I must confess that I was kinda hung up on the number of posts. This withdrawal is gonna be tough. At least I lost my number as a triple nickel. There is some validity to the comment about individual postings reflecting the amount of participation in the site. While it is true that there has been alot of "silly" postings just to jump numbers, (who can forget Hoss and his hundreds of posts each day or the three word posts?) the true contribution was reflected in the number of posts. I view contribution as a two way street. Asking questions is as important as providing the answers. I remember as a Noobie, I was hesitant to ask questions because I didn't want to be viewed as one of the ignorant masses and thought less of. This is a valid point. Who would care to deny that such feelings do not exist? I don't have the luxury of having a strong background in auto mechanics and having worked on trucks since I was knee high to a grasshopper. To say that I consider myself mechanically challenged is an honest assessment of my skill level. However, after awhile, I discovered that the "resident" experts treated every question respectfully and answered in as clear and concise a manner as possible. As time went along, I became more comfortable in the asking and eventually was able to answer some very basic questions that were asked by others more new than I. That's my definition of contribution. One of the tools I use to tell the apparent credibility of the "contributor" is how many posts are reflected in his name element. (Whatever you call that thing to the left of the posting block). High numbers reflected to me an active participant in the site. Yes, there are experts out there who have very low posting numbers but after awhile, you get to recognize their posting handles. Posting numbers may not seem important to those that have "administrative or staff" responsibilities because of their daily involvement in the process of keeping this site running in a "Safe and Sane" manner but to other members, it serves as a tool. I tend to place more credence in someone’s comments if there is some indication that he or she has been active on the site. As I've stated, it's not the only tool I use to determine credence but it's one of the most important. When posting number contribution was deleted for OTHER, it was no great shake as I considered it a valid point. However, for the rest of the site forums, I would encourage reconsideration of the elimination of posting numbers. If the elimination of the posting numbers is based on some technical consideration that we’re not aware of, so be it. However, if not, I would like to appeal to the administrative staff to reconsider the decision to eliminate posting numbers. Another view point mentioned in other threads reflects that some consider this elimination as just another step in the loss of individual status of the member. A perception that also should be considered. In very large organizations you always find a structure that everyone (most everyone) tries to find his place in. This is reflected in the words "administrator, staff, senior member, member, noobie" and many others. The posting numbers also served in this perception. If you see a member, whose status is Senior Member, with post contribution and stars, you tend to think differently of that person than one who has nothing indicated other than "member". Note, I deliberately left out the stars and posting numbers because it seems to be an evolutionary process we're involved in. Lets, just as an example, extrapolate the process and remove the words administrator, staff, and moderator from the left element and we then have individuals with no further identity than that which is reflected in the name alone. To know the importance of the name then becomes dependent on the readers amount of time on the site and knowing the "importance" of whose doing the talking. In summary, I agree, that there has been some who seem to want to build up a number count, just to show how much they "participate", but should that be used as the sole, apparent, reason for posting number elimination?
My apologies for such a long posting but I felt it necessary.

~Dave

 

Just noticed Jack's posting on the other thread. So, disregard this posting as it seems there is more at work here than we're aware of and the decision is final. Too bad that a few have to ruin it for the rest.

 

The decision is definately final, and posting numbers will not be coming back at all. The stars under a member's name will be able to give you a good indication of how long they've been around, same with their member number. I'm shocked that we're actually making this much of an issue over post numbers.

 

Jack, you are right, it is a small thing. As George Carlin once said,"Don't sweat the petty stuff, and don't pet the sweatty stuff."

Have a Blessed Christmas.

DeWain