I like the idea of having ranks for reasons other than post-count, monetary donations, and positions of forum authority, but I definitely wouldn't favour having a rank for spammers.
Here is the way I see it: There are 400-ish-and-growing members of RAF. Just over 60 of those members have posted more than a few times. Of those 60-something members, there are maybe 20 that have acheived high ranks due to astronomically large post-counts. They receive a certain recognition for this.
However, there are members that have been here a very long time, who are very well-known in the boards and have established clear forum-personalities, yet not many of them have attained better than full-member status.
Perhaps there should be a rank for members who have been here a long time and who are active and well-known and widely-befriended, but who have relatively-low post-counts.
Example: I've been here almost exactly as long as Shanker, and he is very well-known in the boards, but my posts are nearly triple his. (no offence intended at all, Shanker, just making an example)
He is also older than quite a few members here who have more posts than he has (like Anna and Ken), but he's still stuck with a "Jr." on the front of his title.
Perhaps, after a person has been here a certain length of time, and/or has reached a certain karma, and is a very familiar name to the members here, they should gain a status comparable with members who have been here only briefly but are very fast posters (like Tyler was at the beginning).
?
Eh. Just a thought or five.
