I have two "featured threads".

At first, I thought "That's nice... Maybe I'm suddenly relevant again". But then I started looking around. Where were they featured? I combed the homepage for a "Featured Threads" section... to no avail. If they were "featured", it was definitely low key... no key in fact.

But that's ok. I'm not one to worry about visibility and recognition. Take the Trusted Member issue, for instance. Since I've been a member for so long and have been noted for my "credibility" by 2the9s himself and called "legendary" by Shausler, our poet laureate, I just assumed I was most certainly a trusted member. But when I looked up my status, it just said "Member". I was a little disappointed until I realized that trusted members are simply people who post a lot. They are trusted to overpost all day and all night and are kind of the cheerleaders of the Org, keeping the enthusiasm going and visitors somewhat entertained.

So "Member" will do and I don't really mind my "featured threads" are probably featured too discreetly, I'm fine, really. Please continue to go about your daily lives.
[This message was edited Sat Mar 20 11:36:46 2004 by Aerogram]

Fancy a shag?

Cloudbuster said:

eww

Whaddya mean "Eww"?

Cloudbuster said:

No, not right now. I gotta let the carpet burns heal first.

Aerogram said:

You should be a trusted member. Who cares if your post count is lower than others? It's the quality that counts.

SENSHY said:

You're absolutely right, though such wordly honors do not matter to an ascetic individual such as myself.

Aerogram said:

Wear knee-pads.

I'm not a trusted member either. Maybe my endorsement worked against you!

it's okay. i still love you.

Aerogram said:

Keep telling yourself that

2the9s said:

Yes.. I was strangely reminded of Al Gore endorsing Dean. Everything you touch turns to tin.

It's all a question of language, if you ask me. The term "trusted member" is badly chosen as it implies there are members who are trusted and others who are not. And at press time, such illustrious Orgers such as 2the9s fall in the unofficial "mistrusted members" category, defying all logic and making a mockery of Org history! I'd go as far as saying "trusted member" is an wholy inadequate term to describe our seminal contributors, which by the way is a term that would fit nicely if "Org Elder" is too much.

Addendum :

My recommandations :

Create "Org Elder" or "Seminal Contributor" category.

Change "Trusted Member" to "Overposter"

Keep the run-of-the-mill "Member" category for the normal folks.

Create a Junior Member category for the newbies.

Aerogram said:

ironically enough, i am a trusted member (of all people )... trusted to do what..? get deactivated... ...

EllisDee said:

That's BOGUS, man!!

i wanna be a junior member!

2the9s said:

bow down, muthaf'ka... ...

What? This is just too much. I gotta go and have a drink.

EllisDee said:

Make that two...

Handclapsfingasnapz said:

Member issue

heheheh



heh

Supernova said:

Off Topic: SuperNova... I finally had Pecan Pie. It wasn't too bad.

I think we need new categories!

Lleena said:

Such as?

Supernova said:

Ottica said:

trusted member

member

slightly tipsy member

drunk member

wont be responding has just fallen over member

!! what do you think!!?

Lleena said:

Very good and probably very accurate!

Ottica said:

You've seen me promoting the wholesome, delicious, goodness of pecan pie, eh?


Err, whatdayamean it "wasn't too bad"?