|
As a fellow nerd and gamer, I post on a lot of other forums aside from this one. In fact, I don't really post that much on this one, but that's really beside the point.
I have found that some of the other forums I post on have a rep system. If you don't know what a rep system is, I'll explain. Basically, it gives people the opportunity to signify that a good post was made, or a post that you liked a lot.
You know how there's always that dude in at LEAST one reply who just says "lol, nice post" to get his post count up and then is warned? With a rep system, they can leave that comment in the rep without leaving a worthless post. This could lead to less clutter, and give us an idea of who is more liked.
You may ask yourself "but Hoby, why would we need to know who is more liked among us, when we have a pretty good idea already?" That's true, but for new people, such as myself, it's hard to recognize who is actually helpful, and who is just being a dumb ass. This rep system will also promote people to make good posts, because the more rep you have, the more people are going to listen... just like in real life.
Just a thought.
|
Quality posters get a star next to their nickname, I think that's a pretty good idea already implemented.
|
Yeah this idea is brought up once a month or so.
|
In my experience, rep systems are better when they're informal. The community knows who the good posters are. The community also knows who the bad posters are.
With that said, a simple thumbs up or down feature wouldn't be so bad. Or, at least it seems to work on YouTube to hide jackass' posts.
|
If we ever feel mods start slipping and quality dwindles we may implement a system designed to separate the good from the bad. For as long as the quality of our forums is good we're all the same.
|
Bad posters usually get banned really quickly. And with the recent influx of new members (largely thanks to SC2) a rep system like this would likely lead to the posting style of the general members changing to what the "new" user is used to and find acceptable. Team Liquid is very much different from other sites in general, and computer game related sites specifically. We have a proud "posting tradition" and we want to keep it that way, even with new members greatly outnumber older ones.
Also, if you have a hard time distinguishing between helpful posts and people being smartasses, I doubt any intricate system would help.
|
On November 23 2010 05:39 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
If we ever feel mods start slipping and quality dwindles we may implement a system designed to separate the good from the bad. For as long as the quality of our forums is good we're all the same.
I'm not saying we should segregate, I'm saying we should let people decide who they like and dislike. Someone in one of the replies above made a comment saying that if I can't tell the difference between a douche and someone being helpful, then that's a different problem. But as someone who is a new poster, that's relatively hard to figure out, even after having years of experience of dealing with e-sarcasm. Especially in the strat forums when someone is sarcastically says something like "Just counter with 6pool." Obviously, he's joking because 6pool isn't a counter, it's an all in. A counter is something done in accordance to your opponent's strategy, but what if some n00b comes on here and sees that and takes it seriously? Oh wait, this dude has -20 rep, I'm not trusting that comment.
The point of the rep system would also make for less clean up from the mods. I know that's their job, but who wouldn't like their job to be easier? There are times when I just feel like saying "great post! I agree with what you said" but it just isn't worth a post, but I want to let the person know that I loved what they wrote.
Another thing that occurs to me is that people get power hungry too. I'm not saying that have yet, because the mods that run this community are part of it. But I believe there'll come a time, just like any other tower of power, where someone at the top decides they want complete control. Instead of giving mods all the power, give the power to the people.
|
I think this would be a problem because a lot of people don't know what separates a good post from a bad post. Also I think this leads to large amounts of trolling, and abuse. For the most part post count tends to indicate people who should be listened to, generally speaking >10000 posts (unless they're a defiler XD) have a decent understanding of both Starcraft and the TL community.
Another thing that occurs to me is that people get power hungry too. I'm not saying that have yet, because the mods that run this community are part of it. But I believe there'll come a time, just like any other tower of power, where someone at the top decides they want complete control. Instead of giving mods all the power, give the power to the people.
ahahahahahaha
oh dear, I think you may be in for a suprise...
|
is awesome32274 Posts
Cause I would be the most famous.
|
On November 23 2010 11:31 IntoTheWow wrote:
Cause I would be the most famous.
[-_-] dislikes [IntoTheWow]'s post. -100 protoss points.
|
I always hated reputation systems with a passion. There is always too much abuse and griefing that goes on with them.
I don't see how such a system would add anything to TL in its current state.
|
is awesome32274 Posts
On November 24 2010 02:11 -_- wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 11:31 IntoTheWow wrote:
Cause I would be the most famous. [-_-] dislikes [IntoTheWow]'s post. -100 protoss points.
protoss points = monopoly bills
|
On November 24 2010 07:44 IntoTheWow wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 02:11 -_- wrote:On November 23 2010 11:31 IntoTheWow wrote:
Cause I would be the most famous. [-_-] dislikes [IntoTheWow]'s post. -100 protoss points. protoss points = monopoly bills
Clearly zerg points are just worth more.
|
I think it would greatly improve the readability of the forums if there were a threshold system. In this system, known/respected posters would have their posts start at 20 points (for example), and everyone else's would start at 0. Posts would be voted up or down by the rest of the forum members.
When you browse a thread, you would be able to select a threshold and all the posts below that threshold would be minimized or hidden. So if I picked a threshold of 10, I would see some intelligent posts from the unknown posters as well as all the posts from the known posters.
|
Sanya12364 Posts
Voting means majority rules. It's good to filter out the garbage, but it will also filter out the unpopular and contrarian. It's generally a terrible idea for a well-moderated forum.
|
I guess the assumption is that the community is interested in unpopular or contrarian ideas from unknown posters. I'm not sure that's the case.
It also seems that it would be a lot less work for the moderators.
A similar system is used by slashdot, which has obviously had success - the only difference is that this would be favoring certain posters from the start (the known/respected ones).
|
United States22883 Posts
On December 07 2010 01:44 blakbeard wrote:
I guess the assumption is that the community is interested in unpopular or contrarian ideas from unknown posters. I'm not sure that's the case.
It also seems that it would be a lot less work for the moderators.
A similar system is used by slashdot, which has obviously had success - the only difference is that this would be favoring certain posters from the start (the known/respected ones).
Slashdot doesn't have fanboys and e-celebrities. ^^
Slashdot's works somewhat well, but Engadget is another example and theirs is pretty awful. Can you imagine the clusterfuck that would ensue when Jaedong and Flash fanboys spam vote eachother's posts?
|
On December 07 2010 02:37 Jibba wrote:
Slashdot's works somewhat well, but Engadget is another example and theirs is pretty awful. Can you imagine the clusterfuck that would ensue when Jaedong and Flash fanboys spam vote eachother's posts?
Well I guess it would still be an improvement over them each making their own individual posts.
Slashdot solves this issue with limited "votes" and meta-moderation. Anyway, it's just something to consider as the forums gets flooded with more posters.
|
I don't know if I'd like this, cause you'd get people down voting each other when they don't agree, or smooth-talkers who don't really contribute much or who don't know what they're talking about, but have a good way with words and then get up voted a lot and then new players read what they write and take it as the gospel truth.
I think as long as the mods are doing a good job (which I think they are, good job MODS!!!), something like this isn't really necessary. There's just too much potential for trolling and misinformation.
Say you have John, who has incredibly insightful and helpful comments when it comes to strategy, but he is a total ass when he talks all the same. He would get down voted because people would think he was mean, even though his information is the best.
Now take Bill. He's a really likable fellow, who's always cracking jokes in his posts and making everybody laugh. But when it comes to strategy, he doesn't know that much, even though he acts like he does. People still like his personality though, so he gets upvoted all the time.
Now I'm a new player, so I'm going to trust Bill when it comes to strategy, and not John, just look at their votes!
I'm sure it wouldn't be the same with everyone, but that's just an example of how this system could promote cults of personality with certain people and disregard others on the basis of "I don't like you, -1".
At least, that's how I see it. :p
|
On December 06 2010 23:56 blakbeard wrote:
I think it would greatly improve the readability of the forums if there were a threshold system. In this system, known/respected posters would have their posts start at 20 points (for example), and everyone else's would start at 0. Posts would be voted up or down by the rest of the forum members.
When you browse a thread, you would be able to select a threshold and all the posts below that threshold would be minimized or hidden. So if I picked a threshold of 10, I would see some intelligent posts from the unknown posters as well as all the posts from the known posters.
People don't ALWAYS post very helpfully, maybe they post really helpful stuff, but only every once in a while. This stops these posts from being read.
|
On December 07 2010 14:50 seRapH wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 06 2010 23:56 blakbeard wrote:
I think it would greatly improve the readability of the forums if there were a threshold system. In this system, known/respected posters would have their posts start at 20 points (for example), and everyone else's would start at 0. Posts would be voted up or down by the rest of the forum members.
When you browse a thread, you would be able to select a threshold and all the posts below that threshold would be minimized or hidden. So if I picked a threshold of 10, I would see some intelligent posts from the unknown posters as well as all the posts from the known posters.
People don't ALWAYS post very helpfully, maybe they post really helpful stuff, but only every once in a while. This stops these posts from being read.
The idea is that the helpful posts would be voted up, so I don't think that specifically would be an issue.
|
Canada8031 Posts
On December 07 2010 15:21 blakbeard wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 14:50 seRapH wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 06 2010 23:56 blakbeard wrote:
I think it would greatly improve the readability of the forums if there were a threshold system. In this system, known/respected posters would have their posts start at 20 points (for example), and everyone else's would start at 0. Posts would be voted up or down by the rest of the forum members.
When you browse a thread, you would be able to select a threshold and all the posts below that threshold would be minimized or hidden. So if I picked a threshold of 10, I would see some intelligent posts from the unknown posters as well as all the posts from the known posters.
People don't ALWAYS post very helpfully, maybe they post really helpful stuff, but only every once in a while. This stops these posts from being read. The idea is that the helpful posts would be voted up, so I don't think that specifically would be an issue.
But with this system, there's no guarantee that these potentially helpful posts will even be read since they'll just get filtered out. You can't upvote a post you never see.
|
On December 07 2010 16:38 Spazer wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 15:21 blakbeard wrote:On December 07 2010 14:50 seRapH wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 06 2010 23:56 blakbeard wrote:
I think it would greatly improve the readability of the forums if there were a threshold system. In this system, known/respected posters would have their posts start at 20 points (for example), and everyone else's would start at 0. Posts would be voted up or down by the rest of the forum members.
When you browse a thread, you would be able to select a threshold and all the posts below that threshold would be minimized or hidden. So if I picked a threshold of 10, I would see some intelligent posts from the unknown posters as well as all the posts from the known posters.
People don't ALWAYS post very helpfully, maybe they post really helpful stuff, but only every once in a while. This stops these posts from being read. The idea is that the helpful posts would be voted up, so I don't think that specifically would be an issue. But with this system, there's no guarantee that these potentially helpful posts will even be read since they'll just get filtered out. You can't upvote a post you never see.
We can rely on dedicated people like you to browse at "Threshold 0" and vote them up  . Browsing at threshold 0 would be the same as browsing the forums as they are now.
|
On November 23 2010 05:39 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
If we ever feel mods start slipping and quality dwindles we may implement a system designed to separate the good from the bad. For as long as the quality of our forums is good we're all the same.
Are you kidding? The sc2 strat is a mess! Weve heard enough statements from good players that they dont post there because everyones oppinion has the same value/loudness there, which should not be the case. The ppl who spew random ideas around should be the background noise and the ppl who can contribute with substantial advice (etc) should be listened to.
There are some really good threads and responses in the sc2strat and I find they should way get more credit and attention.
|
Braavos36374 Posts
We're actually considering a way to highlight good posts in the strategy forum. It won't be reputation and voting, but it could help.
|
On December 08 2010 22:23 Hot_Bid wrote:
We're actually considering a way to highlight good posts in the strategy forum. It won't be reputation and voting, but it could help.
sounds very reasonable. I assume that you gonna let mods/players to highlight them, which I find better than a voting system in every way, because a democratic(ish) system doesnt work when only a few ppl have actually a clue. l look forward to see your solution!
|
and then you'll let us use the report feature to report good posts for mods to highlight?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
