Sorry if this was asked before or something.
But what is the thing under our names besides the mins? Is it how many threads/topics we've like submitted to?

It is Karma. (Karma is a rating for activity.)
http://www.staredit.net/?faq=10

I'm still unsure how the word Karma relates to days active. I'd suggest a name change just to make its purpose clearer to everyone. Other boards, such as Simple Machine Forums, use a Karma system that works like Reputation rather than representing activity. Those who frequent multiple communities are apt to be confused by this name conflict. How about just calling it "Activity"? "Days Active"? "Life Lost to SEN"?

I vote the latter.

Wow, apparantly I responded with the same response as last time when Syphon answered this question.
http://www.staredit.net/topic/2421/

http://www.gamefaqs.com/features/help/entry.html?cat=18

Dear Moose:
None of that explains the reasons for the use of the word Karma. I could go into detail about the actual belief system of Karma, but I assume most people are aware of its basic tenants or can Wikipedia it. Perhaps its just picky on my part, but an activity system just doesn't match a term like Karma very well, nor communicates its concept very clearly, instead relying on extended explanations. I see a word along the lines of "Activity" being far more succinct, or a phrase like "Days Active" being self-explanatory to virtually any user.

The word Karma bears no significance to Starcraft. I see no reason to be attached to the term (unlike Minerals for cash) except as a homage to GameFAQ. Yet the idea here is only to show how dedicated and consistent each user is based on their activity (rather than gauging by post count). You don't have their Karma-based ranking system, Karma fines for warnings, or account restrictions based on Karma. Keeping the Karma term just makes it obvious where it was ripped from. Your Karma system is not the same (albeit more stripped down that truly different), but because you aren't fully lifting the entire system from GameFAQs, I don't see any benefit to keeping its terminology (especially one that fits so awkwardly). In fact, GameFAQs is not the first forum or community to display a "Days Active" stat, though they've certainly built an interesting system around it.

Is the Administration open to alternative name suggestions, or is it committed to the term Karma?

Not yet, anyway.

It isn't so much that I'm opposed to the idea, but rather that I see the entire issue over the name as trivial.

Apparently, "activity" refers to just about anything, as I have more karma than posts

Dear Moose:
Yes, a name is a small matter, but when designing with user-friendliness in mind, nothing is trivial.

Don't we lose one Karma for each moderation action against us? I'd say that's one of the three.

Oh, I also forgot to mention that when I implemented the system, the value of "karma" already existed in the database. It was much easier to use the existing framework and the numbers modified, instead of adding totally new values. The other unused value was "Reputation", so be glad I didn't pick that one.

Was reputation the little red cross? I remember it from early v5. I also remember the gas system.
We used to have like 6 little icons on our profiles

Minerals/Gas/Karma/Rep were the only four.

Karma should realy not really completely relate to how long you were on - that should probably be only a multiplier or something. Weren't you going to make Karma be changed to options of +2, neutral or -1 for every person to every other person? That's a way better system then what's currently there.

I figured that would be a better system for reputation. IE, IP's idea for karma would fit better under the name of Reputation.

Ah. Implement that soon, plez .

Karma's pointless. In its current form, I'd honestly remove it. Just me two cents.

I think it's useful when identifying new guys and veterans. Not all newbies have low minerals or no avatar, you know...

Dear Centreri:
No, Karma is not pointless. Neither post count nor join date communicate what Karma does.

Dear Moose:
Heh, this is the kind of stuff I'm talking about. Without a strong reason for the current name, and the ease of changing it to a name that can instantly communicate its purpose with clarity, it is more practical to rename it. Otherwise, you'll likely be locking these types of topics every few months. Few people care enough to read the FAQ undirected.

If you really don't want to change the name, wikify it. As in, if a person clicks on the icon, it'll take them to the entry about Karma in the FAQ. That's probably the most effective way to get someone to read this obscure document -- bait them into it wherever they might have a newbie question, just like Wikipedia. =o)