How long does one have to keep this title of 'newbie'?
LQ Suggestions & FeedbackDo you have a suggestion for this site or an idea that will make the site better? This forum is for you.
PLEASE READ THIS FORUM - Information and status updates will also be posted here.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I still think this should be about the fact that, one way or another, the word newbie connotes ignorance. Even if he doesn't mind it, that can't be appropriate for niels. Similarly, once we have the LQnewbie title, "member" connotes a level of expertise that can be misleading for newbies.
Level 1: hasn't heard of source code.
Level 2: thinks source is something to do with rivers.
Level 3: knows what source is.
Level 4: has trashed system by trying to compile source.
Level 5: has NOT trashed system by trying to compile source, but has lost Open Office in the process.
Level 6: has finally discovered that the source of all the problems is Microsoft.
FWIW, AFAIK all posting requires joining 1st; therefore it makes sense for the titles to include "Member". Including "Member" also tends to combat the impression that # of posts has anything to do w/ knowledge.
Also, I doubt that the post #'s dividing the levels will be changed. I do see the desirability of adding an additional level at 100, perhaps like this:
Code:
Posts Title
1 New Member
30 Junior Member
100 Member
1,000 Senior Member
5,000 (?? - TBD) Member, "LQ furniture", "LQ Addict", or "Guru"
"LQ Addict" & "Guru" are the current choices available to 5,000+ posters, I think that your "LQ furniture" is a really nice addition to those & I would like to see a "____ Member" choice. I just don't know what good suggestion for the blank would be. "Super-Senior Member" is the idea I want to convey, but I don't like the sound of it. "Master Member" would follow the pattern of the FAA in granting parachute rigging certificates, but I'm not sure I like it either.
too many alarums and excursions about labels. Who cares?
I myself posted a few months back about vetting members, when I wandered into a thread where the advice being given was compounding the OP's problem. I managed to solve the problem, too, though I had the OP doing some hex editing in order to do it.
It was pointed out to me (correctly) that LQ has no capability to vet posters and that no one is expert in all of this (can't be...too vast a subject which changes too quickly).
The only way around it that I see is to do what is done on some other boards; have the user self-rate in terms of experience. Labels could be something like newbie, casual user, user, advanced user, developer, master of the universe, guru, other where the user could put his own string in "other".
The occasional a$$ would self-rate as guru when his knowledge was minimal, but most people would do it right, and people reading threads could be guided thereby.
The only way around it that I see is to do what is done on some other boards; have the user self-rate in terms of experience. Labels could be something like newbie, casual user, user, advanced user, developer, master of the universe, guru, other where the user could put his own string in "other".
The occasional a$$ would self-rate as guru when his knowledge was minimal, but most people would do it right, and people reading threads could be guided thereby.
Good idea. You could also have those being helped rate whether the advice proved beneficial, and so build up a picture that sorts out the self-proclaimed gurus. Or log the number of replies to other people's threads.
The archtoad set also seems to go a long way to address my concern:
Quote:
Posts Title
1 New Member
30 Junior Member
100 Member
1,000 Senior Member
5,000 (?? - TBD) Member, "LQ furniture", "LQ Addict", or "Guru"
Everyone's a member, so there's less reason for newcomers to draw inferences about expertise.
Yes, that's something that has niggled me a little in the back of my mind, "member" after 50 posts (ok it's 30 now) - wait, wasn't I a member before that?
unfortunately "junior" does for me as "newbie" does for some members here.
(see: http://thesaurus.reference.com/search?q=junior&x=0&y=0 "Synonyms: inferior, lesser, lower, minor, second-string*, secondary, subordinate")
Newbie Member? Brand New Member for 1 post. Newbie has precedence in the computing world.
You could also have those being helped rate whether the advice proved beneficial, and so build up a picture that sorts out the self-proclaimed gurus. Or log the number of replies to other people's threads.
I like the idea of rating, but what about those members that have been here for years, helping other posters? Will they start from zero?
but what about those members that have been here for years, helping other posters? Will they start from zero?
User rating would obviously be new, but replies to other people's threads might be pulled out from the trusty LQ database?
Quote:
unfortunately "junior" does for me as "newbie" does for some members here.....inferior, lesser, lower, minor, second-string*, secondary, subordinate
I think you are right there. But there's a place for something (less normative) between "new member" and "member". I'd also personally prefer then to see member moved up from 100 to say 200 or 250 posts.
I've been reading over this posting and I agree with Andrew that I don't really mind being called "Newbie" although at the same time I aspire to become a member. Maybe there could be newbie for the first 10 and then junior member till 50 if you want to rate time/#posts. Also, I like the idea of self-rateing (I would still pick newbie ) for those who are more experienced. ~just my opinion.
---------------------------------------
True wisdom consists of knowing that you know nothing.
Seems to me we have two separate classifications: 1)Experience 2)Contributions. Is it not true when one joins one becomes a member and when one posts a solution to a question one becomes a contributing member? Out of all who join, how many are willing to share their experience? I feel strongly that 'contributing members' should be recognized for their unselfishness. Perhaps 'new member' should relate to the legnth of time since joining, 'member' after their first posting, then recognize regular contributors with senior, guru, and the like?
Yeah, but you must make a distinction between contributing members in cash, as it has been until now, and in expertise.
Gosh ! XavierP just thought the same thing as me !
And if a member should decline the title of "senior" ?
I wouldn't mind being called "older" member, considering my posts show more of my getting sillier as time goes by instead of my increasing knowledge.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.