First of all, I second the request.
As for the name:
Since upvoting a tremendous amount of competing answers implies that the user actually cares about the question getting answered instead of just wanting to "score" himself, I suggest Team player.
This is something that we're actively considering (in fact, it came up quite long before this year's Winter Bash). It would definitely serve to reward people that do what's needed to get the gold badges, and keep going.
The 'secretness' of them solves the problem of implementing badges with higher criteria than gold, we don't publicly set very high goals ...
I've wondered about this, as I often look through user profiles, and their cross-site activity. Also since the question was asked, Stack Exchange now has tens of sites, not just three.
Here are some examples I've thought about;
Duathlete — gold medals across two sites
Triathlete — gold medals across three sites
Decathlete — gold medals awarded across ...
I think there is still a need of incentives to answer many more old, unanswered questions. Current badges don't help much: a bronze badge doesn't matter; getting 5 votes on a tumbleweed tag/question is very unlikely, however good your answer might be.
So, I propose: Persephone (gold badge, can be awarded multiple times): Posted 25 good answers to 90+ days ...
I think we should replace Reversal, for all of the reasons listed in that discussion and then some:
Current Reversal badge encourages answering awful questions without turning them into good ones.
Current badge actually encourages downvoting the question you're answering (or, in some unfortunate cases, posting "witty" answers to the questions you're ...
A possible reason for the lack of a bronze "favoriting" badge is that favoriting seems to perform two somewhat different functions:
Users might want to watch a question closely for a time -- they're interested in possible answers to it, or perhaps plan to write an answer themselves if no one else comes up with a good one. Questions of this kind normally ...
Comments are second class content here - as you know comments are liable to be removed at a drop of a hat, they are ephemeral and should not be considered to have any permanence or importance.
As such - adding badges will only cause comments to be "gamed" for it and encourage more commenting rather than less.
In fact - comments like the one you have posted ...
+1 I had thought the exact same question but I never asked :-P
Worthy Question Question favorited by 10 users
Favorite Question Question favorited by 25 users
Stellar Question Question favorited by 100 users
This would be nice, but I'm afraid it's too easy to get.
Instead, I suggest that the Über-Fanatic badge on each Stack Exchange site be reserved for users that have been visiting the site every day since the first day of the private beta, and a minimum of 2000 days.
Maybe also require that the user hit the rep cap every day he visited the site, too.
Reviewer: 300 reviews, over 60 actioned.
(possibly) Scrutiniser: 1000 reviews, over 300 actioned.
Where actioned is:
Edit (suggested edits don't count until approved)
Flagged (only counts if the flag is marked as valid/helpful).
Voted to close (only counts if the question is closed).
Voted Up or Down on the post (only counts while the post is not deleted)...
I like it!!
How about "Not a rep Monster"?
Or, "Not A Rep Whore"
I wanted to design a badge for it but got bored and completely redesigned the gold badges.
(Note that the 1000 is random, I prefer 400/500)
You are right that the book, The Elements of Style, is basically unknown outside of the US.
Many other existing badges are named with a tongue in cheek (Unsung Hero, Vox Populi, Tumbleweed, Deputy, Peer Pressure, Disciplined, Mortarboard) and as such are deeply rooted in idioms of one particular culture.
I am pretty sure that no one would seriously apply a ...
This is my proposal on how the loyalty and commitment gold badge could be:
Lustrum badge will be given to people that have 5 consecutive Yearling badges and have an overall score over 3k (or 5k or 10k the best amount could be decided here). In any case the score should be higher than the 1k that is necessary for the 5 consecutive Yearling badges.
I think despite the common objection, this badge would be a good idea for a few reasons:
Badges are different from rep
@Tomas' analogy is apt. "Reputation is like money, whereas a badge is like a present!" When they award a Nobel prize, they don't say "8 million dollars should be enough award for anyone", they also give you a diploma and a gold medal. You ...
I'd call the badge "Spirit". The spirit of the site is to get all good content up to the top where it can be as useful as possible.
If you consistently up vote based on merit alone, even if it means another answer scores higher than your own, then you have the spirit of the site at heart.
And yes, I think that does deserve a gold badge. By the time someone ...
Simply put, no.
Badges are supposed to reward behavior or for using certain features of the site.
This badge would encourage, or at least reward, a person to post a single answer, and never come back. Or worse, create multiple accounts to ask a single question in the hopes of earning the badge.
I don't see this as a badge worth implementing.
This request makes sense, as it encourages teamwork. Many questions are simply presented badly(walls of text/poor English/confused newbies). And it's awesome to hit two birds with one stone. Now in response to your questions:
How many questions do you need to get reopened to earn the badge?
One is fine. After all, it's a tough thing to do, and rare. And we'...
Maybe taking a different view of it will help.
We're in the 1st grade, in Mrs. Applebee's class. She wears long hem skirts and always smells like peach pie (irony? perhaps). Whenever someone's cleans after they play or draws a pretty picture or helps Mr. Applebee in the garden, they get a gold star on their locker.
You're very happy with your gold stars. ...
Badges rewarded for reputation are unhelpful. Reputation is already prominently displayed on SE. Badges should be reserved for things that are helpful to the site but not directly rewarded with reputation.
edit to clarify: I consider reputation to be the primary measure of contribution to the site. I consider badges to be a secondary measure. Yes, I think ...
My thinking is that extra activity, even after the cap is reached, is
to be encouraged.
One of the purposes of the reputation cap is to get people to take a break from the site so they don't burn out; I don't think a badge for exceeding it makes sense. If they really wanted to encourage extra activity, they'd just get rid of the rep-cap, so I think your ...
So basically its the OP's who are in charge of dishing out this badge (only they can accept an answers) where as with the Enlightened badge it is a community decision (up votes from users). When you look at it in that way I don't think its such a good idea...
The green check mark doesn't really mean anything other than that the OP clicked the accept ...
Originally I thought a bronze makes sense here. But in retrospect I do not.
Getting full access to review is now a hard enough task, you need Strunk & White and it helps lots if you have enough rep to really act on the stuff.
Introducing a bronze badge here is odd. Traditionally bronze badges are "welcome to the system" badges. However in this case, ...
In corporate life, a "turnaround" of a poorly-performing unit to a good-performing unit is hard to achieve because all the "legacy," issues involved. Hence, when one is accomplished, it is noteworthy. The same is true here. There should be a "turnaround" badge with bronze, silver and gold levels.
The question must have been -1 or lower, with a bronze ...
I'm not a fan of this idea. I realize that the reusable chunks of knowledge that stick around on these sites come from the answerers, so their contributions are very, very important. The fact that upvotes on answers count for more than upvotes on questions is clear evidence that SE (and likely much of the community) supports this position.
However, I ...
This would only encourage people to downvote posts for the sake of a badge, rather than because they honestly feel that a given post is truly unhelpful. You'll see at least some people downvoting good posts, or acceptable posts, just to get a badge. This isn't behavior that we want to encourage.