Top Members ?

I always saw the "top member" distinction as something to strive for. But I think. It makes less sense the less active users there are.

Now, I don't exactly know how top members are picked, but if the process of picking them is not continuously run, or evaluated, or adjusted to what the community current state is, then you get what's essentially a picture of the past.

On one hand, it's great to see who have historically contributed a lot to this wonderful place. On the other, if none (or almost none) of them are active or posting anymore, then the list is more of a historical record than a snapshot. Ironically part of the definition of being a top member is being active, so you'd expect to see the top members around a lot. But I don't think that's true anymore.

It is unfortunately sometimes not very obvious (often for good reasons) but I think its an essential role, because it helps with some of the running of the site. we are not actually supposed to talk about it. Some of it is on the face of it probably boring to most, but actually really interesting to those passionate about having the best engineering community site ever.

Regarding becoming a member,  I dont think it needs much more than providing a positive role. and being consistent. Its good that the process might take years to be a TM (if thats desired; not everyone probably accepts). There have been cases (I feel anyway) where people were too trigger-happy to on-board new TMs that either disappeared or didn't have a team spirit or worse, and from my perspective I like the longer considered approach to really prove consistency. Plus it feels like a good achievement so a win-win for all (hopefully!).

I think its fair to say 99% of TMs (at least the active ones) will always be trying to improve things for all, probably being a thorn in the side of cstanton   (hopefully rarely! : ) since he is just as passionate) even if its boring stuff like spam discussions etc., even if its not visible.

I tend to agree with your comment - I’d like to think top members had input to how the community runs, rather like an Employee Forum.  It’s a lot harder to be more active now because contributions disappear off the home page quickly, I feel never to be seen even if still actively discussed.  It’s a bit dispiriting.  The community is still one of the best I’ve ever come across so that aspect of it is working exceptionally well.  Top Members as a concept is an excellent one and hopefully it can become more active again.

battlecoder said:

Now, I don't exactly know how top members are picked

There are details here:  Becoming a Top Member of the element14 Community - the exact specifics are not specified so that people can't 'game' the system.

battlecoder said:

But I don't think that's true anymore.

Verint doesn't make their visibility easy, unlike in Jive where you'd have a symbol next to your name. Commenting and posting to the community aren't the only ways top members are active on the site; I see that in the Community Reporting section.

shabaz said:

probably being a thorn in the side of cstanton   (hopefully rarely! : )

Maybe once or twice ;)

Andrew J said:

I’d like to think top members had input to how the community runs

They certainly do.

I miss the Top Member icon.  When I finally got active in the community, I used it to figure out how much stock to put into the comments.  Now that I've been around for a bit, I know who is who and a bit of who knows what, but it was really helpful in the beginning.

Is there a way to put a Top Member frame around the Top Members' avatar?  Just trying to think outside the box.

Thanks all for your replies. From what you all say, Top Members are a lot more integral to this community than what I already thought they were, so that's even more of a reason to keep the program alive.

shabaz said:

Its good that the process might take years to be a TM (if thats desired; not everyone probably accepts). There have been cases (I feel anyway) where people were too trigger-happy to on-board new TMs that either disappeared or didn't have a team spirit or worse, and from my perspective I like the longer considered approach to really prove consistency.

Absolutely. What I meant with "adjusted to the current state of the community" is that if; for example, a requirement is "posting X amount of replies a month" and the current community activity levels are nowhere near half of X, then that's unrealistic bar and may require reviewing. I don't think there's any rule like that though, now that I've read the "Becoming a Top Member" page, so I don't think my comment applies.

It's ok if it takes years to become TM. Honors like that are earned, so I agree with that being a good thing, shabaz, but if the process is a manual selection that no one is doing anymore, then no matter how much current members try, they have no chance of even being considered, and that's what I meant with that it should be "continuously run / evaluated"

You all raise a good point about visibility though. Not only about who the top members are but also the content

I'm not sure taking years to become a Top Member is necessary. It can be based on performance.  If a Top Member is not performing they can eventually revert to being a regular member.

Just a thought, would a ML algorithm be able to display a top membership meter on each members profile dashboard  to provide performance feedback to them for things like top performer,  blogger of the month, mentor of the month, etc ? 

Just a thought, would a ML algorithm be able to display a top membership meter on each members profile dashboard  to provide performance feedback to them for things like top performer,  blogger of the month, mentor of the month, etc ? 

I'm sure it could be done.

How do you feel about having an AI judge your project competitions?   

No thanks !

MK

+1

Not asking ml to judge, just talley. 

Wouldn't be ML if it's just counting. However, to your credit, what an ML model *could* do, is learn to "recognize" good, positive behaviors which could be scored higher, and be considered in the "contribution" metrics.

Gamified sentiment analysis.