[quote author=Veqryn link=topic=27511.msg969394#msg969394 date=1338885910]
DJ, you should remove that “respect” counter below everyone’s name.
Have the karma be per-post, and not per-person.
If anything, make it so that only admins and moderators can see people’s respect total.
reason: if you give people a counter of any kind, they will try to increase it. You will quickly see people giving each other “respect points” purely to give each other points. This serves no purpose, and distorts the original intent.
[/quote]
I agree with this. Just like the Karma of old, it will just lead to ‘collecting’ points.
So I’m not going to tell you that. Not even the moderators know the answer. I really only want the posts to be hidden in the extreme cases. If there are too many that are hidden, I’m lowering the threshold.
In a sense, the hiding a post part of it is a temporary backup to “report to moderator.” IL is pretty fast but if he is away on vacation and the rest of lag by a few hours, the community might be able to make a porn or spam posts go away without a moderator’s intervention.
So downvoted posts should be hidden only in the extreme cases, 3 downvotes (or whatever) should be more of a signal to the community that this post may not be relevant or appropriate. It’s also a training mechanism for the community. If the community doesn’t like your “style” then you’d better adjust to stop getting downvotes. The training aspect needs work because you should have to provide a comment as to why you downvoted so each member know what they need to do to become a better citizen. e.g., “Downvote because this post was nonsensical and childish.”
I don’t really think this will work, BUT lets give it a try.
DJ probably put some effort into this, and it is an Idea to be sure.
Lets all give it a try for 3-4 months and see how it goes.
After that, we can really decide if this is a good addition or not.
(btw, what happens when a post gets a lot of down votes?� how many down votes are required for whatever actions happen to it?)
I want people to collect points. I want people to post good things and be rewarded. I want to build a reputation system that works. That was the idea behind karma but karma had a loophole. The loopholes here should be corrected by, you, the community.
Post “gimmie votes” and the community must downvote it until you start losing reputation instead. Personally, I’m much more willing to downvote a single post than subtract karma from somebody.
This is only the first step and in a sense an experiment.
Also, I can do a simple database query and find the anomalies and delete them, it’s much easier to pinpoint in a system like this.
DJ, you should remove that “respect” counter below everyone’s name.
Have the karma be per-post, and not per-person.
If anything, make it so that only admins and moderators can see people’s respect total.
reason: if you give people a counter of any kind, they will try to increase it.� You will quickly see people giving each other “respect points” purely to give each other points.� This serves no purpose, and distorts the original intent.
I agree with this. Just like the Karma of old, it will just lead to ‘collecting’ points.
80, I’d be shocked if the numbers got that high.
@Vance:
@Imperious:
Right the thing should work without a numerical value or rating attached to it.
After X amount of flags, the post should disappear and the post count should reduce by the same. It should not be ± type of thing. + does not lead to any consequence anyway so why have it?
So if 90 people click + and 10 people click -, would you have it show as +80 or as -10?
BTW, to make this work, everybody need to use the system. A few can be childish with it but if everybody else uses it appropriately, it will balance out.
In that sense, the system is incomplete because the casual user doesn’t have motivation to up vote.
Well no. you only need a negative arrow. If it reaches say -10, the post is hidden or removed ( not sure which one should be the action)
It is more like what they do on you tube ( and i don’t mean the ± system they got for rating videos), but the flag system. If enough people flag a post, it gets hidden. Problem with that system is it still allows a person to view the post. I propose this not be possible.
I like the concept that it -costs- reputation to smite a bad post.
But of course, you have to post alot in order to score any reputation.
Thats another problem.
Like Karma, it leads to people who post alot of fluff posts. Sometimes posters think their is some race to get to the top of the “total posts leaderboard” which is clearly a concept only from their mind. They often post in so many threads often offering nothing but “jokes” because they know nothing about the topic, or “i totally agree” style posts which add nothing to the discussion. I think we used to have more of this problem in the past and when Karma was junked, the forums got fresh air. Some people were just karma freaks and it disrupted the forums IMO.
[quote author=Imperious Leader link=topic=27511.msg969548#msg969548 date=1338916579]
Thats another problem.
Like Karma, it leads to people who post alot of fluff posts. Sometimes posters think their is some race to get to the top of the “total posts leaderboard” which is clearly a concept only from their mind. They often post in so many threads often offering nothing but “jokes” because they know nothing about the topic, or “i totally agree” style posts which add nothing to the discussion. I think we used to have more of this problem in the past and when Karma was junked, the forums got fresh air. Some people were just karma freaks and it disrupted the forums IMO.
[/quote]
Great comments IL,
Who are some of the worst culprits we’ve had for that?
Oh wait… Commander Jennifer - 45905
In fact, when reviewed… Out of 5233 members, only 6 have moderator status.
3 of which are in the top 10 “posters” on the site. How fascinating… 0.001%, is representing 30% of the top post count.
I totally agree with your sentiments Imperious Leader, how do we cut down on people posting fluff, just to get on the “total posts” leaderboard?.
It would seem, that perhaps the site is rewarding those who post the most…
[quote]Who are some of the worst culprits we’ve had for that?[/quote]
I forgot their names, but they since left this site. They posted like 20 times a day and most of that was “yea you right” or “I totally agree” or some silly joke. Nothing that added to anything.
[quote]3 of which are in the top 10 “posters” on the site. How fascinating… 0.001%, is representing 30% of the top post count.[/quote]
Because they been with us for many years. What i was talking about was those new members who showed up posting 30+ posts a day of 4-5 word posts. Not members with us since like 2001 who post 3 times a day and have alot of posts only because over time they had more opportunity.
You got to look only at how many posts they make in a day on average. Going by total posts is a waste.
[quote]I totally agree with your sentiments Imperious Leader, how do we cut down on people posting fluff, just to get on the “total posts” leaderboard?.[/quote]
People who consider their post count important have some real issues. It means nothing to anybody. Karma for some reason motivated them as well.
[quote]Post “gimmie votes” and the community must downvote it until you start losing reputation instead. Personally, I’m much more willing to downvote a single post than subtract karma from somebody.[/quote]
Yea but like karma it will bring again that silly thread which had its only purpose to rank up + votes, where people asked for votes and reciprocated to those who gave them. It is only a matter of time before something like that shows up.
Again their is no [b]result[/b] from having alot of + posts. The only result that may appear is by having many - votes and the post gets hidden. So really, their is no need for +
[quote author=djensen link=topic=27511.msg969519#msg969519 date=1338912631]
None of the BBCodes are working. The stupid BBCodes permission plugin, I think, is the problem. I’m looking into it.
[/quote]
Thank you!!
[quote author=Gargantua link=topic=27511.msg969536#msg969536 date=1338915606]
I like the concept that it -costs- reputation to smite a bad post.
But of course, you have to post alot in order to score any reputation.
[/quote]
You would never be able to smite, then, Garg.
And perhaps that’s the way it should be Gamer! :)
-147?
-43?
Already guys?
Sigh.
I’m thinking about seeding reputation with something else. 1 point per 2 existing posts (not future) and 1 point per thread started.
Thoughts?
It would be a one time bump in respect.
How bout make this only related to the post and not a mark against the poster.
People vote for the post or not and if it heads into say the -10 range, it gets hidden.
Why the heck does it need to run a cumulative total for that poster?
So if you remove the total under the avatar, it might work.
Is there a reason we need to see everyone’s total posts under the avatar? Removing this may help stop the race for post leader board.
Exactly right. It will solve all the problems.
We tried to tell you, Dave :-)
Can you imagine what Garg and IL’s totals would be in a couple of weeks? :-P
Heck, I even gave IL like 7 +'s last night and he STILL has -43 in one day! :-)
