Stars

[Cowboy Dan]

Well, I didn't exactly mean stars. I meant that you go up in rank just by the number of posts. I don't think THAT is a good way to rate people. I think you stars should increase by the number of reps.

[caner5000]

I dont support because stars are a good way to rate a member. The stars system is used the same way it is used to rate cards and to me thats a good idea.....plus how do you think the army rates people, by stars and medals

[Cowboy Dan]

Well, I didn't exactly mean stars. I meant that you go up in rank just by the number of posts. I don't think THAT is a good way to rate people. I think you stars should increase by the number of reps.

[moneypony]

no,many people rep spam or give reps for just tiny things,you also shouldn't be rated by posts neither so i would say perhaps it should increase by your activity,if you were online for 6 months(not account created for that long,time spent online) of course a few minutes of inactivity will make it not go towards the count otherwise people will just be mostly AFK,it can also be counted by posts per day,if you have less then 1 post a day then you might no have enough to go to the next,i would also enjoy it if they count it by number of character in words but that will just make people post more posts with pointless details going away from what they would have said.i don;t think the post system is fair because it makes it seem that people who post more are greater than others,and most 5+ spam and some even banned,personally,i think i spammed once or twice but sometimes other people with lots of posts spam a lot.but a change of star system would be too big of a deal as they usually have to change some details which can't be reversed.

[Cin]

Well said. People even create multiple accounts to rep themselves, people would be repeatedly doing that.

 

Stars aren't all that important anyway. (I tend to personally look at what the member has said, then the number of posts)

[Pikachu]

Stars are nothing.

 

Oh, maybe some praises or saying 'Wow a 5-star, you must be a good member!' along the way. But no, it means nothing.

 

Do you know 2sick4u? He has only 800+ posts (I forgot) but yet a very respected member with lots of contributions.

 

There

[D-Striker]

No support, some people don't rep usually.

[Sammidysam]

Stars are nothing.

 

Oh' date=' maybe some praises or saying 'Wow a 5-star, you must be a good member!' along the way. But no, it means nothing.

 

Do you know 2sick4u? He has only 800+ posts (I forgot) but yet a very respected member with lots of contributions.

 

There

[/quote']All of those reasons were great, but I think that this one is the best.

 

Moneypony, if your stars went up by your activity, people would just leave this open all day. That is enough said for that idea.

 

Stars are as good as they should be.

[moneypony]

if you read,i said that inactivity for a minute or 2 will not contribute to the timer.

and changing the way we earn stars would be too big a deal and stars just show that you post a lot and people who post a lot aren't always the best member,some people give reps to people who make like 400 or 1,000 and sometimes 5,000 posts.