New Groups and Privileges - PM use, etc. Offer Feedback here

[Vaughn Paul]

Hi everyone,
We've just finished adding a new member group, Frequent Contributors, and have also made changes to the other existing groups. For instance, the minimum number of posts to become a Senior Member has been reduced to 250 from 1000.

Why did we create all these groups in the first place? Because with each group comes certain privileges. By assigning privileges we can maintain the smooth functioning of the forum. For instance, now Newly Registered Users must have their first 9 posts approved by a Moderator. This has eliminated members joining and instantly instigating some trouble. Also, some members only joined to advertise their own products or services and were sending out multiple PM's and Emails to members. Now members have to submit 25 posts in order to be able to use PM's. The exception is that if you've used PM's in the past then you can have this enabled again by emailing a Administrator at [email protected] or [email protected].

Here's the updated list of the user Groups and their assigned privileges:

GROUPS AND PRIVILEGES:
1. Unregistered Users: Can read any post, except in Chat Room and Donor's Lounge. Can't post. Can't view profiles or member lists. Views ads until registered.
2. Newly Registered Users (Submitted 0-9 posts): Can read any post, except in Donor's lounge. Can post anywhere except in Chat Room or Donor's Lounge. Must have first 9 posts approved by a Moderator. Can't use Private Messages (PM), or view profiles or member lists.** Can't hide online status. Views no ads.
3. Registered Users (Submitted 10-24 posts): Can read any post. Can post in Chat Room and anywhere except the Donor's Lounge. Can't use Private Messages (PM).** Can view profiles and members lists and send email to members. Can't hide online status. Views no ads.
4. Contributors (Submitted 25-249 posts): Can read any post. Can post in Chat Room and anywhere except the Donor's Lounge. Can send and receive Private Messages (PM) and email with members. Can view profiles and members lists. Can't hide online status. Views no ads.
5. Frequent Contributors (Submitted 250 or more posts): Can read any post. Can post in Chat Room and anywhere except the Donor's Lounge. Can send and receive Private Messages (PM) and email with members. Can view profiles and members lists. Can hide online status. Views no ads.
6. Donors (Made a donation of $25 or more to help the Forum): Can read any post. Can post in Chat Room and anywhere including the Donor's Lounge. Can send and receive Private Messages (PM) and email between members. Can view profiles and members lists. Can hide online status. Views no ads.
7. Moderators (Invited to help moderate the Forum): All privileges except can't perform Administrator functions.
8. Administrators (Invited to help with technical functions and moderate the Forum): All privileges including performing Administrator functions.

Please feel free to make suggestions and offer feedback about this. We want to continue to make efforts to improve the forum. By the way, some of you may think that the forum is a money making venture. I can assure that it's not. I decided to remove the ads for all members, except unregistered members, to improve member's experience. I also paid a phpbb forum technician to help with all the changes over the last 4 months. This has been costly. Therefore, we've created a Donors user group to help offset this cost as well as monthly server fees. If you'd like to give back to the forum, it is much appreciated, but not expected. Thanks always for your participation on the forum and making LOVA a fun place to come and discuss Jyotish!

Namaste,
Vaughn Paul

[digitsoftime]

Dear Vaughn Paul ji,

The recent changes has been pretty nice and helpful and the forum seems to run smoothly. However I think 250 posts seem too less to be termed a senior.

regards,
S

[Vaughn Paul]

Hi Digitsoftime and others,
Yes, maybe there's a better title than Senior Member. I've also wondered about that. Since the forum started in 2006 there's been about 4 or 5000 members. Currently there are about 3500 members listed. And in that time there's only been about 50 people who have posted more the 250 posts, so about 1% of the members. From that perspective it seemed that 1000 posts was too much and too elite a group. I'm open to ideas about another title than Senior Member. Maybe one that sounds less like it's a stamp of authority or knowledge level. Because that's certainly not always the case. Some people come and post chit chat comments with no astrological value at all and acquire 250 posts within a few months. So, Senior Member maybe is not the best title. Any ideas? Thanks, Vaughn Paul

[Vaughn Paul]

Maybe Frequent Contributors should be called Active Contributors and Senior Members should be called Frequent Contributors. So it's not a matter of seniority but level of activity/contribution. Any thoughts about this anyone? Vaughn Paul

[digitsoftime]

Dear Vaughn Paul ji,

You are right. To be called senior members definitely stamps a sense of seniority. Again, only some members can't be called senior members based on their astrological knowledge, because there will always be someone else who would have the complete opposite view and still be correct thereby creating a rift between 'senior members'.

If you feel it is really necessary to have senior members, one suggestion would be to have an anonymous voting system, voted by the members, the result of which the moderators and admins can analyze and finalize the decision. The same can apply for any other new changes which you think need user's opinions.

Regarding names, 'frequent contributors' , 'active contributors' both seem two ways of putting the same thing and only seem to make the system more complicated. There can easily be members with over 250 posts who are not active at all. May be you could give the name 'registered user' for people below 500 posts and 'advanced member' for people over 500 posts, (or something like that). Or another thing would be to give the same name for both categories but with different colour.

regards,
Sunny

[kandhan]

Mr. Paul/Sunny

This is a valid point. Quantity does not amount to quality. My question is: what is the need for such categorization based on number of posts? i feel 2,3,4, and 5 are not necessary at all.

regarding hiding online status: it should either be given to all registered members or not. I beleive the restriction is to avoid inbox of members being flooded with PMs. Members who have posted less that 249 may actually have more astrology knowledge than those who have posted 250 or more. Chances are that they will receive pms than senior members. A member can always disable PM/email.

and am of a similar view regarding ads. members who cannot contribute directly can contribute indirectly through bandwidth.

[digitsoftime]

Kandhan ji,

point number 2 is necessary i think..to restrict the new users a little bit in order to avoid spamming..like first 50 posts or so..
The remaining 3,4,5 may not be absolutely needed.

regards,
S

[kandhan]

Sunny

maybe a feature by which one can refuse to accept pms from another member will be a useful feature to restrict spamming. similar to the friend/foe feature where we can still see their posts but they cannot send PMs to us.

[kandhan]

[Humannature]

Dear Vaughn,
How about you start a poll on which member has been most helpful n knowledgable.
Each member gets 5 votes (n 5 only...or wat ever number u decide)..u know to choose 5 people whose readings have been fruitful..
we can have various categories....most knowledgeable, most supportive, thought provoking article contributor etc...

[digitsoftime]

Hi Human nature,

the person with the least number of votes will feel bad..and no one should be 'made' to feel bad.

Anupam ji..

regarding designation, we will make special arrangement for you

regards,
S

[Humannature]

Hi Human nature,

the person with the least number of votes will feel bad..and no one should be 'made' to feel bad.

Anupam ji..

regarding designation, we will make special arrangement for you

regards,
S

We have a handful of very very knowledgeable people n a lot of intermediate n beginners on this site.
Its not about making anyone feel good or bad...its about peoples opinion on who they think the real experts are...so others might benefit from it..
plus we r not gonna publish the number of votes or anything..
it will be something like "these are the top five in this area" kinda poll...

[Vaughn Paul]

Dear Humannature and others,
I really don't think that it will benefit the forum to have a qualitative/subjective ranking system of members. It's bound to result in jealousies, hurt feelings, arrogant posturing, etc. I'm reluctant to pursue it. I think that only an objective ranking system based on something like # of posts will work. I don't see enough benefits and a lot of potential problems with any kind of subjective ranking system. We've just spent many months improving the forum and it's now at a point of being quite harmonious and problem free to a great extent, especially when compared to where it was just 4 or 5 months ago. Vaughn Paul

[digitsoftime]

I totally agree Vaughn Paul ji.

[Humannature]

Dear Humannature and others,
I really don't think that it will benefit the forum to have a qualitative/subjective ranking system of members. It's bound to result in jealousies, hurt feelings, arrogant posturing, etc. I'm reluctant to pursue it. I think that only an objective ranking system based on something like # of posts will work I don't see enough benefits and a lot of potential problems with any kind of subjective ranking system. We've just spent many months improving the forum and it's now at a point of being quite harmonious and problem free to a great extent, especially when compared to where it was just 4 or 5 months ago. Vaughn Paul

Okay

[Raveesh]

@Vaughn ji : I am a learner in this forum , I would like to suggest to implement star rating on threads
like 1 2 3 4 5 Stars and how many people have given the start rating and found a thread interesting (Just interesting or may be some other word ) this to be implemented only in case of Students section not in readings section.
Because there are many interesting threads and the number of views are too much but I think there should be a star rating on a thread more than Voting option I second you on your opinion for not coming up with voting .

[Ram.qa]

Dear Humannature and others,
I really don't think that it will benefit the forum to have a qualitative/subjective ranking system of members. It's bound to result in jealousies, hurt feelings, arrogant posturing, etc. I'm reluctant to pursue it. I think that only an objective ranking system based on something like # of posts will work. I don't see enough benefits and a lot of potential problems with any kind of subjective ranking system. We've just spent many months improving the forum and it's now at a point of being quite harmonious and problem free to a great extent, especially when compared to where it was just 4 or 5 months ago. Vaughn Paul

I agree with you Paul ji.

[birthtimes]

Regarding private messages...Yesterday I received a private message regarding one of my 12 total posts on this forum--it is extremely frustrating to not be able to reply in return.

[birthtimes]

Perhaps it would make much better sense to allow a person to receive and respond to private messages after their 9th or 10th post...

[R V RAMANAN]

Dear Birthtimes,

Please check your Pm options now.

Regards
Ramanan

[rosebud0810]

I also agree with some of the comments here…perhaps the PM privileges should be activated for SOME MEMBERS who have made under 25 posts. One suggestion that I can make is that the request for these members should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. If you see evidence of misuse/abuse by the requestor, then by all means, deny them the privilege. Otherwise, if they are serious about abiding by the rules set on this wonderful forum, they should be given a chance to use the PM function. The PM function is a very helpful tool and it gives the members the opportunity to reach out to other members for important discussions. Personally, I reached out to a few astrologers when I was at a very low point in my life when only darkness surrounded me. I was desperate for advice but did not want to broadcast my heartbreaking life story to everyone on the forum. Thankfully with the PM function, I was able to get very valuable advice.

If the PM function could be made available to those with serious intentions of using it, it would be a very effective tool.

I have a genuine interest in vedic astrology and by no means I have the acquired knowledge to contribute at an intelligent level as other esteemed astrologers. For this reason, I will never be able to reach the minimum post requirement. If there were other alternatives (such as the one I suggested where the PM rights are granted on case-by-case basis), it will make members like me very happy. Would you please consider activating the PM function for my account? It would be greatly appreciated.

[srcs]

@VPN; yesterday i got a pvt.message to my mail but it is not allowing me to open. I get "u r not authorised
to open/receive Pvt.message".Then why it was sent to me.
srcs

[praytogod]

I had also sent u a private message srcs ji. in August- Perhaps you are not able to view it either. However, the LOVA website does give me the option of "send private msg to srcs"and "contact srcs". I used the given option but i don't think it is working.

[srcs]

@pray to god. Don't worry.I got ur message.wait for the said period.Pl.don't be in a hurry.
1st come of the present knot. God will surely show a way out.

[praytogod]

ok srcs sir- as you say