|
|
#21
08-24-2007, 05:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Alternative to the * system
[ QUOTE ]
opening the door for serious abuse, [/ QUOTE ] You mean, like, people who aren't reputable would appear to be, and vice versa? We can't have that. I won't know whether to like their posts or not. 
|
|
#22
08-24-2007, 05:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Alternative to the * system
[ QUOTE ]
NT, "i doubt anything involving reputations assessed by other users would carry that much weight." I feel pretty much exactly 100% the opposite. [/ QUOTE ] diablo, the reason i feel this way is that i don't want OOT to become some sort of rep-whoring suck zone like some forums that have this system. any truly democratic rating system would pretty much necessarily get corrupted by the fact that noobs rating each other would far outweigh the opinions of established, solid posters. if you can give me a rating system where only certain people can issue a rating, then perhaps. i'm not saying that the opinions of OOT posters should have no weight in the matter, merely that the existing systems that i've seen don't really accomplish that anyway.
|
|
#24
08-24-2007, 05:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Alternative to the * system
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] NT, "i doubt anything involving reputations assessed by other users would carry that much weight." I feel pretty much exactly 100% the opposite. [/ QUOTE ] diablo, the reason i feel this way is that i don't want OOT to become some sort of rep-whoring suck zone like some forums that have this system. any truly democratic rating system would pretty much necessarily get corrupted by the fact that noobs rating each other would far outweigh the opinions of established, solid posters. if you can give me a rating system where only certain people can issue a rating, then perhaps. i'm not saying that the opinions of OOT posters should have no weight in the matter, merely that the existing systems that i've seen don't really accomplish that anyway. [/ QUOTE ] Well on BB, you don't have any reputation altering power until you have at least 50 posts. You could have this number at like 200 or something here if you desire. Other measures in place to reduce abuse are you can only hand out reputation 5 times per day, and you can only give a person reputation for a 2nd time after you have given out reputation to at least 40 others. It generally takes quite a while to build up a solid amount of reputation altering power as well. I have been there a little over 3 months, have ~300 posts, and have 5 points of rep-altering power. I have just under 5000 reputation points. So basically if someone in my position were to give me reputation for a post, I would have 5005 rep points instead of 5000. You really need to establish yourself to have any reasonable effect on another poster's rep. Some of the mods have over 100000 points of rep-altering power.
|
|
#25
08-24-2007, 05:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Alternative to the * system
scotty,
this sounds interesting. what adds to 'rep altering power' in this system? posts? because if this is the case it would obviously be a problem, retards like Bob Ojeda Fan or El Diablo would have more input than someone like adsman, who is basically always right. it also seems like mutually terrible posters would just build each other up all the time.
|
|
#27
08-24-2007, 05:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Alternative to the * system
NT,
It seems like a pretty good idea to me. It's not a perfect system, but there seems to be enough variables to limit easy manipulation. Getting positive responses to your posts increases your ability to rate others. Being around along time increases your ability to rate others. Post count increases your ability to rate others. It actually seems pretty fair to me.
|
|
#28
08-24-2007, 06:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Alternative to the * system
[ QUOTE ]
scotty, this sounds interesting. what adds to 'rep altering power' in this system? posts? because if this is the case it would obviously be a problem, retards like Bob Ojeda Fan or El Diablo would have more input than someone like adsman, who is basically always right. [/ QUOTE ] I briefly outlined it in the original post, but I'll do it again. There are 3 ways to add to your rep-altering power: 1. Posts - every 1000 posts earns you 1 more point of altering power (1000 is arbitrary, just what BB happens to use) 2. Time - every year of membership earns you 1 more point 3. Reputation - every 1000 positive reputation points earns you 1 more point of altering power - this is the main way your power goes up So everyone who has been around a while, posted a lot, and posted valuable contributions will have higher rep-altering power. As mentioned before also, anyone with negative overall rep ("in the red") has zero rep-altering power, so people who consistently make terrible posts won't have any effect. If the system was implemented exactly like BB, it would take a while for it to become effective just because everyone will start with such little power. BB has been around for quite a while and has huge membership, so posters have anywhere from 0 to 100000+ points of altering power. I have only seen mods with huge amounts like that, but some regular posters have 5-10K points (typically ~3-5 points from Time, ~10 from # of posts, and thousands just from receiving reputation from others). The admins could of course customize all the numbers to best suit our forum. They could automatically give mods extra rep-altering power. You could make rules in OOT such as rep-begging = temp ban (or if mods have extra rep power, just neg the guy which will eliminate any positive rep he got from begging plus some).
|
|
#30
08-24-2007, 06:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Alternative to the * system
A) Give certain posters a high rep count to begin with, so they can semi-veto the onslaught of noobs helping each other.
B) Make rep points be the biggest factor in how many rep points you can in turn give out. Post #'s and Time don't really matter as much in OOT. It could work. Make a rule that says if you talk about rep points or beg for rep points you get banned
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
