Lack of interest "Most Albums" on the Notable Members list... do it makes sense?


Well-known member
Imho, the "Most Media" tab is more than enough to add into the Notable Members list. The "Most Albums" tab doesn't make much sense really... here you have an example:

The main content type of the XFMG are media (be it pictures or videos) and this should be the only thing being considered in the Notable Members list.

I can create lots of empty albums and place myself on #1 for the "Most Albums" tab at the Notable Members list. Empty albums don't add value to the forum... why consider them for rankings on the Notable Members list?

Thank you,


Well-known member
Users can also upload loads of tosh media items or drivel in posts, yet these are counted, so why not Albums?

Just because a few might abuse the system to boost stats doesn't mean we have to lose those stats, otherwise we would have to remove all stats.

Besides, that's what good forum moderation is about, keeping an eye on users and dealing with situations that arise. And keeping the reports queue as low as possible. ;)


Well-known member
My idea is this: in Windows you can have lots of directories but those folders per se have no value and mean nothing. What matters are the files inside those directories, those files have a value (be it poor or high value).

In this case, albums per se are worth nothing. That's why I suggest not to consider them in the Notable Members list.
Last edited:


Well-known member
In this case, albums per so are worth nothing.
To you, maybe but to a site which uses albums as collections of media they may be of value. Take Flickr as an example, on there they not only count the number of media items a user has but also their collections (ie albums). Collections of photos are important to photographers, arguably more so than the number of photos taken. Collections have meaning as they are usually based on subjects.

So I'd say that album counts should remain.