Your Ideas needed! What would a verified member acct look like!?
One idea, I have long percolated on is a verified member acct. In the upcoming weeks, we will be announcing more information about a verified member system. The key feature will be member email confirmation to unlock participation in some parts of the site.
Since day one, listeners have had to verify their email ids in order to sign up. From there, with experience and trust built up in the community, they can apply for the Verified Listener badge after completing a mock chat with a member of the VL team. For context, prior to becoming Verified, a listener must reach the below milestones:
A. Have 50+ Chats
B. Have 1100+ Cheers (Novice Level 4)
C. Have 1+ positive written reviews
We want to bring a similar program to the member side for the following reasons -
-allow members to build trust and reputation in the community
-allow trusted members to help with quality assurance around the site
-allow members to show their level of commitment to their personal growth journeys and our community
So my question to all of you is……
What could this look like? We will be asking members to verify their emails, but beyond this, what baseline criteria would a member have to reach to become verified" ???
Some examples of possible criteria are -
-50 chats with listeners
-10 upvotes on the forum
-X number growth points
-zero mutes, warnings, behavior points
-------> Please share your feedback in this thread. And vote on some criteria options here. I want use a form for this to ensure I capture all of the ideas and feedback in one structured place.
**id love to hear from as many members as possible. Listeners, you are welcome to give feedback, but I encoueage you to put on your member hat. We want this program to represent and enhance the member experience.
Initial reaction: great! I've supported this idea for a long time.
Member experience: Someone I know came to 7 Cups recently because I had mentioned it. She was hoping to talk to someone anonymously. But her perception of 7 Cups was that it required her e-mail address. So she left and talked to someone anonymously on a telephone helpline. You almost never hear from the ones who walk away.
Verified e-mail: No such thing. A bot can easily "verify" an address. Even I could write a bot that does that. All that will happen is we turn away people in genuine distress, while allowing determined spammers and trolls to have continued access.
But overall, yes, this is good to see.
@RarelyCharlie oh, you should be able to talk to someone here without a a verified email address, no problem.
but in order to access chat rooms or post on forums, requiring it would cut down on the number of problem users we have by proooobably 80+% if we're being conservative? it has already been shown that only forums that do not have have email verification receive the exact same forum spam we do.
but i don't think anyone thinks we should outright deny listener service to someone who wants to be on here as a guest <3
and we can deal with the 1-3 users who are still devoted enough to try to cause problems much easier after they've been slowed down by verification and are no longer in the hundreds.
@bunnypants - I think that makes a lot of sense - I agree that we shouldn't prevent people from being able to talk to someone just because they aren't comfortable verifying an email address, but we can limit broader access to areas like forums without it to at least decrease the spam issue we're having since other solutions that have been tried (spam filter, captchas) have ended up causing more issues for users here with good intentions than for those spamming!
I feel quite torn on this. Maybe this option should only be visible to listeners or mods instead of to other members? It's unfair to label some people as more quality than others. Although, it could be helpful to see whether members have had warnings/mutes/bans before... I don't know about this.
@JaydenIsHere but on the other side, I think this could have a positive effect on the members who do come here for support, but also make unverified members feel like they have less worth... I'm really torn here
@JaydenIsHere
I don't think it'd make the unverified members feel less worthy than a verified member, but rather motivate them to become verified. Similar to how badges are motivating rather than degrading 
@Emily619 hmm, that depends on who you ask. Also, the fact they would feel motivated for the badge is wrong. We all know roles on this site often come before our own self-care. And then adding that towards the member side, even if it is short term, could cause some stress.
And another thing which I just thought about, please please please do not add this to the queue. Yes, it could reduce ghost chats, but also create them by listeners naturally prioritising members because of the proof they do have conversations with listeners. There are better ways to combat ghost chats, and I submitted a decent way a while ago, and was told it was forwarded to the admins after a couple months. But this is me going on a tangent, oops haha
@JaydenIsHere It's important to remember that all roles are volunteer roles, and self-care is #1 It's always important to take breaks when needed, whether it's a break from the site or a break from a specific role. As long as this is emphasized and remembered for member roles, it should be alright. The other member leadership roles, such as Forum Member Leader or Mega Member, have worked out well and those in the role seem to be ensuring self-care
@Emily619 ah, yeah, that's a good argument about the other member roles and it going well... You're probably right. Thanks for giving me some food for thought ❤ I think I'm just gonna try to remain positive about it until I have a reason now to. Thank you!
@JaydenIsHere
I like the idea, only if warnings don't factor in. Even I have had warnings before. I'm sure anyone who's been on here as long as i have has had at least one to their name. I mean heck, I was given one of those warnings for venting in the group chats.
@LittleAardwolf I'm pretty sure everyone has gotten a warning at one point or another. Maybe it would be more appropriate to just filter out warnings and have mutes/bans or warnings from the last week or something?
@Emily619 @JaydenIsHere
As a member who uses this site for support I agree more with Jayden's statements that "It's unfair to label some people as more quality than others... [it could] also make unverified members feel like they have less worth." than with Emily's theory of "rather [it'd] motivate them to become verified".
I can see this idea having the unintentional consequence of "unverified" members being looked down on, and having untrue assumptions made about them:
"They can't get verified cause they got too many warnings."
"They aren't verified cause they're a troll."
I come on here for support, not to tick off a checklist of requirements to be accepted as a legitimate member on the site. It would be quite demoralising to be perceived otherwise.
@JaydenIsHere I agree. That's what I was trying to say...it feels like it promotes a competition or comparison atmosphere. Why would I even try to reveal anything here if it was going to affect my "score"?
@JaydenIsHere
I understand what you are saying, but since becoming a verified listener doesn't take so long, its kind of part of the training and members should be able to choose their listener which includes knowing what experience and training the listener has completed. We all start somewhere and work our way up to earn things just as we do in other jobs. This will also help weed out those who come on here who do not have the best intentions. While we should not be "punished" for others behaviors, its a reality and we should be happy they do this as our actions will show that we are willing to work hard and we will have no problems reaching our goals. 7cups admin team has to find some way to ensure quality. I wish you lots of luck in here and I can tell by your thoughtful response that you will do well. :)
This is a nice idea! I don't think forum upvotes should be counted, as it's not a requirement to become a Verified Listener. As far as the mutes, I feel this is a similar aspect as to the forum upvotes - since it's not a reqiurement to become a Verified Listener, it shouldn't be a requirement to become a Verified Member. If it is counted, however, I do think that they should have a time limit, rather than disqualifying people from applying if they've had a mute or warning sometime ago. For example, no mutes/warnings/reports within the last X months.
@Emily619 Agreed! I think 3 months is a good time
@Laura As someone who uses the site a lot but doesn't really talk to listeners, having to have 50+ private chats seems a lot!
I agree, and I said this on the feedback form. People use 7 Cups in different ways and it would be good to allow alternative criteria.
@LittleLotte
@RarelyCharlie I agree about the alternative criteria. It would help to know what the purpose is behind this, having a minimum amount covering all areas of the site might be useful just as it shows knowledge of all areas. I think that picking one form of support over another should be treated equally though. Some people might prefer 1-1s, some forum, some group support and some on the growth path steps. I think these options should all be treated equally, so requirements should require all of these or have different options to get the badge.
@LittleLotte
I rarely use the listener system(because it's not very good) and I have had probably have closer to 1,000. Granted that was because I found one listener who would put up with me(ONE!). It's not hard to get 50 when you're desperately trying to sort out the weeds.
@LittleAardwolf .... Aardy, you just haven't found my listener account yet :) <3 Platy
Yes, it does exist :P
@LittleAardwolf and then even some of the few listeners who bend over backwards to do their best are not appreciated at all by 7cups or the leviathan a-hole administration who flag listeners, issue warnings, and terminate their accounts based on vindictive lies that are submitted in reports in order to get the listener banned. And it always works because no matter what BS allegations are made against the listener, they are accepted 100% at face value and the listener is guilty as charged (even if they have earned many accolades and highly positive reviews for all their hard work). (edited and some deleted by Rumple very unsupportive)
@LittleLotte Same it's a bit like quality over quantity.
@Laura I don't know. Maybe I don't know enough about what you're doing.
It feels a bit like....competing to be Head Boy or Prefect????
And with all the emotions running around as we are all healing and working on things....would this make people feel truncated in what they are willing to express or even in the amount of help they might seek out ? I say that while completely agreeing that we want 7 Cups to be the best, safest, most supportive Community: which includes respect, kindness, boundaries, etc.
Please educate me. I may not be understanding.
A good therapist would never want their clients to remain in therapy
@shyCat6891 True. However a gops therspist also wants people to seek help that nees it. And most people eho are desling eith a big challrnge ALREADY feel judged.
I have a question. I was a listener for several months. Due to work I was unable to find time to get on the site. Now I am back as a Listener. I was reading about 7 cups online and it mentioned there are phone listeners that can be compensated if they so choose- is this correct and if so what is the process for becoming a phone Listener? Thanks, Erin
It is not correct. When 7 Cups first started it was a telephone service and listeners could be paid. Later, that was all dropped.
Some obsolete information about those old systems has never been cleaned up, so you can still read about it in a couple of places.
@AutumnSunset23
Oh ok I thought it was incorrect i just wanted to be sure. Thanks. Sry.
@AutumnSunset23 It would be nice if all the outdated info was archived and labelled so it's known it's no longer relevant. It can still be accessed so people can look at the history if desired, but it would be less confusing if someone comes across old information.
"We will be asking members to verify their emails."
YES!!! 2018 here on 7 Cups is l@@king better all the time. 
I don't know ...the more I sit with thos...the odder ans more incomfortsble it feels. Take me as an example. I'm a relativelt new member...I THINK i have an okay rep ocerall....but I don't really know. And the Listeners may feel differently than the members and vice versa. I've asked Listeners for feedback.
Pursuing vadfes and decidinf to articipste further cis a vis newsletters forums ans thr the like... thst sll feels choice-driven. This feels like veing measured to see whether I-m "good enough" to belong to the elite crowd.
@Laura
zero warning? it sounds very strict to me. warnings are not reports. we all can get them from time to time on a bad day. even community managers could get them without their mod badge there. being offtopic from time to time in discussions by example is not so bad.
But I agree with no behavior points or mute in a reasonable time -similar to listeners for going in leadership roles- isnt 3 months or something?
Upvotes is tough, not everyone is comfortable sharing their story in forums. Don't forget that members can feel vulnerable to share their story and dont necessary want their issues being public.
Complete the compassion course could be a reasonable criteria. similar to AL1 for listeners needed for a lot of projects.
@TortueDesBois
This
