what the Reputation and User Rank systems are supposed to represent even in IPS... are they not? Gamification, Reward Systems, Awards, Toplists. For example, how can you have Reputation levels without tying in BA? I'm actually surprised that even this is considered a secondary thought thanks to current user suggestion. I guess opinions will vary. But IMHO - IPS 4 feels like it's goal is to be an incredibly versatile system that impressively addresses many types of UGC and community sites but doesn't plan to nail down all the essentials of any one in particular. Personally I'd rather have something that does only the fewer things it is designed to do extremely well.

My goodness. You can use the add-on for free... it was built to do exactly what you are trying to do... and it was updated less than a week ago. Sounds like this may not be a technical problem and more of a philosophical one.

Looks great but these are almost always lesser compromises. If it's not in the core then the developer of a promotion / reputation system will only include functionality in the core and maybe a popular plugin or two. And each new plugin may not be created with a plugin in mind although they would if it was in the core. I used vBulletin for over 15 years and the greatest free system existed, without a doubt. But the developer couldn't keep up with all the different variations of addons that came out and eventually I had to uninstall it, leaving many unhappy users. My biggest fear is that an essential part of my site's driver and incentive system will live or die by the interest of a third party developer who may not see it as a dedicated long term project.

 

[GrooveOnBeat]

 

The concept of rewarding users for their contributions have been around for as long as I can remember. After all, these are what the Reputation and User Rank systems are supposed to represent even in IPS... are they not?

[ghinton]

I was very surprised to realize that this was not in the core functionality, as I am finding quite a number of things. And to be quite honest, I get tired of hearing about getting a plug-in to do something. The development on plug-ins for 4.0 is pretty abysmal to say the least, so the likelihood of finding what you may need is slim to none right now. And also, why should you have to spend hundreds of dollars on plug-ins for stuff that is pretty much standard on every other similar software out there?

[Izaya Orihara]

But in a traditional forum setting, 90 percent of the forums promote based on post count OR the time a member has been on the site.

To me, while this added functionality would of course be a great addition to the core product, is basically a minority/niche group of people and something that isn't what the software needs to be focused on implementing.

I was very surprised to realize that this was not in the core functionality, as I am finding quite a number of things. And to be quite honest, I get tired of hearing about getting a plug-in to do something. The development on plug-ins for 4.0 is pretty abysmal to say the least, so the likelihood of finding what you may need is slim to none right now. And also, why should you have to spend hundreds of dollars on plug-ins for stuff that is pretty much standard on every other similar software out there?

IPS is certainly not the only product you'll hear the "Get a plug-in" for

The development for 4.0 plug-ins is actually pretty good to me. Considering, we've not even been gold for 3 months and that particular section is about 300 or so products already. Do keep in mind this is a rewrite and many people were waiting for it to become gold(I guess some were waiting for 'official gold' announcement) so I wouldn't call the development abysmal in the least. Nor is a blanket statement of not being able to find what you need accurate for all of us as clients.

The only mod I am truly missing out from 3.X is the credits/store add-on and from my knowledge, that will be coming in due time.

The concept of rewarding users for their contributions have been around for as long as I can remember. After all, these are what the Reputation and User Rank systems are supposed to represent even in IPS... are they not? Gamification, Reward Systems, Awards, Toplists. For example, how can you have Reputation levels without tying in BA? I'm actually surprised that even this is considered a secondary thought thanks to current user suggestion. I guess opinions will vary. But IMHO - IPS 4 feels like it's goal is to be an incredibly versatile system that impressively addresses many types of UGC and community sites but doesn't plan to nail down all the essentials of any one in particular. Personally I'd rather have something that does only the fewer things it is designed to do extremely well.

Looks great but these are almost always lesser compromises. If it's not in the core then the developer of a promotion / reputation system will only include functionality in the core and maybe a popular plugin or two. And each new plugin may not be created with a plugin in mind although they would if it was in the core. I used vBulletin for over 15 years and the greatest free system existed, without a doubt. But the developer couldn't keep up with all the different variations of addons that came out and eventually I had to uninstall it, leaving many unhappy users. My biggest fear is that an essential part of my site's driver and incentive system will live or die by the interest of a third party developer who may not see it as a dedicated long term project.

 

And I'd prefer a product that is not catering to anyone group in particular because then you run into an issue where your product is incredibly great for ONE person/type of customer but incredibly restrictive to others(See Apple products, Xenforo, etc etc). It's great to be a master but when you can only master ONE TRICK, I'd take a jack of all trades. With a Jack of all trades, it may not be perfect in one particular area(Which IPS is not at times...). but it at least can adapt to my needs because it reaches more people than trying to cater to a subgroup. Not my best example this early in the AM, but i know what i mean LMAO.

One thing I can say about IPB the last few years I use it, I trust and have faith in most of our developers. I certainly can't say that for developers of other platforms I've used(Shady business and illegal connections) that they will properly develop a feature. You run the risk of any thing you use being discontinued at any time. IPS could just discontinue IP chat at any given moment, I'd be up a creek without a paddle. Thankfully, we have chat alternatives should that ever arise but still. I prefer to buy and use for my needs presently than worrying about 'what if this developer maybe decides not to update said product'. I look at few other popular platform developers and how many of them  abandoned the platform and at least in my own experience, I've yet to run into that issue except once with IPB. Which isn't too pressing. It was the Mentions mod we used in 3.X that we now have core in Version 4.

But of course our needs, wants and experiences will vary and I do wish many people would realize that when they demand for this feature or that feature or complain that this feature is lacking or missing. Many/most are not bothered affected so we probably shouldn't speak collectively for all customers. I think feedback frompeople would've been great early on but I am glad they didnt take a select few people because you run the risk of certain big board owners(not sayign names) demanding features that benefit them and other big board owners and possibly not  benefiting medium and smaller board owners such as myself.

[esquire]

And I'd prefer a product that is not catering to anyone group in particular because then you run into an issue where your product is incredibly great for ONE person/type of customer but incredibly restrictive to others(See Apple products, Xenforo, etc etc). It's great to be a master but when you can only master ONE TRICK, I'd take a jack of all trades. With a Jack of all trades, it may not be perfect in one particular area(Which IPS is not at times...). but it at least can adapt to my needs because it reaches more people than trying to cater to a subgroup. Not my best example this early in the AM, but i know what i mean LMAO.

If you're going to even have the boldness to attempt to be a jack of all trades then you have to master the essentials of each of them - or very few will ever be satisfied. Instead, they will turn to tools that get done what they want to accomplish. For example, there is little point in having a Stack Exchange type of expert system if it doesn't have the awards system necessary to go with it. You can argue that it's not essential and that's fine. But if you've ever been around one you know that it's a major driver, like it or not. And if it's missing, good luck trying to get people to use it, let alone buy it.

One thing I can say about IPB the last few years I use it, I trust and have faith in most of our developers. I certainly can't say that for developers of other platforms I've used(Shady business and illegal connections) that they will properly develop a feature. You run the risk of any thing you use being discontinued at any time.

The problem is that things like we're discussing aren't add-ons or anything that usually don't come connected that I've ever seen. If you've got Best Answers, Up/Down and LIkes, there is supposed to be a point to all of them appearing. It's not supposed to be there just for window decoration. And if you think a developer wants to tackle a project like this, good luck. Be prepared to cough up more money for each effort, which is far more work than it would be if in the core (and have it work for every add-on you've created.) And as you've pointed out, good luck getting customers to have their large sites rely upon the possibility that your dev guy has decided not to expend all that time. 

[Lindy]

 

Personally I'd rather have something that does only the fewer things it is designed to do extremely well.

I'm not sure that's completely accurate based on what I've seen. You want a product that fits your specific needs perfectly out of the box -- which apparently IPB (3.x) did. IPB was 13yrs old -- it was packed with features and functionality that made it so top heavy it would take ages to shoehorn features into which resulted in release upon release of bugs. You like to say we work in a vacuum in "stealth mode" and frankly, it frustrates me more than you can imagine. https://community.invisionpower.com/release-notes/  that is virtually all derived from feedback. Very little of it is from our internal roadmap at this point, which we will be rolling forward with in coming weeks. Not agreeing with your particular specific needs for a community or not being able to immediately act is not the same as not listening to feedback. There's a pretty large difference there. No, we don't ask for feedback on everything and we're not going to - if you would like that level of involvement in development, you should find a solid free/open source solution. We do talk to customers - we have focus groups, we garner feedback from this community, sales interactions, support, conference calls with managed clients, etc. We don't elicit everyone's opinion because at some point, we have to have less talking and more doing. We've explained our philosophy about solidifying the foundation before getting crazy with features and I feel we've demonstrated thus far that we have the ability to do that... the proof is in the pudding from 4.0 to 4.0.9. 

If you take note of the list of people that have very vocal opinions here and elsewhere - it's literally the same dozen people or less (out of thousands) saying the same things over and over and my goodness, does it get tiresome sometimes, if I'm being honest as to newcomers, it appears to be epidemic level feedback, when a look at the author info reveals it really is the same group of people - it's something I feel we're going to have to deal with at some point and simply say "maybe the product isn't right for you after all - I'm sorry." In some regards, I'd like to personally buy licenses for other products just so we can move forward without the constant distraction on where we've been vs where we're going.  

I love solving problems; I love turning a negative situation into a positive one and reaching a middle ground when possible and above all, I truly love making a client happy. At some point though, I have to just accept "this client thinks their community represents all communities and is not open to anything else, nothing I say will please them and we all need to move on." IPS is stronger now than we were 4 years ago, gaining business on both ends of the spectrum and the overall feedback on IPS4 is better than even we had hoped. So, it's difficult to take seriously the notion that we've taken the wrong direction and approach - sales and overall feedback dictate otherwise and I feel we're doing something right and also feel the future is bright. There is, however, a lot to do and we will get there. As a client, you can either choose to evolve with the platform, find a different solution or continuously hammer the same points over and over and eventually be labeled a distraction instead of an asset. 

As for the topic at hand, I've been reminded that we have upcoming plans with social groups, reputation and a criteria system we can tie some promotion enhancements into. I don't have a timeline for that as Pages, Gallery and search improvements are next up as priority.

 

[iozay]

I am not a fan of including the whole list in... But promotions based on reputation is an extremely good idea(Not just a promotion on the amount of content but the quality of your content!)  

The other things are mostly a nice to have to me but not anything critical enough that it has to be a part of the core product.

[esquire]

 

I'm not sure that's completely accurate based on what I've seen. You want a product that fits your specific needs perfectly out of the box -- which apparently IPB (3.x) did. IPB was 13yrs old -- it was packed with features and functionality that made it so top heavy it would take ages to shoehorn features into which resulted in release upon release of bugs. 

Not at all! - I'm thrilled if items like these are in the master IPS plan!   Lindy... I totally appreciate your taking the time to politely answer questions the best you can. I think that's why lots of people are here.

You like to say we work in a vacuum in "stealth mode" and frankly, it frustrates me more than you can imagine. https://community.invisionpower.com/release-notes/  that is virtually all derived from feedback. Very little of it is from our internal roadmap at this point, which we will be rolling forward with in coming weeks. Not agreeing with your particular specific needs for a community or not being able to immediately act is not the same as not listening to feedback. There's a pretty large difference there. No, we don't ask for feedback on everything and we're not going to - if you would like that level of involvement in development, you should find a solid free/open source solution. We do talk to customers - we have focus groups, we garner feedback from this community, sales interactions, support, conference calls with managed clients, etc. We don't elicit everyone's opinion because at some point, we have to have less talking and more doing. We've explained our philosophy about solidifying the foundation before getting crazy with features and I feel we've demonstrated thus far that we have the ability to do that... the proof is in the pudding from 4.0 to 4.0.9. 

Rome certainly wasn't built in a day!   Thank you most sincerely for taking the time out of your busy day to try to provide a very complete response. This should not be understated and a main reason why I'm still here.

The release notes do show some willingness to listen of which you speak. But most of the foundation has been laid over the past 2.5+ years. Some of the changes were radical departures from the IPS 3 approach/philosophy. Choosing not to share these conceptual changes with the customer has nothing to do with the more public nature of open source software. It's about sensitivity to and managing expectations of customers. Imagine if a desktop software developer hyped its upcoming version in periodic blog posts with short videos of the product. Customers spent 2 years gradually upgrading their hardware based upon expectations -- only to find out on launch day that only web/SAAS versions would be offered!! 

I'm at a hard stop point even months after release of the beta on several fronts because of totally changing gears: I was shocked to discover radical IPS3 to IPS4 incompatibilities, such as Friends and basic forums. The Discussion Forum has no Best Answer option. The QA Forum has no viable discussion option, just a series of answers that go up and down. And IMHO, the QA Forum is still not usable because users will certainly try to have a discussion and it will render topics incomprehensible as I illustrated from a few minutes of use. And that there isn't any basic connection of the up/down and Best Answer out of the box - and that basic part really has to work or the users themselves will immediately be unhappy.

I'm just one guy along with the handful of people who thought the same. You're right - you have thousands of customers and none of them nor this small focus group has complained. Perhaps it will all work out just fine and it's just a case of a couple of squeaky wheels. Or maybe not, we'll see. But right now I'm stuck not knowing how to resolve this and to get IPS 4 to continue the IPS 3 approach. I can't afford to wait even longer and invest on faith that somehow, some way, this will be worked out. And TBH, I don't see what airing out what you guys plan to do at this very late date makes much of a difference. After this many months, people are either impressed or headed to find software that solves their need, open source or not.... 

[Lindy]

Thanks, esquire - I appreciate the response. 

I know friends and QA top your list (believe me, I know ) -- I'm going to demonstrate a point here. After seeing it in practical usage, we've recognized that the QA features we want to incorporate can't be done to our standard within the confines of the "forums" app. Our intent (and this of course is subject to change) is to split QA off into its own app where those features can truly involve and introduce a separate solution in the suite for handling basic things like "Best Answer", "Most Liked" etc. See, now the problem is, I know it's not going to end there and that's one of several reasons why we're hesitant to "air" things until they're fully vetted and we have a solid game plan in place... you're going to want to know things like: can existing QA be converted? what would the app cost? how will it work? what will it look like? what are we talking here, 3 months, 6 months? I need to know for planning purposes, etc.  We don't have all of that information available yet and I'm reasonably confident someone is going to make me regret even mentioning it at this point.  

The same principle applies to things like friends. I've said before, we're not going to (re)add a list of friends that does not benefit virtually the entire suite. We do have a lot of plans on the internal roadmap for social engagement and I can say I think your itch will be scratched. That's as much as I can say right now. Am I being too vague and secretive? Perhaps, but I don't feel a compelling obligation to share every detail of our operation beyond what's available in the release note tracker for several reasons: 1) It can become confusing and misleading if we outline something and we get into it and decide we need to do it differently, or another feature suggestion comes in (like this one) that we can incorporate, but changes the scope of the initial task somewhat.  2) Believe it or not, we do have competitors that are following us and we do prefer to keep things that are still a few months off under our hat. 

There were rumors for several years regarding the iPhone getting a bigger screen. Each year, people holding out were disappointed and they had no idea whether it was coming or not until the day it went on sale. An inside joke at IPS is the number of times I tried to switch to Android. All I wanted from an iPhone was a larger, more usable screen for my aging eyes. At the time, I was the minority -- many people thought huge phones were ridiculous. They'd release the next one without a bigger screen, but other cool features that I thought would make up for the lack of screen improvement like touchID, so I'd switch anyway - which worked for me for a while, but the small screen would eat at me... I'd switch to Android again, be miserable (but with a bigger screen) and the cycle would continue until the next iPhone release. FINALLY, everyone wanted a bigger screen and they released the 6 and 6+ (I went with the 6) and I had everything I wanted. Apple would never tell me when and if they were going to do it, but part of it is their business philosophy and part of it is their knack for creating buzz and controlling demand. 

The point is, if your equivalent of a bigger screen is a deal-breaker and you can't afford to wait any longer, you may indeed to wish to put yourself out of your misery and find a more immediate solution. While it may not make sense from the outside looking in - especially to the forum enthusiast crowd, we're moving at a very strategic and calculated pace and direction to ensure the foundation is solidified and that we're laying bricks in the appropriate order vs "eh, we'll do this and then come back to that later."

I'm sorry we're not in a position to give you a map of the puzzle to let you see how it all fits together and I know that people such as yourself have waited for what seems like an eternity already, but really, all that's left to do is continue to watch or find a narrower focused solution with a greater strength in the specific area(s) you're looking for immediately.  

[Joel R]

Apparently this necro topic came back to life with a roaring vengeance!  And I'm glad it did, because this is absolutely something that I would like to include in my IPS v4.  (This is genuinely one of the top three things that I wanted to include in my new v4.  I have a whole text file that I've been saving for the last year of fun ranks and awards!).  

My current problem with the way IPS counts total activity and total reputation is that it misses out on the many flavors of the underlying activity.  It also imparts equal value to non-equal activities.

This is why I strongly believe that IPS needs to provide metrics of content count and reputation for each  App.  

Then, the ACP can include an open system for promotions and awards where the admin can add and define multiple rules to form a single rank or award.  For example, one award for "Community Activist" can be based upon 3 underlying rules: 

• 10 forum posts
• 10 blog posts
• 10 gallery images

You get the idea.  By offering a usable framework, you unleash the creativity of your clients to offer these nuanced and incredibly powerful awards and grouprank promotions that are tailored to their own communities.