Post count

[Charles]

There is no such thing as "forum post count."

I do not think any app reports individual post stats per app at this time.

[esquire]

There is no such thing as "forum post count."

I do not think any app reports individual post stats per app at this time.

​So does this mean that:

(1) currently there is no function that can be used to output a user's forum post count, gallery image count, blog post count, etc. ?

(2) that levels will work as stated earlier, using ALL type of content count equally? From what I recall, IPB 3 levels were completely based upon forum post count.

[Charles]

Yes both those points are right.

[esquire]

Charles, thank you for the quick answers.

A sincere thought -- I'm getting the feeling that IPS 4 was approached to build the best Suite you could conceive, not wanting to look back much at the past. I think you guys did a great job with a lot of it the more I investigate, with some really inventive things too. But some of these things can significantly affect the way communities have been run and that some of these changes may become much more apparent with a live community. How much legacy support do you envision? For example, if content is now being used instead of posts for user levels, could a weighting system be built in to help admins deal with a significant change?

[craigf136]

Then to me, this is a major game changer and I need to review either all the awards and things we currently do to reward our users based on forum participation or stay on 3.4.7. I don't want comments, files, events, etc. to be counted towards a users forum post count or content count as it's now known in 4.0

Surely a compromise can be achieved?

[Charles]

Be it a post in a forum, a post in a blog comment, a post in a file review, or whatever else it is: these are all still a post that the user made. So obviously that total count of posts shows under their profile. If anything one could say the 3.x way was wrong and should have been addressed long ago.

This seems to make basic sense to me. As a user, if I click "Submit" on an input form I don't really think about where that form is. All I know is I submitted a post and I want credit for that on my profile's counter.

[craigf136]

I appreciate that @Charles and I understand the reasons behind it, but this is not how communities have been run, this is how members have been rewarded and this is a major change in the system.

This means that many, many communities will be unaware of this significant change and this issue will need to be addressed as a result.

[Charles]

I appreciate that @Charles and I understand the reasons behind it, but this is now how communities have been run, this is now how members have been rewarded and this is a major change in the system.

This means that many, many communities will be unaware of this significant change and will need to address this issue as a result.

​That may be so but I'm sure we can agree it makes more sense to the end user that every post they make increments their count. Sure you might have to adjust your settings a bit but it's only because the system makes more sense.

[xert77]

​That may be so but I'm sure we can agree it makes more sense to the end user that every post they make increments their count. Sure you might have to adjust your settings a bit but it's only because the system makes more sense.

​Is it possible to show the top ten posters in a block though? I don't care how they earn posts, I think it is good that they get rewards for all aspects of the site, I just wanna display a list.

[craigf136]

Sense to who? I understand the logic behind the change, I don't necessarily agree that it's right, seems like it a case of our way and that's it.

This is down to every community on how they want to implement post incrementation, surely we should decide on whether or not to increase a members count if they add a file or picture.

[openfire]

​That may be so but I'm sure we can agree it makes more sense to the end user that every post they make increments their count. Sure you might have to adjust your settings a bit but it's only because the system makes more sense.

​But what about the issue that esquire raises about photos? I don't consider these to be "posts". How much thought and effort goes into uploading photos? Zero effort. Yet they get credit as "posts" in this new scheme.

[Charles]

I appreciate that it means a new way of thinking but it's really a very simple concept to get behind. Every time a user posts content to your site the little counter on their profile goes "+1" ... it's that straightforward and makes perfect sense that it should work that way. It is not something we will be changing.

We may consider app-specific post counts or, more broadly, a user stats area under their profile that shows what they are up to Suite-wide. But the simple counter is going to stay a simple counter. It's simple like that. It counts. Counter.

 

[CheersnGears]

​But what about the issue that esquire raises about photos? I don't consider these to be "posts". How much thought and effort goes into uploading photos? Zero effort. Yet they get credit as "posts" in this new scheme.

​I would consider these to be posts.  When someone puts a photo on Facebook, they "post" the photo.

whether I post a photo in gallery, a comment on a blog, a comment on an article or starting a new topic... those are all posts and should be counted. The "it should only count if it is a post in a forum" mentality is very Board centric and doesn't take into account those of us who use the full suite.

It doesn't happen too often, but I side with Charles here.

[Charles]

​It doesn't happen too often, but I side with Charles here.

​Well I think that's all that needs to be said about this.

[craigf136]

OK, so we have 4 members

• Member 1 is participating in the forums, every day, 24 hours a day and averaging 2 topics a day and 10 posts a day, 10 comments in pages, 1 event a week, 1 file a day
• Member 2 is participating purely on pages and comments and making over 60 posts a day such as "ha ha, thats funny"
• Member 3 is posting pictures from random game images and posting 100 a day
• Member 4 is purely creating event entries in the calendar and post 1 event a week

Members 2, 3, 4 never participate in the forum itself.

Who is the more valuable member?

 

[Charles]

OK, so we have 4 members

• Member 1 is participating in the forums, every day, 24 hours a day and averaging 2 topics a day and 10 posts a day, 10 comments in pages, 1 event a week, 1 file a day
• Member 2 is participating purely on pages and comments and making over 60 posts a day "such as ha ha, thats funny"
• Member 3 is posting pictures from random game images and posting 100 a day
• Member 4 is purely creating event entries in the calendar and post 1 event a week

Members 2, 3, 4 never participate in the forum itself.

Who is the more valuable member?

 

​If you are asking my personal opinion I would say the member with the highest reputation as I don't care about post count. A member can reply "lol" to every post and get a high post count but I value the member who types out one, well thought out reply way more. Organically that person will get more "likes" or "up votes" on his one reply and therefore be ranked way higher. At least that's how I would run my site.

In your example every one of those 4 members could have been running around posting junk posts so either way the raw count doesn't tell you much about value.

[Rikki]

OK, so we have 4 members

• Member 1 is participating in the forums, every day, 24 hours a day and averaging 2 topics a day and 10 posts a day, 10 comments in pages, 1 event a week, 1 file a day
• Member 2 is participating purely on pages and comments and making over 60 posts a day such as "ha ha, thats funny"
• Member 3 is posting pictures from random game images and posting 100 a day
• Member 4 is purely creating event entries in the calendar and post 1 event a week

Members 2, 3, 4 never participate in the forum itself.

Who is the more valuable member?

 

The thing is, content count isn't a good way to judge value and never has been - someone who makes two posts can certainly be more valuable than someone who makes 50. It's the reputation system that helps you discover value in the content. Incidentally, we support 'reputation badges', which can highlight members with higher reputation next to their posts.

[CheersnGears]

OK, so we have 4 members

• Member 1 is participating in the forums, every day, 24 hours a day and averaging 2 topics a day and 10 posts a day, 10 comments in pages, 1 event a week, 1 file a day
• Member 2 is participating purely on pages and comments and making over 60 posts a day such as "ha ha, thats funny"
• Member 3 is posting pictures from random game images and posting 100 a day
• Member 4 is purely creating event entries in the calendar and post 1 event a week

Members 2, 3, 4 never participate in the forum itself.

Who is the more valuable member?

 

​Any member that is posting random game images on my site is going to get warned really quick.   If they are posting relevant content that happens to be mostly pictures, then they are participating even if it isn't a discussion.    Creating pictures, creating calendar events, creating topics is all creating content. ... which is precisely what you want to reward your users for doing.

I have one user who only ever posts Youtube videos of vintage car ads.   He never actually takes part in the discussion, but a discussion is very often generated from his posts by other users of the forum.  Why would I want to penalize him for his posts when they generates many more times what he originally posted.... even if he never replies?

Counting all user content is the correct path here.... if you have to adjust your reward structure to compensate for it, then that is the way to go... not artificially limiting rewards to your favorite type of content.

[craigf136]

So let me explain how we run our site @Charles and maybe that will help understand my point a little better.

Our site is based on strategies, theories, stories, we don't encourage post pumping for the sake of a higher post count. We encourage the use of the like system (we call it brains).

The more brains you get, the higher rated the post content you have added is. We don't actually use the "like" system as it is implement here, "brains" need to be earned by good quality content within the forum itself (our members are encouraged not to award brains just because the found something funny, but we because something was well thought out, researched and developed). It doesn't necessarily mean the post count that they have is good quality but it shows the participation within the forum is high and rewarded as a result, as well as the brains that they have achieved.

We will be using (or at least that was the case, I'm considering my way forward now) the suite as website, that allowed articles to be published by staff and to allow members to comment on them, those comments were to be purely comments outwith the forum application itself and not to count towards the overall post count.

Not allowing the site admin decide on what constitutes an increase in content count, seems a little narrow minded, when a setting can be implemented that allows us to increase post incrementation or not, similar to what is available on forums in 3.4

[Charles]

We are certainly open to the idea of limiting what increments the little counter if there is any widespread interest in it.

[craigf136]

Thanks for considering the change, appreciated.

@Rikki content "quality" is key here, not quantity. Someone who posts "ha ha ha" for example or "lol" is quickly warned and repeat offences dealt with via the warning system. Why should they then be able to go and make a one word reply to an article or a users photo or file and get away with it but still have the count increased?

I have already compromised with the like system being tied into so many different things, that we are adapting to changing "brains" to a more social side of things and doing a way with the additional like system we have installed.I don't think what I'm asking for is too much to ask and I don't think if you poll your customer base that they will all be thrilled with the idea either. Fundamentally it should be a setting, a setting that the site owner can implement or not and it should be within the suite as standard and before it goes gold.

You have to remember 4.0 is fantastic and I love what you have done, but for customers that have 3.4.7 and gallery, downloads, content a fundamental change is happening that they have no control over and IPS is forcing them to change they way they do things or go elsewhere because a setting does not exist - it's that simple.

[Rikki]

@Rikki content "quality" is key here, not quantity. Someone who posts "ha ha ha" for example or "lol" is quickly warned and repeat offences dealt with via the warning system. Why should they then be able to go and make a one word reply to an article or a users photo or file and get away with it but still have the count increased?

​I completely agree. It seems to me if you're already moderating poor quality content, then all remaining content is therefore of a pretty good quality and you'd want it to count as a contribution in the community whether it's a forum post or a gallery image?

[Flo44]

i would just mention another thing : Member are accustomed with the post counter to judge about the activity or Rank of a member in the community because on every other software there is only the post count That relate the member s activity. Therefore if the post count count another thing than posts every member will misunderstand why a member have too much posts and it will not be very fair for members That use only the forum app.

[craigf136]

​I completely agree. It seems to me if you're already moderating poor quality content, then all remaining content is therefore of a pretty good quality and you'd want it to count as a contribution in the community whether it's a forum post or a gallery image?

​Yes you are correct, but the the fundamental difference is, we provide the member with a place to post images, downloads (as long as the guidelines are adhered to) - if they want to submit a picture of a tree, then they can submit a picture of a tree. That choice is the users choice, the gallery is for them to use but not abuse. We won't remove it just because it has no relevance to the site.

It should not increase the post count (I use that term as that is industry standard for forums - which is what this entire suite is built on the back off). I don't understand the difficulty in given us the clients the ability to switch counter on or off per application?

 

[esquire]

I think it is a very large assumption to believe there is one right way to approach how numerous different communities prioritize their content. Options certainly could have and should be provided. One assumption of what is "right" doesn't make sense to me.

Can someone operate IPS without a forum and only pages and gallery? The vast majority of sites focus on a forum with other modules complimenting the forum activity if desired. But you would have us accept that the only right answer is that all content should be treated equally for purposes of ranking? 

As iterated above, many communities spent years focusing on forum content and users have earned all types of rewards based upon that system. Changing the system for a particular community seems more wrong then the solution provided now. What wasn't broken didn't need fixing. I think the impact will be seen once achievements have been re-calculated and presented. Users who suddenly find themselves losing out may be furious. I don't know that explaining how this is really the right way will be acceptable nor should it.