I'm with GA on this one. Most of us here know each other. Most new and recent members knew us from other boards. Many truly new members will read but not necessarily post...at least early in the game. By when they do they know who and what to read.

Most people will gravitate to posts that interest them or to posts that interested many others. The concept of ratings adds little and affects few new posters and can only aggravate senior posters. Are our memories that short? What happens if one of the moderators or administrators is negatively rated?
You don't have to answer.

Note that the WS site no longer uses ratings or member numbers. The Squires' site minimizes this also. It's all in good fun until someone gets really teed off, for little gain. So IMO bag ratings, classes, or other caste systems.

Someone pointed out to me privately that I now have fewer stars. I stand in good company with the mighty ojeffso2 as having less than the maximum. I am proud to report that I have less than he does. I'm still hoping to equal the famous 2 star rating of the great LCC from another lifetime!

I wonder if someone from another forum payed a visit to take my stars away? My guess is yes.

I consider it a badge of honor by the way but it does demonstrate how rating systems can be easily abused. Even by those with little or nothing to offer. I will not respond in kind so if he wants to join in, he will be clean as the new fallen snow.

Off to the offline!

Funny. Yes, the good 'ol days. I miss those---NOT.

Now that I'm a Wine Student, I'm happy. Being a WineO Wannabe was pretty depressing. Wine Enthusiast is good - I want to strive for that. Wine Addict is not too great. But I may be a Wine Buying Addict.

Listing the number of post is good. The titles are okay (at least it makes you think). Rating of posts is good. Rating of posters is probably not necessary in a moderated Forum. To me, the only advantage was to get the point across if a poster got out of hand. It is too easy for this to be misused.