I’ve always felt the requirement for ITB folks to label themselves on this board as being ITB is an excellent one. Is that requirement still in place? If “yes,” can we please implement some front-facing ITB badge that these folks must have on their posts? (in other words, something that doesn’t require an investigation (such as looking at one’s profile) to figure out?)
If the requirement is no longer in place, why not?
I think it may have been a bug/issue the switch over to the new system. Maybe users need to opt into it. I don’t know exactly how it works. Todd or the mods are probably better at shining a light at that
Cool. I did do a search for “ITB” in:title before posting — admittedly, I wasn’t willing to comb through thousands of results for a mere “ITB” search; thanks for tolerating this level of laziness.
So, now that I know we do have a front-facing ITB badge, that’s resolved.
But what about the requirement that those ITB actually use it? Is that WB requirement now gone? Asking because I’ve noticed many ITB folks without the ITB “flair”, and I’ve always felt it important to know who is ITB, so their posts can be taken with whatever grain of salt the reader may want to take it. I’m sure some ITB’ers’ posts are influenced/driven by their ITB status/motivations, and I’ve always liked the little “hey, just FYI” heads-up that a front-facing ITB badge/flair offers to all WB users and readers.
It’s the same issue with people having their real names. That was lost for many, many people during the migration and it would be a full time job to police every single account to get them to update. So it’s just gone. Just add it to the list of things we lost during the migration!
I found the workaround to have me (or any other mod) do it - both Johan and William are now listed as ITB
Feel free to ping the mods anytime someone has a missing ITB tag, it’s easy to fix now
No, it’s not gone, I just had to figure out the easy fix on the admin side, as often they don’t bother to do it themselves. Remember on the old site they ALSO had to, but I also had a workaround - now we have the same situation here, no worries.
I agree that, as a Berserker on the consumer side of things, it would be nice to be able to clearly see if a poster is ITB just so I can appropriately weight the opinions in the post. So it would be nice if those who are in the business would use the ITB flair. But at the same time, I can understand if someone would prefer to use their MC or GCC flair.
I noticed that Discourse has an officially supported “signature” plugin. Maybe a compromise would be to require that those who are ITB to identify themselves as such, but allow them to choose how to do that. If they want to mention that they are ITB in their posts, that’s fine. If that’s a hassle, using the ITB flair would be easier. But if they want to use a different flair, they could add a note in their signature.
Let me finish by saying that I don’t think this is a huge problem right now. I don’t see a lot of unscrupulous shilling right now, so @ToddFrench may not want to spend energy solving a problem that isn’t urgent. But as a WB “consumer” I would consider a policy like this an improvement.
thanks, Charles - I have already looked at the signature plugin several times, and think it’s funny it is referred to as ‘a relic of the past’ in such threads as the one linked
Let’s go with the ITB flair as we have it now - BB and ITB are both obviously ‘ITB’, and now that I found the quick workaround to make those ITB indicated as such, it should solve the problem quickly, particularly with the surprisingly effective community policing we have here (that’s not sarcastic, it truly is awesome, allows me to be lazy!) - if the new ITB-ification doesn’t work, we’ll consider signatures again, but that will crowd up the new interface and require more intercession of me/mods reaching out to those ITB to fill in their signatures. This way, I do a couple steps, boom, they are listed as ITB