User vs Member

Dav

Hello all,

The Commissioner and I were just having a chat and he said that someone had asked him what a "Registered User" was. Now we all know that it means someone with an account here on the site, but more or less since I started working in the office, we've always used the word member because "user" I think isn't correct. You don't use a community, you belong to one, so being a part of any of the communities on this site makes you a member of them and reminds us all that we're the ones who make it work as a group.

So with that in mind, does anyone think it daft (zing!) of us to propose a change from "Registered User" under everyone's name to "Member"?

Sad Professor

Yeah, I'd be cool with that.

But here's a more radical suggestion: don't have anything under a user member's name or make it customisable (without subscribing). What's the point of identifying someone as a "Member" or "Register User" except to distinguish them from a "Moderator", who arguably should only be identified as such in the forums they mod. It only adds to the sense of "us and them" that many people believe exists on the site.

TouchingVirus

What about the members without members? :pac:

But on a serious note I've always viewed users as a somewhat impersonal term, and one not quite indicative of a community or group of communities such as boards.

looksee

I would support the idea of mods only being identified in the forums they moderate, I have thought this would be a good idea for a while but I don't know if it would be practicable.

cyberwolf77

Sounds like a great plan to me.

Spear

looksee wrote: »

I would support the idea of mods only being identified in the forums they moderate, I have thought this would be a good idea for a while but I don't know if it would be practicable.

Last I recall, it's not due to the way the user groups work.

Can we presume "registered" is being dropped as it's fairly redundant.

seamus

What about a return to the "fun" (big inverted commas) tags, where your tag changed depending on post count? Except add in the join date to the fun as well.

So someone is "Newbie" for their first six weeks, then "Hasn't much to say" until they hit 500 posts, then when someone hits five years they get "Career in tatters", and so on. Come up with 30 or 40 different titles to keep things interesting which trigger depending on various criteria.

Spear

seamus wrote: »

What about a return to the "fun" (big inverted commas) tags, where your tag changed depending on post count? Except add in the join date to the fun as well.

So someone is "Newbie" for their first six weeks, then "Hasn't much to say" until they hit 500 posts, then when someone hits five years they get "Career in tatters", and so on. Come up with 30 or 40 different titles to keep things interesting which trigger depending on various criteria.

Those tag lines run a risk of offending someone given the 600,000+ registered accounts. I remember a case of someone getting the default tag of "freak poster" or the like, and wrongly though it was an attack on them. Something such as career in tatters probably wouldn't be well received given current economic woes. If we used dynamic tags they'd end up watered down to be completely PC and innocuous.

seamus

They could be used as "gobsh1te filter". Complain about the tags == siteban.

Beruthiel

seamus wrote: »

They could be used as "gobsh1te filter". Complain about the tags == siteban.

Beat me to it.

aoshea83

+1 on this, think it's a great idea

Merkin

Spear wrote: »

Those tag lines run a risk of offending someone given the 600,000+ registered accounts. I remember a case of someone getting the default tag of "freak poster" or the like, and wrongly though it was an attack on them. Something such as career in tatters probably wouldn't be well received given current economic woes. If we used dynamic tags they'd end up watered down to be completely PC and innocuous.

Agree with this and think it would be hard to keep them generic enough without offending someone. As for proposing a site ban for anyone who complains, I am only assuming that's a joke? I think doing so would be excluding people on the basis of not "knowing" Boards.ie which of course people won't if they are a newbie....something totally at odds with hoping to foster a community environment

MugMugs

Personally, I can see better things coming from your time. Like enhancing what's given to those who subscribe and sorting out the Avatar issue.

But if it's a quick fix then go for it.

GLaDOS

*shrug*, doesn't bother me, change it if you want. Not something I've ever really thought about.

OldGoat

Dav wrote: »

So with that in mind, does anyone think it daft (zing!) of us to propose a change from "Registered User" under everyone's name to "Member"?

I always look for the double entendre when I see the word Member being used. "Registered Dick" might be just as appropiate.

I'll agree to being called a Member if you'll agree to change the horrendously named 'UnFollow' button to "I'm bored with this thread now and I don't want to Follow it anymore" button.

seamus

Merkin wrote: »

Agree with this and think it would be hard to keep them generic enough without offending someone. As for proposing a site ban for anyone who complains, I am only assuming that's a joke? I think doing so would be excluding people on the basis of not "knowing" Boards.ie which of course people won't if they are a newbie....something totally at odds with hoping to foster a community environment

Well, you could always put a checkbox in the UserCP that says, "I'm a boring arse with no sense of humour and I take personal offence when a mindless algorithm applies a fun tagline underneath my username".

Or, "Hide tagline". But I prefer the former.

pickarooney

You'll essentially be changing it from something nobody sees to something people remark on and for no obvious gain.

What will be the equivalent tag for posts made by unregistered posters?

Merkin

seamus wrote: »

Well, you could always put a checkbox in the UserCP that says, "I'm a boring arse with no sense of humour and I take personal offence when a mindless algorithm applies a fun tagline underneath my username".

Or, "Hide tagline". But I prefer the former.

I can see how the former might be preferable Seamus but it mightn't be so side-splittingly funny to someone on PI with self-esteem issues for example? I get that being overly PC can be a complete pain in the Swiss Roll but seeing as the issue of bullying and exclusion is particularly topical at the moment I don't feel it's a good idea. Call me a boring arse if you want

Otacon

Dav wrote: »

Hello all,

The Commissioner and I were just having a chat and he said that someone had asked him what a "Registered User" was. Now we all know that it means someone with an account here on the site, but more or less since I started working in the office, we've always used the word member because "user" I think isn't correct. You don't use a community, you belong to one, so being a part of any of the communities on this site makes you a member of them and reminds us all that we're the ones who make it work as a group.

So with that in mind, does anyone think it daft (zing!) of us to propose a change from "Registered User" under everyone's name to "Member"?

But my funny* one wouldn't be funny anymore...

* may not actually be funny anymore.

GLaDOS

Otacon wrote: »

But my funny* one wouldn't be funny anymore...

* may not actually be funny anymore.

You could change it to some sort of 'dismembered' style joke

pickarooney

ScienceNerd wrote: »

You could change it to some sort of 'dismembered' style joke

I would have thought that would be reserved for banned users.

Merkin

Otacon wrote: »

But my funny* one wouldn't be funny anymore...

* may not actually be funny anymore.

Is that you Jimmy?

wnolan1992

I'd have nothing against the change, but tbh it seems like a non-issue really.

The "Registered" part of the tag draws the distinction between those that are members of the community and those that just use the community by lurking (obviously I don't me "use" as a derogatory term here, I lurked myself for years before joining), and I can't see how "Member" is somehow more inclusive...

As was posted earlier, I think there are better things that could be done in the same vain, such as the mods only appear as mods in their forum, cmods in their category etc.

seamus

Sorry, serious answer:

This does seem like a non-issue, as mentioned above.

Either go with my fun idea, or do away with a default tagline altogether. I don't see any gain in changing "Registered User" to "Member". In fact, removing the default tagline might make moderators stand out that bit more.

looksee

Am I missing something here, but if you have a user name aren't you automatically a registered user? If you are just lurking you don't show up anyway. So why do you need the tag at all?

I am sure somebody is going to point something out that will make me look stupid!


Edit: just read Seamus's post. Yes, what he said.

BENDERS LINKS

Spear

BENDERS LINKS wrote: »

We already have that, it's called subscribing.

BENDERS LINKS

Spear wrote: »

We already have that, it's called subscribing.

My name is URL

Worst Christmas present ever

Steve

What seamus said.

Inject some fun

El Guapo!

Doesn't bother me either way.
Would subscribers still be able to have "subscriber" or their custom tagline?

As was said though its not really an issue.
What I would like to see though, is in a thread, the OP has either "OP" or "Thread Starter" by their name. It'd be handy to know when the OP is responding in a huge thread without going back to page one to check.
Yes, I'm lazy and my memory isn't the best.
Now what did I come in here for again..............???