Hi Peasie,

I appreciate what your saying and know the thread that you're talking about (Now with a lot of gaps where discussion once was).

As an overall feeling though I don't think that we should start thinking about any change that might start segregating the members into sub groups. At the moment we have ICB, IAB, AAT, ATT, ACCA, CIMA, IFA, AIA and even one or two ICAEW's all conversing quite merrily on equal terms.

For bookkeeping questions the answers should be universal enough to cover any body and if the question is specific then people do tend to state the body that they are a member of.

The thing to ask yourself is if you were answering a question would you be so forthcoming if you knew it was being asked by, for example, a chartered accountant? Your answers are no less valid regardless as to who you are talking to.

There's also an issue where people are not members of a body may become less open to asking questions for fear that their lack of a professional body may cause issues when asking questions.

If you start putting badges on people then we would be building a psuedo class recognition system into a currently hierarchy free forum.

In short, my vote is that this one is not a good idea even if it could have had some useful, though limited, uses for some quite specific circumstances which I do fully appreciate.

Right, next message...

-- Edited by lutherparker on Monday 9th of January 2012 11:05:08 PM

Have to agree with Kris Luther, that whole incident from yesterday is now behind us and I was hoping that we have now moved forwards in a constructive manner.

This thread was a different matter. And I for one have actually voted against the idea of peoples supervisory body being part of their profile unless they decide to make it part of their signiture such as people like Lor (Lorraine) have in order to advertise her AAT status.