|
This thread got me thinking about this 'issue' more.
I see why it'a good thing to have something like a post count on a forum, as it gives the user visible feedback that his efforts are building something up and it's a cute way (especially combined with the icons) of motivating users.
The down side is the obvious truth that post count is a very 'unpure' indicator of the quality of the poster. The only correlation is that if the poster has a few thousand posts, chances are he's not 12 years old and that he's still not banned after having posted as many posts. That's it.
I have a radical proposal which is meant to shake the ideas in your head, and make you wonder how TL would work if this was in place.
I'm thinking of placing a thumbs up/thumbs down button system for each post, like this:
![[image loading]](http://i46.tinypic.com/2liehhe.png)
Next, I propose restarting all user icons to basic ones (except admins, and people who earned special icons).
Next, we start all over again, but instead of counting posts, we count the thumbs up and subtract the thumbs down (or some other formula).
In this simple way, shitty posters will remain SCVs even with 10K posts. On the other hand, good posters will get cooler and cooler icons, and besides being encouraged to continue with good posting, this system will also naturally promote these posters as good role models for others, unlike now.
Some examples how it'll affect the daily life on TL:
- If someone makes a good guide, a replay pack, a translation, a fish recipe or whatever, they'll probably get a bunch of thumbs ups and will eventually get a better icon. People will be encouraged to contribute. Of course, readers are the ones who do the voting, so only quality material will earn recognition.
- it would be easier for admins to notice a bad post if there are 50 people thumbing it down. A simple thumb down counter would weed out a huge percentage of shitty posters.
- of course, admins' opinion is what matters ultimately, so they'd be able to give multiple thumb down penalties. So now, instead of getting temp-banned for 2 days, you may get -20 thumbs to go along with it.
|
Incontrol: lol (+56)
poster#4758: i thought avatar was a good movie (-78)
It is too influenced by popularity and FOTM opinions.
|
But incontrol is mostly a good poster, so karma has many thumbs ups waiting for him.
Give me an example of a bad poster who will get good icons?
The only ones who get easy votes will be those who have earned it somehow in the past.
|
That's not a good thing, though. Each post should be judged on its individual merit, not by how popular the person is. Shit, it basically works like that currently, you just don't have a visual notification. Look at what happens when Rekrul makes a shit post and when CharlieMurphy makes a shit post.
|
l10f
United States3241 Posts
On June 16 2010 01:51 niteReloaded wrote:
In this simple way, shitty posters will remain SCVs even with 10K posts.
ils?
Just kidding.
@OP: But how will you deal with those people that will always thumb up/down posts without reading? (They always exist, sadly)
|
United States24772 Posts
If the blogs rating system wasn't mostly abused then I think a thumbs up/down system might have a chance of being fair/successful.
But we've consistently seen that this isn't the case. This suggestion of yours op has been discussed and rejected already in other threads. Some kind of similar modification might be in order and I get where you are coming from.
|
its kind of troublesome too since people who've contributed in the past, yet dont carry a star, would be just as respected as the sc2 newbies until they do some more stuff?
what?
|
On June 16 2010 03:53 H wrote:
That's not a good thing, though. Each post should be judged on its individual merit, not by how popular the person is. Shit, it basically works like that currently, you just don't have a visual notification. Look at what happens when Rekrul makes a shit post and when CharlieMurphy makes a shit post.
Rekrul and CharlieMurphy are hardly similar.
I have respect for Rekrul for what he's shared and for his attitute - he says what he means and even tho all this is on the internet, you get the feeling you know him a little.
I don't have the same respect for CM.. I couldn't even if I wanted to, I never really got the idea what he's about and he has 20K+ posts. I don't like him, I don't dislike him, all I know is he's around(tho I guess many people are like that, me included, but CM is just a bit more extreme representative).
That says something about his posting.
So, in my system, I think Rekrul would easily rank up, while CM wouldn't. just my opinion tho.
On June 16 2010 04:56 l10f wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 01:51 niteReloaded wrote:
In this simple way, shitty posters will remain SCVs even with 10K posts. ils? Just kidding. @OP: But how will you deal with those people that will always thumb up/down posts without reading? (They always exist, sadly)
Those people wouldn't affect the foundations of the system, because their behavior will affect some people one day, other people the other. They may affect the absolute level of thumbs up, but the relative level will stay the same, which means a modified formula can be easily made.
I'm guessing that's what you have in mind Micronesia, when you mention the abuse of blog system. There could be a system that flags people who spam thumbs down on everything and then take that privilege from them or send them to disney.com.
majesty.k)seRapH, you have a point too, so this obviously isn't ready to be implemented in this form even if people agreed. But these things can be worked around.
|
United States24772 Posts
On June 16 2010 07:28 niteReloaded wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 03:53 H wrote:
That's not a good thing, though. Each post should be judged on its individual merit, not by how popular the person is. Shit, it basically works like that currently, you just don't have a visual notification. Look at what happens when Rekrul makes a shit post and when CharlieMurphy makes a shit post. Rekrul and CharlieMurphy are hardly similar. I have respect for Rekrul for what he's shared and for his attitute - he says what he means and even tho all this is on the internet, you get the feeling you know him a little. I don't have the same respect for CM.. I couldn't even if I wanted to, I never really got the idea what he's about and he has 20K+ posts. I don't like him, I don't dislike him, all I know is he's around(tho I guess many people are like that, me included, but CM is just a bit more extreme representative). That says something about his posting. So, in my system, I think Rekrul would easily rank up, while CM wouldn't. just my opinion tho.
This isn't really refuting H's point. Sure, you have less respect for CM as a poster I suppose (or just haven't made a decision yet overall). If you are like many tl users, you are going to thumbs down CM for bad posts and thumbs up rekrul for the same post. You might even thumbs down CM for a good post. Basically the thumbs up and thumbs down decision turns into "do I like this person or not" rather than "was this a good post or not."
Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 04:56 l10f wrote:On June 16 2010 01:51 niteReloaded wrote:
In this simple way, shitty posters will remain SCVs even with 10K posts. ils? Just kidding. @OP: But how will you deal with those people that will always thumb up/down posts without reading? (They always exist, sadly) Those people wouldn't affect the foundations of the system, because their behavior will affect some people one day, other people the other. They may affect the absolute level of thumbs up, but the relative level will stay the same, which means a modified formula can be easily made. I'm guessing that's what you have in mind Micronesia, when you mention the abuse of blog system. There could be a system that flags people who spam thumbs down on everything and then take that privilege from them or send them to disney.com. majesty.k)seRapH, you have a point too, so this obviously isn't ready to be implemented in this form even if people agreed. But these things can be worked around.
That's a much more difficult system to set up than you probably realize... and this isn't as simple as "abusers will just vote everyone down but the effects will cancel."
|
what if you piss me off personally and i go on a personal vendetta to thumbs-down every post you ever made?
|
United States24772 Posts
On June 16 2010 08:51 redtooth wrote:
what if you piss me off personally and i go on a personal vendetta to thumbs-down every post you ever made?
This in and of itself wouldn't be that difficult to detect with some coding, but this is also a somewhat extreme example. That's happened to my blog on numerous occasions lol
|
On June 16 2010 07:46 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 07:28 niteReloaded wrote:On June 16 2010 03:53 H wrote:
That's not a good thing, though. Each post should be judged on its individual merit, not by how popular the person is. Shit, it basically works like that currently, you just don't have a visual notification. Look at what happens when Rekrul makes a shit post and when CharlieMurphy makes a shit post. Rekrul and CharlieMurphy are hardly similar. I have respect for Rekrul for what he's shared and for his attitute - he says what he means and even tho all this is on the internet, you get the feeling you know him a little. I don't have the same respect for CM.. I couldn't even if I wanted to, I never really got the idea what he's about and he has 20K+ posts. I don't like him, I don't dislike him, all I know is he's around(tho I guess many people are like that, me included, but CM is just a bit more extreme representative). That says something about his posting. So, in my system, I think Rekrul would easily rank up, while CM wouldn't. just my opinion tho. This isn't really refuting H's point. Sure, you have less respect for CM as a poster I suppose (or just haven't made a decision yet overall). If you are like many tl users, you are going to thumbs down CM for bad posts and thumbs up rekrul for the same post. You might even thumbs down CM for a good post. Basically the thumbs up and thumbs down decision turns into "do I like this person or not" rather than "was this a good post or not." Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 04:56 l10f wrote:On June 16 2010 01:51 niteReloaded wrote:
In this simple way, shitty posters will remain SCVs even with 10K posts. ils? Just kidding. @OP: But how will you deal with those people that will always thumb up/down posts without reading? (They always exist, sadly) Those people wouldn't affect the foundations of the system, because their behavior will affect some people one day, other people the other. They may affect the absolute level of thumbs up, but the relative level will stay the same, which means a modified formula can be easily made. I'm guessing that's what you have in mind Micronesia, when you mention the abuse of blog system. There could be a system that flags people who spam thumbs down on everything and then take that privilege from them or send them to disney.com. majesty.k)seRapH, you have a point too, so this obviously isn't ready to be implemented in this form even if people agreed. But these things can be worked around. That's a much more difficult system to set up than you probably realize... and this isn't as simple as "abusers will just vote everyone down but the effects will cancel."
Yeah, I get your points, this system obviosly wouldn't be perfect in this state.
I just hope people can see the good sides, and maybe this partly inspires someone to come up with a superior system.
|
On June 16 2010 08:55 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 08:51 redtooth wrote:
what if you piss me off personally and i go on a personal vendetta to thumbs-down every post you ever made? This in and of itself wouldn't be that difficult to detect with some coding, but this is also a somewhat extreme example. That's happened to my blog on numerous occasions lol
ever visit tom's hardware flaming comments are more +20 then well thought-out and through comments.
Only way to avoid 1 liners getting +10000 is to make it OP only.
|
United States5262 Posts
The way I saw it, sure you can look down on the post whores, but raise your own post quality. That's in part why I started the results and standings. I wanted attention yes, but attention for raising my post quality.
|
I have a countersuggestion:
Why not include a thumbs up/down system only for "veterans"/mods etc. first and then if someone gets a number of "thumbs up - down = X" he gets the right to rate other posts too?
Or at the very least an ignore button pls! for posters like these for example:
+ Show Spoiler +I like how zerg players feel that they should automatically have a free expansion. They have no clue that they could easily play one-base and expand later, like every other race. Its like if they can't have 2-base they think its imbalanced. Too bad protoss production buildlings can't act as an extra nexus that we can put at our natural and just saturate with probes while building an army.
Not saying that its an imbalanced matchup, but seriously, you can't call a map bad just because the other races can put pressure early on a fast expansion. If you want an expansion, you should have to defend it. Its not fuckin free.
I just never want to read a post from such guys again. he didnt even understand the thread. I even doubt he read through it.
I dont know... maybe it is my problem but It annoys me because I really really like discussions.
|
Please no thumb up thumb down system. TL is fine as it is.
|
it's far far too easy to just go through the posting history of someone you really hate and give all their posts thumbs down. Could take a while but if the hate is strong enough it's too easy to abuse in too many ways
|
Kentor
United States5784 Posts
No web 2.0 stuff, thanks.
|
On June 20 2010 18:11 Divinek wrote:
it's far far too easy to just go through the posting history of someone you really hate and give all their posts thumbs down. Could take a while but if the hate is strong enough it's too easy to abuse in too many ways
not if only the mods and veterans can do it. with my countersuggestion you would only be able to rate posts if you allready have a good reputation
|
United States24772 Posts
On June 20 2010 21:37 clickrush wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2010 18:11 Divinek wrote:
it's far far too easy to just go through the posting history of someone you really hate and give all their posts thumbs down. Could take a while but if the hate is strong enough it's too easy to abuse in too many ways not if only the mods and veterans can do it. with my countersuggestion you would only be able to rate posts if you allready have a good reputation
I think a good percentage of ratings abuse of my blog was by staff and veterans lol
|
On June 21 2010 00:02 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2010 21:37 clickrush wrote:On June 20 2010 18:11 Divinek wrote:
it's far far too easy to just go through the posting history of someone you really hate and give all their posts thumbs down. Could take a while but if the hate is strong enough it's too easy to abuse in too many ways not if only the mods and veterans can do it. with my countersuggestion you would only be able to rate posts if you allready have a good reputation I think a good percentage of ratings abuse of my blog was by staff and veterans lol
:D people get bored.
You have to control how people give or get raitings make it like you can only rate 3 blogs a week and you'll see alot more ratings that aren't 5 or 1
|
United States24772 Posts
On June 21 2010 09:27 semantics wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2010 00:02 micronesia wrote:On June 20 2010 21:37 clickrush wrote:On June 20 2010 18:11 Divinek wrote:
it's far far too easy to just go through the posting history of someone you really hate and give all their posts thumbs down. Could take a while but if the hate is strong enough it's too easy to abuse in too many ways not if only the mods and veterans can do it. with my countersuggestion you would only be able to rate posts if you allready have a good reputation I think a good percentage of ratings abuse of my blog was by staff and veterans lol :D people get bored. You have to control how people give or get raitings make it like you can only rate 3 blogs a week and you'll see alot more ratings that aren't 5 or 1
Not it wasn't that people got bored :p
|
I don't know why people keep clamoring for this. Every couple of weeks a 'TL OWN THE INTERNETZ!!$#!@' thread pops up and if the mods allow it, it is done...
that kind of mob mentality could easily be reproduced with the thumbs system. I've never been a fan of the blog rating system either (it's very inaccurate—how am I rated a 1??). If I care enough about the blog, i'd rather write a comment than click a five star. I think the only time I ever rate is just to throw down 1stars for stupid people who are obsessed with a high blog rating. These are generally the same obnoxious people who are fixated on post counts.
Keep it natural and let the mods sort it out.
|
Braavos36399 Posts
On June 21 2010 10:25 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2010 09:27 semantics wrote:On June 21 2010 00:02 micronesia wrote:On June 20 2010 21:37 clickrush wrote:On June 20 2010 18:11 Divinek wrote:
it's far far too easy to just go through the posting history of someone you really hate and give all their posts thumbs down. Could take a while but if the hate is strong enough it's too easy to abuse in too many ways not if only the mods and veterans can do it. with my countersuggestion you would only be able to rate posts if you allready have a good reputation I think a good percentage of ratings abuse of my blog was by staff and veterans lol :D people get bored. You have to control how people give or get raitings make it like you can only rate 3 blogs a week and you'll see alot more ratings that aren't 5 or 1 Not it wasn't that people got bored :p
I voted 1's on all 170+ of your blogs to see what your rating would be. I think I dropped it from 3.6 to 2.4 single handedly, and then Sonuvbob removed my ability to vote on blogs.
I can confirm it was 99% because I was bored.
|
United States24772 Posts
Hahaha I see. There were a few people who did it XD
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
