community rating.

[Sharkith]

I would have thought anyone who was prepared to make such a point would not really care what people think ? Otherwise everyone would be so frightened of anyones opinion that there would be no point in posting to begin with.

That's sheer assumption though, no proof that that's the case whatsoever hence it's really not a valid point at all. Also, Banana's talking about tying this to forum rewards which makes the problem a thousand times worse.

Xest,

it is more a proposition you know full well that no argument can begin without some form of proposition. Arguments are not borne on data alone. What is important is to state propostiions from the outset - which I think I did. You are of course more than qualified to use other propositions. You cannot just discount the one I was making because it was what it is. It is the nature of proposition to seek proof so to cite no current proof as a way of ignoring it is kind of missing the point. So just to re-iterate the proposition:

Anyone who is prepared to make a controversial point in a public forum is not likely to worry too much about a rating system.

find the data to disprove it... I really don't mind it can be revised or rejected.

Equally to Ankh - if you have a negative rating and you think some people are after you then surely that rating is simply an indicator of how sad some people are. Obviously from your own construction it is nothing to be taken too seriously.

Which is why it's totally pointless in the first place and ironically, overall does nothing but cause more frictio.

This is a good test of the proposition although not sure about your observations because I cannot see what you can see of course.

It helps with such as self moderation - which is irrelevant now anyway, seeing as we produced a CoC and brought in more mods to mean self-moderation isn't even needed. Equally however for every little bit of self moderation it helps with it's already just causing even more friction and annoyance to other people.

Not sure what you mean here. We could volunteer another 'proposition' and discuss it: anything that makes external moderation less visible reduces the friction in the channel? That of course might not be good if you want to promote 'free' and 'open' discussion - the evidence for this is the fact that Ankh self censoring in this way would not be good. Hence why I volunteered another view. Sorry you found that objectionable.

If people have a point to make and feel passionate about it let them make it, as long as they don't go over the top (in which case the CoC/Mods come into play) then it's not a problem, don't make people hide their views or dampen their feelings just because of some silly easy to abuse shop/rating system.

I don't find this statement clear it mixes two things. The first bit I agree with - but I am confused why you do not agree with the first proposition I made above. The second bit is really important and needs to be aired as the other side of the first proposition so the other side of this might be.

A public rating system impedes communication of alternative perspectives and so reduces the diversity of the forums and so it has a bad effect on the forums as a whole.

kind regards

Sharkith

[Belisar]

I have to agree with Ankh (omg) and Xest <faints>.

Seems to me the the idea of a forum is to come and post a point of view. Some will agree (and post) some will disagree (and post). We have discussions that turn into arguments, posts that prompt thought and individuals expressing their thoughts without getting either worried about votes or searching for rewards.

Sorry to say I struggle to see the upside of the voting system.

However I for one am happy to see some thought and innovation in the way the forum runs and am therefore happy to suck it and see (for those who think I am being kinky that simply means let it run for a while and then make a more informed judgement).

Edit - can I campaign for votes ? maybe create some spam threads saying vote for me, I am a nice person and my posts make sense so givf me a positive (garbage but then I guess I will just be like a lot of politicians).

[Xest]

Anyone who is prepared to make a controversial point in a public forum is not likely to worry too much about a rating system.

find the data to disprove it... I really don't mind it can be revised or rejected.

Why do I always have to be the one to find the data? When I was proving something you insisted the other day that I be the one to provide the data, now I'm disproving once again you ask me to provide data to back my claim or you suggest my point isn't valid without data. Going by your previous logic you should be the one providing data this time round to prove your point, else what you said should be assumed to be completely and utterly false, much in the same way you treated my comments the other day until I provided some data.

[Satyn]

If this voting system would be used wise by everyone it would be a great thing. But its not so I understand everyone that doesnt like it. I dont care if it goes or stays tbh I just dont want ppl feeling upset about the points they are getting. And some of those ppl are very well known. It would be sad to see them stop posting over this system.
Its also sad that ppl are so childish to abuse the voting.

Maybe make it possible to only vote positive? and leave the negative behind?

[Puppet]

What I've seen so far, the system is genuinly used for rating postive and negative posts and thus might give the ones with bad posts something to think about. I'm hoping this system will improve the posting quality overall.
Maybe make it possible for Moderators to see who voted negative. If someone suspects someone is purposely harassing with neg votes, (for example when he gets a - on a decentish post), the mod can look it up and see if there's a voting pattern for that specific person.

Unfortunaly this system will not improve the postings. I could give you a social-mathematical proof for it, but I wont bother. Instead I redirect you to http://www.freddyshouse.com where they got this same system pretty much (called Reputation Points) and looks how the postings come on thát board....

In worst case scenario you actually get an avalanche of voting as Ankh described, which will not only demotivate serious posters, but also motivate some people who got nothing to post at all, but just are fishing for Rep.Points (Community-points, whatever) to enhance their virtual e-Peen. Once again I point you towards Freddyshouse and look up Belomar's postings. Literally 25% of his postings of the last few weeks is ended with 'If you like this picture, post, please give reputation points'.

Your last suggestion is a nice one, but think about it, you're sorting out people who 'deviate from the average vote'. Why bother with a rating-system if it's easily being rated (if you want to rate postings anyhow? Whats the point?) anyhow. Just get a moderator / semi-unbiased person to do the Ratings then.

Worst thing however is that even the (semi-)private guildforums are having this link system. I mean.... Whats the point in that? Im gonna rate Wou his posting for setting up a group upcoming next Wednesday? Not to mention the easy way of manipulating the ratings in the guildforums. Just spam postings and lets guildies rate em +. Do it in 1 thread and keep clicking the + for maximum score. YAY for that.

In the end the score-system is entirely useless and in the end will be used by forum-addicts to extend their e-Peen.

My 2 cents,
Puppet.

// edit: The entire reason for such a public forum is to debate and discuss to gain information. A rating-system on postings on such a forum serves no reason other then 'adding fluff' or mimicking other forums (Freddyshouse to mention that one again). It's pointless and by even having people stop posting over this you're actually going straight AGAINST the principle of the forum in the beginning....

And dont get me wrong, I wont stop posting (or start posting more) because of those ratings. I dont care about them and the only few times I clicked them was because I saw the changed layout and didnt know what it did (kid-style 'I wonder what this button dooooooooooooooo oooooooooohhhh')

[Puppet]

Also I quote:

The rules for the rating system are as follows:

Everyone starts with 10 points of rating man
Rating a post costs 1 point of mana
You can't rate yourself
You can't rate the same post twice
You can only see your own rating
If you rate someone they get +1 or -1 to their score
If people agrees with you, your score is also increased by 1 (shared)

Mana can be recovered in 2 ways

Increases by 5 point per day (50 max)
Increases by 1 point (shared) if someone agrees with you
Decreases if someone disagrees with you

Basically the best way to get points is by agreeing with as much people as possible. The trick to do that is to scan topics every now and then and on rating 'go with the flow'. If a posting is +4 you go for +, same if a posting is -3. That way most people agree with you, and you get the most points and such.

Now *think* about that for a few seconds and realize what will happen with ratings in the near future: Everyone who read this post will soon skyrocket in the scores, as they all agree with everyone! Perfect harmony, all maxed out community-points, all maxed out rating-abilities to get even higher community-points!

Then later on people get bored of the lemming-clickage and considering they got 18 billion community-points they wanna see how fast they can drop them, so they go rate counter-active! Wooohooo.. These ratings surely are representive for the postings!

Just remove em, they pointless and will be just another number-game in a few weeks time.

:tare:

[Amedor]

Do I detect a hint of sarcasm.

[Sharkith]

Why do I always have to be the one to find the data? When I was proving something you insisted the other day that I be the one to provide the data, now I'm disproving once again you ask me to provide data to back my claim or you suggest my point isn't valid without data. Going by your previous logic you should be the one providing data this time round to prove your point, else what you said should be assumed to be completely and utterly false, much in the same way you treated my comments the other day until I provided some data.

I dunno where I said you had to Xest?

All I said is it was a proposition 'in search of data'. I means it could prove to be true or false. Your point was that the proposition was a) an assumption and b) groundless without proof which simply does not hold. It wasn't me banging on about data this time! It could be true or false but isn't that up to people to decide for themselves in how they either use the system or in how they vote in a poll? No need to get sensitive Xest

As for the discussion - the best thing to do is get a clear statement of the arguments and then have a poll. On this point the first proposition would be rejected anyway since it would not be a good line for a poll.

Puppets comments above seem to be fair as well. Equally the following statement verifies that the idea that one should not really take it seriously might have some weight despite it appearing like a groundless assumption as you put it:

And dont get me wrong, I wont stop posting (or start posting more) because of those ratings. I dont care about them and the only few times I clicked them was because I saw the changed layout and didnt know what it did (kid-style 'I wonder what this button dooooooooooooooo oooooooooohhhh')

[Satyn]

Then later on people get bored of the lemming-clickage and considering they got 18 billion community-points they wanna see how fast they can drop them, so they go rate counter-active! Wooohooo.. These ratings surely are representive for the postings!


:

and thats what I call childish why cant ppl just be mature and use the system likes its ment to be used?

[Mojo]

and thats what I call childish why cant ppl just be mature and use the system likes its ment to be used?

Your asking a bit much of people, like puppet says it is a numbers game (for some at least) I personally don't care and it won't change the way I post.