New names for Users and Guests

[Head1]

Can we have some ideas for new names  for members (users) and freeloaders (guests) 

[Jonestown]

I say stick with “Members” and change “Guests” to “Interlopers”

[PilotMan]

Members and Guests sounds OK to me.

Are there different privileges for the two, what's the differentiator?

[GingerNuts]

Members and Guests sounds OK to me.

Are there different privileges for the two, what's the differentiator?

A guest is someone who is browsing the forum without being logged into an account. Not sure about anything else but massage reviews are hidden from them. Eventually they get this message:

You have reached the limit of 10 topics you can view as a guest.
Please login below or register an account with UKPunting.

[akauya]

Fellows and Interlopers
Comrades and Sojourners
Inmates and Visitors

 

[Blackpool Rock]

Members and Non members sounds logical or possibly Logged in members.

I tend to view the forum while logged in otherwise I hit the limit of viewable threads but once I log out does my identify then show as being a non logged in "Guest" if I still have the UKP tab open on my computer or would I need to be still viewing pages for it to register me 

Just another thought at a slight tangent and i'm assuming it's not possible but as we have seen from a few threads recently (which is being cracked down on) but members show as the date they signed up rather than became a paid up member.
Would it be possible to show their membership date as the date they became full members as this would stop people jumping to conclusions and down new members throats  There is clearly a concern that recently paid up members get a hostile welcome so don't then contribute as a result and then potentially don't pay their annual subs going forwards


Anyway i'm sure some of the pedants from the forum helper thread will be along to argue the correct terminology soon, hopefully they can agree this time 

[standardpostage]

Members for members sounds good to me 

Visitor sounds better than guest though, I think 

[JontyR]

Something slightly more punting centric perhaps?

For Members - Booked in or Booking Confirmed?

For guests - No Bookings made.

Or how about "on the hotlist" for members and "no feedback" for guests.

[PilotMan]

A guest is someone who is browsing the forum without being logged into an account. Not sure about anything else but massage reviews are hidden from them. Eventually they get this message:

If they're not logged in, where would the handle of "guest" appear?

[Doc Holliday]

If they're not logged in, where would the handle of "guest" appear?

It would only appear next to a name (usually in an old thread) where the account had been completely deleted by an admin eg https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=37683.msg510550#msg510550

[Dipper]

I think member / visitor is ok. Simple and effective.

[PilotMan]

It would only appear next to a name (usually in an old thread) where the account had been completely deleted by an admin eg https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=37683.msg510550#msg510550

If that's the only only place that the handle "guest" appears, then my suggestion would be to change it to "retired" 

[Doc Holliday]

Just another thought at a slight tangent and i'm assuming it's not possible but as we have seen from a few threads recently (which is being cracked down on) but members show as the date they signed up rather than became a paid up member.
Would it be possible to show their membership date as the date they became full members as this would stop people jumping to conclusions and down new members throats  There is clearly a concern that recently paid up members get a hostile welcome so don't then contribute as a result and then potentially don't pay their annual subs going forwards

No it's not possible for 'us mortals' to see what date the membership was completed/approved.

I appreciate what you are trying to say as being positive, but even if we had full access to all the data including how often they have logged in nobody other than mods should be questioning others contributions to the forum and that is, quite rightly, what is being clamped down on.

[Doc Holliday]

If that's the only only place that the handle "guest" appears, then my suggestion would be to change it to "retired" 

  Guest means you don't have an active account. IMO guest works and it is standard nomenclature across all forums. I'm not even sure the software allows it to be edited?

Edit should have read an active account under that name or in the case of who is online viewing either has no account or is not logged into one.

[myothernameis]

For Guest names:

Boarder, Partaker, Renter, Roomer, Visitor, Inmate, Lodger

For Member/User names:

Associates, Fellows, Delegates, Comrade,

[mh]

"Players" and "Gawpers"
"Professionals" and "Amateurs"


Seriously though, I can understand changing "Users" but "Members" and "Guests" is quite benign, surely?

[daviemac]

Would it be possible to show their membership date as the date they became full members as this would stop people jumping to conclusions and down new members throats  There is clearly a concern that recently paid up members get a hostile welcome so don't then contribute as a result and then potentially don't pay their annual subs going forwards

The easiest thing is for members not to jump down the throats of new members. It's been posted several times in various different threads that it is something we are trying to get away from. If anyone has an issue with another member then report it and the mods or admin can look at how often they've logged on etc before deciding what action to take if any.

[MrMatrix]

I think member / visitor is ok. Simple and effective.

+1 

[90125]

I think member / visitor is ok. Simple and effective.

Agree with you. Cannot see anything wrong that needs fixing.

[GingerNuts]

If they're not logged in, where would the handle of "guest" appear?

It would only appear next to a name (usually in an old thread) where the account had been completely deleted by an admin eg https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=37683.msg510550#msg510550

If that's the only only place that the handle "guest" appears, then my suggestion would be to change it to "retired" 

The freeloader guests (as per the OP) are the ones you see if you look at the bottom part of the forum home page.

Hidden Image/Members Only

[vindici]

Can we have some ideas for new names  for members (users) and freeloaders (guests) 

Users > Members

Guests = No Change

[alabama1]

The freeloader guests (as per the OP) are the ones you see if you look at the bottom part of the forum home page.

Hidden Image/Members Only

I thought that list is showing members , not guests. 

[vindici]

I thought that list is showing members , not guests. 

Just above, you can see the numbers.

[Doc Holliday]

The freeloader guests (as per the OP) are the ones you see if you look at the bottom part of the forum home page.

Sorry I had assumed everyone knew about where the Guest and User totals appear as it is the area under discussion for change. The names are just the users/members. I was just pointing out the only other place you may see the term Guest appearing.

It is a long time since I had behind the scenes access to an SMF forum and my memory ain't great these days, but I didn't think the term guest could be edited anyway. I assume Head 1 must know otherwise as he has asked the question?

[Dipper]

The freeloader guests (as per the OP) are the ones you see if you look at the bottom part of the forum home page.

Hidden Image/Members Only

Hadn’t realised the scale of freeloading until you drew my attention to it with this post.   

Remarkable numbers.

[myothernameis]

Hadn’t realised the scale of freeloading until you drew my attention to it with this post.   

Remarkable numbers.

And who logging on, 0 posts, registered at least 5 years

[tynetunnel]

Members and visitors ?

Members and non-members ?

[yandex]

I've been thinking about this from my own perspective. I haven't punted for a while and as the main purpose of the site is reviews, followed by punting advice then how about:

Member, for people who have added a review within a certain time
Contributed, for people who have posted elsewhere on the site
Non-comtributer for the others.

I guess it raises the issue of people adding reviews for the sake of bumping their status but how many people are really going to do that?

I also quite often just visit the site without logging in. Does that show me as a guest at that time?

[akauya]

The freeloader guests (as per the OP) are the ones you see if you look at the bottom part of the forum home page.

Hidden Image/Members Only

I'm guessing a lot of those in the 'freeloaders' numbers are SPs, Mumsnetters, the Old Bill, pimps, "University researchers", journos, spurned wives/girlfriends, etc.

It's always good idea to keep that in mind when we post in a public forum, some comrades (in arms) tend to forget this and post any kind of shit that can identify them.

[Dipper]

I'm guessing a lot of those in the 'freeloaders' numbers are SPs, Mumsnetters, the Old Bill, pimps, "University researchers", journos, spurned wives/girlfriends, etc.

It's always good idea to keep that in mind when we post in a public forum, some comrades (in arms) tend to forget this and post any kind of shit that can identify them.

A good point.

What seems like innocent freeloading for information on sex buying could have more sinister connotations.

[Dipper]

Can we have some ideas for new names  for members (users) and freeloaders (guests) 

Would a colour difference of each username work or be possible to distinguish one from the other?

[Jonestown]

I've been thinking about this from my own perspective. I haven't punted for a while and as the main purpose of the site is reviews, followed by punting advice then how about:

Member, for people who have added a review within a certain time
Contributed, for people who have posted elsewhere on the site
Non-comtributer for the others.

I guess it raises the issue of people adding reviews for the sake of bumping their status but how many people are really going to do that?

I also quite often just visit the site without logging in. Does that show me as a guest at that time?

You’ll have the coders rubbing their hands in glee at the thought of all that work.

[mh]

It was visually useful when the user list on the home page had different colours for logged in members and guests. I think there was also some colour for 'had left a review recently' too.

[Doc Holliday]

It was visually useful when the user list on the home page had different colours for logged in members and guests. I think there was also some colour for 'had left a review recently' too.

There still seems to be some confusion over this. The list of names you see on the homepage is a list of people who have accounts and are accessing the forum by being logged in to their account. Guests will only show in the totals figure at the top of the list and will include everyone who is reading the forum but not logged into an account. This will include some who do actually have an account but are not logged in.

Yes you can have different colours for members in the list of users. This has to be allocated to a particular membergroup. For example someone who has been designated a service provider, could show in a particular colour and a moderator in another.

[Doc Holliday]

I'm guessing a lot of those in the 'freeloaders' numbers are SPs, Mumsnetters, the Old Bill, pimps, "University researchers", journos, spurned wives/girlfriends, etc.

It's always good idea to keep that in mind when we post in a public forum, some comrades (in arms) tend to forget this and post any kind of shit that can identify them.

Absolutely. It is a public forum just with limited daily views. That said I would be fairly certain that the Police actually have long standing accounts to give full and easier access. Hopefully with zero posts 

The guests total also include bots. Mr google is a busy man 

[vindici]

I've been thinking about this from my own perspective. I haven't punted for a while and as the main purpose of the site is reviews, followed by punting advice then how about:

Member, for people who have added a review within a certain time
Contributed, for people who have posted elsewhere on the site
Non-comtributer for the others.

I guess it raises the issue of people adding reviews for the sake of bumping their status but how many people are really going to do that?

I also quite often just visit the site without logging in. Does that show me as a guest at that time?

Sounds a bit convoluted and difficult to automate.

[mh]

There still seems to be some confusion over this. The list of names you see on the homepage is a list of people who have accounts and are accessing the forum by being logged in to their account. Guests will only show in the totals figure at the top of the list and will include everyone who is reading the forum but not logged into an account. This will include some who do actually have an account but are not logged in.

Yes you can have different colours for members in the list of users. This has to be allocated to a particular membergroup. For example someone who has been designated a service provider, could show in a particular colour and a moderator in another.

Yep, fair enough, I was just used to the old coloured list and read too much into it.

Sounds a bit convoluted and difficult to automate.

It was done before, probably got dropped off when a new version of the forum software got installed. I'm not demanding it back, just thought it was useful visually.

[Vinegar Strokes]

Contributors and Leeches

[Blackpool Rock]

Contributors and Leeches

A bit black and white that along with many other similar comments however as a member when I log out but keep the tab open on my computer presumably my presence will then show me and all other members as being leeches then 

[Gent4life]

A guest is someone who is browsing the forum without being logged into an account. Not sure about anything else but massage reviews are hidden from them. Eventually they get this message:

Hi all, I'm new so apologies if I get this wrong on how to reply to a previous comment.

So the above is correct as I've been Google browsing for quite some time now and using your reviews to include or exclude AW profiles on certain HLs I have, namely add a profile to a HL that I like the look/sound of, then move to a proper intention HL once I have confirmed reviews I have read on here, or in the case of mostly/all BAD reviews, straight to the Blacklist!

Now, this was all fine and indeed I get the message saying 10 topics limit reached but actually I had a way of getting around that too.  It was only when I read a post yesterday saying that search results for profiles on Google form UKP can be removed on request that I thought hmmm I guess I need to finally register so i can search for profile without that issue and see links and photos properly.

Amazing site all BTW

As a former guest who has bitten the bullet and Registered, I have to say it felt more like Freeloading ;-)

[mancsguy1975]

Personally i'd like to see "Members" catagorised by their level of contribution to the site - there are obviously so called members who have never reviewed or have not reviewed for years...

[sensualencounter]

Personally i'd like to see "Members" catagorised by their level of contribution to the site - there are obviously so called members who have never reviewed or have not reviewed for years...

Punters punt in many different ways. Punters contribute to this site in many different ways.

If you see a leech / freeloader then report him.

The other side of the coin is you’d be giving absolute horrors like KT and Sergeant Major and their fake reviews / boundary pushing a badge of honour to use even more nefariously. That already happens with certain individuals, so why exacerbate the problem? And similarly, just like KT, he had / has his fan boys on here, fanning the flames and encouraging him.

[daviemac]

Personally i'd like to see "Members" catagorised by their level of contribution to the site - there are obviously so called members who have never reviewed or have not reviewed for years...

How do you propose we categorise the level of contribution, what in your opinion makes a good contributor.   

 

[PilotMan]

How do you propose we categorise the level of contribution, what in your opinion makes a good contributor.   

IMHO it's a combination of sharing of general relevant experience, intel and reviews.

Reviews are a simple and effective way to measure contribution.

Posts are probably difficult to automatically assume value, as a high volume of posts doesn't necessarily mean they're all good. Conversely a low volume poster may be a significant and valuable contributor.

Maybe the likes button provides some analytical capability?

Members who neither post or review are obviously of little value to the forum, unless they are paying for membership.

[90125]

Punters punt in many different ways. Punters contribute to this site in many different ways.

If you see a leech / freeloader then report him.

The other side of the coin is you’d be giving absolute horrors like KT and Sergeant Major and their fake reviews / boundary pushing a badge of honour to use even more nefariously. That already happens with certain individuals, so why exacerbate the problem? And similarly, just like KT, he had / has his fan boys on here, fanning the flames and encouraging him.

Very well put.

[mancsguy1975]

IMHO it's a combination of sharing of general relevant experience, intel and reviews.

Reviews are a simple and effective way to measure contribution.

Posts are probably difficult to automatically assume value, as a high volume of posts doesn't necessarily mean they're all good. Conversely a low volume poster may be a significant and valuable contributor.

Maybe the likes button provides some analytical capability?

Members who neither post or review are obviously of little value to the forum, unless they are paying for membership.

Agree - two really good metrics which provide a measure of contribution 1) Review count and 2) Like count for valued contribution

[Malvolio]

Not sure if the Like count is that useful - it might be someone gets likes for cracking a funny joke in off-topic.

[northface]

I would not view the 'like' count as a measured view of contributing to the site also.


Someone could 'like' every post that has been placed by someone who has never reviewed for example just for the hell of it
or someone might like a particular member and like all his posts just to bump his score up.

[Doc Holliday]

Not sure if the Like count is that useful - it might be someone gets likes for cracking a funny joke in off-topic.

Interesting. So are those who post in the jokes thread not contributing to the site?

Anyway, we seem to have gone off subject here also? The thread was about new names for Users and Guests?

[cunnyhunt]

Personally i'd like to see "Members" catagorised by their level of contribution to the site - there are obviously so called members who have never reviewed or have not reviewed for years...

I do not think that works as well as intended.
I have been here since day 1 ( member no 6) in the last few years I have only occasionally punted as I have a reg and several from SA, as well as having a car accident which stopped all activities for 2 years. I visit here as members here are like minded, and my position may well change in the future and I resume regular punting.
I can’t review, but I still scan the areas I’ve worked in and if names of SP’s pop up that I have experience of I will try and add info.