Vote: Reorganized Reputation System.

[Drac]

Nah lets make it more of as count dracula thing.

Watch it sucka!!!!

 

[14 Kempo]

Nah lets make it more of as count dracula thing.

That's Count Chocula ... come on Terry.

 

[Carol]

Always after me Lucky Charms...

 

[terryl965]

That's Count Chocula ... come on Terry.

Ok so I'm not a ceral buff. I like only Frosted Flakes.

 

[Makalakumu]

I voted to keep the system as is because as it stands, it doesn't really mean that much in terms of content. People who post often and in popular places are going to have higher reps. People who have much more specific info in more obscure areas may not have higher reps. Thus, the system is really only showing the collective approval of the contributions of various community members with no contextual criteria. Which isn't neccesarily a bad thing. I'm comfortable being brainy in some areas and less social in others.

 

[exile]

I voted to keep the system as is because as it stands, it doesn't really mean that much in terms of content. People who post often and in popular places are going to have higher reps. People who have much more specific info in more obscure areas may not have higher reps. Thus, the system is really only showing the collective approval of the contributions of various community members with no contextual criteria. Which isn't neccesarily a bad thing. I'm comfortable being brainy in some areas and less social in others.

Good points, UpN. If you're right—and I very much suspect you are—it suggests that the problem people who don't like the current system have is not so much with the system itself, but rather with the way other people may draw conclusions from it. The particular system in force—which is only one among many possible ones—is pretty neutral. In itself, it doesn't tell you much more than what is suggested in the lines I've bolded. There's no way such a system can quantify the worth of the contributions made by any given member. It can't do anything but record the response of members to a bunch of posts. If you ask people to vote on favorite ice cream flavors, almost certainly it will turn out to be the case that vanilla, chocolate and butter pecan will be the top three flavors, at least according to ice cream industry polls that I've seen. But what does that fact mean to the people for whom burgundy cherry or mint chocolate chip are the best things ever created? And so on...

I think UpN, and others who've made similar points, such as Sukerkin, have got the essence of it here; and I think that what the people who are unhappy about the system are actually unhappy about is that members with relatively lower rep will be perceived as somehow less valuable to the board than those with higher rep. But some of the very best, most insightful and informative posts I've seen on the board have been made by people with relatively low rep (and, not coincidentally, lower post counts)—and (I'd like to think that) anyone who spends much time on MT could say the same thing.

I don't think any particular change to the rep system will change the facts that (i) people who post more, and who post in a way which corresponds to the `collective will' of the board, are going to accumulate more rep, and that (ii) the quality of any given post is not necessarily correlated with the poster's rep numbers. I'd bet high that if we have any rational rep system at all, then the same substantive issues are going to arise no matter what form that rep system takes. You just have to assume that people, on the whole, aren't going to confuse rep with intelligence, logic, rationality or whatever. And if they do... well, that's really their contradiction, as me mum used to say... and I very much doubt that any change in the rules of the game are going to be able to ensure that higher rep guarantees higher intelligence, logic, or rationality (or the converse, for that matter).

It's not academe, folks, where people who don't get enough `rep' from the journal referees don't publish and do perish, and have their careers destroyed in the process. Be glad.

 

[arnisador]

But some of the very best, most insightful and informative posts I've seen on the board have been made by people with relatively low rep

Leading one to wonder if reputation is the best name for the score?

 

[shesulsa]

Leading one to wonder if reputation is the best name for the score?

And once again we return to the question of how much a person's reputation matters and what it really means - which is ALL a matter of popular opinion. REMEMBER: Al Gore won the popular vote ... but he wasn't President now was he?

I think the error in your thinking is that you are applying logic to a feel-good system which is logically doomed.

People get rep for hilarious posts - by the nature of your argument this should never happen. People get reputation for being supportive of others - by your argument this should never happen. People get rep for playing devil's advocate or inserting a moderator warning. By your argument this should never happen. Staff can get rep for initiating good board policy - by your definitions this should never happen.

Your desire for the reputation system to be mathematically and categorically correct cannot be achieved because no feel-good system is designed for this. That is to say unless our coding guru can mandate that staff are immune to reputation giving and receiving as long as they carry a staff banner, can disallow reputation in all but martial forums, and can discern the posts in those forums as to quality, then your utopian idea of reputation is hopeless, sorry.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

And once again we return to the question of how much a person's reputation matters and what it really means - which is ALL a matter of popular opinion. REMEMBER: Al Gore won the popular vote ... but he wasn't President now was he?

I think the error in your thinking is that you are applying logic to a feel-good system which is logically doomed.

People get rep for hilarious posts - by the nature of your argument this should never happen. People get reputation for being supportive of others - by your argument this should never happen. People get rep for playing devil's advocate or inserting a moderator warning. By your argument this should never happen. Staff can get rep for initiating good board policy - by your definitions this should never happen.

Your desire for the reputation system to be mathematically and categorically correct cannot be achieved because no feel-good system is designed for this. That is to say unless our coding guru can mandate that staff are immune to reputation giving and receiving as long as they carry a staff banner, can disallow reputation in all but martial forums, and can discern the posts in those forums as to quality, then your utopian idea of reputation is hopeless, sorry.

Uh, no, not without massively rewiting the system and being forced to reexamine and remodify things everything vB makes a change in the core software.

 

[Brian King]

So if I understand the views that say the system is lopsided and/or broken and if I understand all who say it does not matter, leave the scoring system as it is, it is a feel good system and such should also have absolutely no problem simply changing the name of the system. Perhaps instead of reputation we should call it popularity which does seem to more fit the way that most here write how they use and read it. If you tell a good joke you become more popular, if you support somebody you become more popular and so on. If you are a jerk you become less popular.

Problem solved. Instead of reputation points now call them popularity points. The number of stars will still be increasing at an expediential rate but it is only popularity and who really cares about that other than the shallow sad folks yet it will still be a method of encouragement and control as most want to be liked.

Brian King

 

[arnisador]

People get rep for hilarious posts - by the nature of your argument this should never happen.

I don't recall arguing anything at all like that.

Your desire for the reputation system to be mathematically and categorically correct

You're simply making things up and attributing them to me.

I explained my position here.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Current vote is:
36 Keep it
27 Change it
673 not voting/no opinion (based on member logins since poll began)

 

[Flying Crane]

Current vote is:
36 Keep it
27 Change it
673 not voting/no opinion (based on member logins since poll began)

Hey Bob,

I haven't voted, as I don't see a choice that seems best.

Maybe everyone should just keep the points they have, but put a cap on how much rep power someone can accumulate? This way the collection of stars might slow down a bit, and maybe even cap the number of stars. Once you hit that cap, you just don't acquire any more rep. People can hit you with a rep comment, but don't add it to the total anymore.

I've been saying this kind of thing all along, regarding rank in the martial arts. If you still need a carrot dangled in front of your nose to keep training, then maybe you aren't really blackbelt quality. Black should be black, ditch all the rest of the degrees and stuff.

Same thing here. Cap it out, don't go beyond the cap, but don't ditch what people have already, unless the cap on stars would be lower than some already have. Bring it to that line and then just hold it there.

 

[terryl965]

Hey Bob,

I haven't voted, as I don't see a choice that seems best.

Maybe everyone should just keep the points they have, but put a cap on how much rep power someone can accumulate? This way the collection of stars might slow down a bit, and maybe even cap the number of stars. Once you hit that cap, you just don't acquire any more rep. People can hit you with a rep comment, but don't add it to the total anymore.

I've been saying this kind of thing all along, regarding rank in the martial arts. If you still need a carrot dangled in front of your nose to keep training, then maybe you aren't really blackbelt quality. Black should be black, ditch all the rest of the degrees and stuff.

Same thing here. Cap it out, don't go beyond the cap, but don't ditch what people have already, unless the cap on stars would be lower than some already have. Bring it to that line and then just hold it there.

Very well said

 

[Kreth]

I've been saying this kind of thing all along, regarding rank in the martial arts. If you still need a carrot dangled in front of your nose to keep training, then maybe you aren't really blackbelt quality. Black should be black, ditch all the rest of the degrees and stuff.

I'd rep you for this post, but I don't want to over-inflate your total...

 

[Flying Crane]

I'd rep you for this post, but I don't want to over-inflate your total...

heh heh, that's ok, Bob will just take it away again if necessary.

 

[Ella]

artyon:

Very well said Brian this is the best board on the net.

Probably one of the best suggestions I've seen so far!!

very well said my tea-sipping friend.

Very well said

Some people have been mentioning some things about a thumbs up/thumbs down system. So perhaps we could add something like that, in addition to the rep system. That way, perhaps less posts similar to those above find their way into threads, because they seem rather pointless; to me, at least.

Why post something which has no new information or thoughts or anything? Kinda... a waste of space

 

[terryl965]

Some people have been mentioning some things about a thumbs up/thumbs down system. So perhaps we could add something like that, in addition to the rep system. That way, perhaps less posts similar to those above find their way into threads, because they seem rather pointless; to me, at least.

Why post something which has no new information or thoughts or anything? Kinda... a waste of space

You mean like your post, please do not make statement that you yourself practice.

 

[Sapper6]

Some people have been mentioning some things about a thumbs up/thumbs down system. So perhaps we could add something like that, in addition to the rep system. That way, perhaps less posts similar to those above find their way into threads, because they seem rather pointless; to me, at least.

Why post something which has no new information or thoughts or anything? Kinda... a waste of space

well, i would have just rep'd the guy for his statement but it seems you would have had a problem with that as well.

 

[Drac]

well, i would have just rep'd the guy for his statement but it seems you would have had a problem with that as well.

I did rep him....