95 replies to this topic

[Jyosua]

Hai guyz. So in the staff forums, we're talking about possibly removing post counts in favor of a quality points system. You see a post that's very useful or helpful, you can give it a quality point, and the member has their accumulated quality points displayed in their profiles. Note that these will be logged, and likely restricted so you can't give more than a certain amount within a certain period of time. This is to prevent abuse.

An alternative to removing post counts, is removing user groups instead, keeping post counts, and implementing quality points.

I decided to post this here, in hopes that some intelligent discussion and reasoning on this issue would be done. Please don't disappoint.

[Ragnell]

I think your second idea, of removing user groups, keeping post counts, and adding quality points, is the best way to go. The post counts would help show how active the member is, while the points would show how productive they are. These two things will show if a person really posts important information or if they spam all over the place.

And I don't think most spammers here do it for post count exactly, they do it more for the user group title. So removing those would be the best way to stop spam.

That's my opinion, anyway.

[Jyosua]

I think your second idea, of removing user groups, keeping post counts, and adding quality points, is the best way to go. The post counts would help show how active the member is, while the points would show how productive they are. These two things will show if a person really posts important information or if they spam all over the place.

And I don't think most spammers here do it for post count exactly, they do it more for the user group title. So removing those would be the best way to stop spam.

That's my opinion, anyway.

I agree with this, and that's the mindset I'm hoping most people will take, but I still want more people's opinions on it.

[Kratos]

I'm personally leery on Reputation Systems, they are often abused, but assuming you keep a close eye on things...it should work out better.

As for Post Count vs. User Group - I say disable Post Count and base User Groups on the Point System.

-=EDIT=-

Are these points ran through a CP or anything? So Mods can keep an eye on it?

Edited by Kratos, 08 July 2009 - 04:02 PM.

[OldMan]

I've never seen any real benefit from the removal of postcounts, really. If somebody wants to be an elitist idiot, he'll be it regardless of that number. Also, I believe that the "postcount doesn't rise here" is a good "spam is allowed" tag. But anyway...

I'm wary of a quality points system... alright, wary is an understatement. I've been a member of a couple art communities in the past, and I've seen a favorite system to define the "top" works uploaded. After a while, only a few of those were truly exceptional; many were actually junk, only pushed to the top because of mass-favoriting of people with a massive friends list.

Do you see where I'm getting? Even if you log and restrict it, chances are it'll be an horribly skewered system. It's likely to soon degenerate into a popularity contest.

On the other side, groups don't really serve any purpose anymore - before they had benefits attached, but now... might as well group everyone that's outside of staff as "members." Maybe make a group for ex-staff members, but that'd be it. I thought about site contributors at a point, but... frankly, given the way the site works, everyone would reach that rank so it'd be utterly pointless.

[Jyosua]

I say disable Post Count and base User Groups on the Point System.

I don't think this would be possible without a lot of modification. We'll see though; I'll look into it.

[Lux Aeterna]

I'm leaning towards number one. I mean, yes, a post count can depict how active you are, but is that really necessary? I believe it more has to do with the quality, rather than the quantity. The usergroups on the other hand wouldn't be bad to keep. It can help you determine if the person is trying to help you or is just being a thorn in your side. I think it would be complete if there was a negative quality points, if you ask for help and someone is a jerk about it.

All in all, both have a potential to grow into something good, I just believe number one would be better.

[Kratos]

I've never seen any real benefit from the removal of postcounts, really. If somebody wants to be an elitist idiot, he'll be it regardless of that number. Also, I believe that the "postcount doesn't rise here" is a good "spam is allowed" tag. But anyway...

I'm wary of a quality points system... alright, wary is an understatement. I've been a member of a couple art communities in the past, and I've seen a favorite system to define the "top" works uploaded. After a while, only a few of those were truly exceptional; many were actually junk, only pushed to the top because of mass-favoriting of people with a massive friends list.

Do you see where I'm getting? Even if you log and restrict it, chances are it'll be an horribly skewered system. It's likely to soon degenerate into a popularity contest.

On the other side, groups don't really serve any purpose anymore - before they had benefits attached, but now... might as well group everyone that's outside of staff as "members." Maybe make a group for ex-staff members, but that'd be it. I thought about site contributors at a point, but... frankly, given the way the site works, everyone would reach that rank so it'd be utterly pointless.

I agree with you, completely. It has a tenancy to boil down to popularity contests.

I don't think this would be possible without a lot of modification. We'll see though; I'll look into it.

If you want, depends on what the Rep System you're planning on using, I might know someone that can mod it for you (or even write on for you {In both senses of my suggestions}).

Edited by Kratos, 08 July 2009 - 04:08 PM.

[Liz]

i dunno. the quality point system seems to me that will suffer the same fate that stars thing in our profile did. you know, where people will give points to members they like, not give points to members they dislike, regardless of the quality of the post and such. and don't forget about those people who will be "i'll give you points if you give me points" and all that mumbo-jumbo.

i mean, on paper it's a great idea, but i'm not too sure it'll work as smoothly as it should...

[Mekkah]

On another forum I work on, we have tried a reputation system, which was a lot like this suggested quality points system. Keep in mind that community is very different from this one, so the results may not be the same. But here's what happened:

Only people who were already known as contributors could give more reputation to others, regular members could not. We ended up ditching the system because it was simply not used enough to be a worthwhile indicator.

I still believe it has potential, but its correct use has to be encouraged. Personally, I don't trust the judgement of a LOT of members here. Absolutely no offense intended, but this is how it is, judging from polls and discussions about FE.

So while I would really like to see it, I think giving the privilege to using this quality points system to every single registered member is a bad idea.

For removing post counts, I think it's pointless. It's just a number that shows your activity, no more no less. I don't think attaching usergroup privileges to them is a very good idea as it encourages quantity over quality (in forums where post count does rise, no less). Attaching them to the quality points system right away doesn't seem like a good idea to me either, because that system hasn't been tested here yet.

What I would suggest is ditching those postcount-based usergroups, keeping post count and testing out the quality system. I don't know the exact reasoning behind the postcount-based usergroup restrictions...I'm going to guess you want to encourage people to stay for longer, or you don't want to give every new member maximum privileges. Either way, may I suggest trying out attaching those privileges to registry date instead? It probably has roughly the same effect as the current ones, but without all the spam. I would do either that, or do away with them.

[Crystal Shards]

I'd say take out user groups and the post system (or, if possible, like Kratos suggestion and do groups based on reputation), but that's just me. And I don't know how IPB is set up, but on vB you can make it so people can't rate the same person over and over again; they can only do so many within a 24-hour period, and they have to give rep to x number of people before they can give rep to the same person again. Also, you don't have to put a comment for positive posts (you can) but you HAVE to put a comment for negative reps, so that people aren't just neg repping people because they're angry. People with more rep power could give more reps, etc. Lastly, you can decide which groups can see who gave them rep (on Mercury Ice only the admin can, though I don't really know why since I never check my rep). If those are options for customization I would definitely put the rep in place, since those safeguard against so-called popularity contests and abuse of negative repping.

Edited by Crystal Shards, 08 July 2009 - 04:21 PM.

[Kiba]

I say you choose one of them for a month or 2 and see how it goes, then change it to the second option if people don't like the first one and see how the second one goes

[AppleObsessedGuy]

I say keep the post count but add the points system. It would be similar to the Apple forums. It works well. If you want, take a look: discussions.apple.com

[Defeatist Elitist]

I dunno, I have a sort of fondness for post count and seeing just how many times we've all typed out our little message and hit the reply button.

[AppleObsessedGuy]

Also if we do get rid of post counts (not saying that we should) could we at least have the option to view them privately?

[NoNameAtAll]

Also if we do get rid of post counts (not saying that we should) could we at least have the option to view them privately?

You don't need to see it. Just go to see member's post.

[AppleObsessedGuy]

But that only shows what we have posted not how many.

[6669`]

The only thing I can imagine being accomplished by removing post counts is stopping people who care about it from being obnoxious, which I am all for, but a rep system sounds like an even worse idea.

[Masu]

Rep system sounds like a terrible idea. We would have people abusing it to either +rep buddies or -rep ppl they dont like like:

"-rep lyle because hes a faggot."

Just an example of what would probably be the most popular -rep reason.

I dont see a need for removing postcount/usergroup. I havent seen any elitism over it in months, and the only people that i've seen purposely spam to get specific user groups were Destiny Hero and I saw Luigi Bros whining about losing his posts as if it was the end of the world when we lost the 3 months of data.

But hey, if its removed, I dont care. im just VERY,VERY,VERY,VERY STRONGLY against a "Reputation-like" system here.

[Tino]

There's one thing for everybody to realize about post count. The only time it may be a bad thing to have it displayed publicly is if there are excessive amounts of spam just to raise it, or if there's a lot of elitism over it. Otherwise, the people who care about it don't mind having it displayed and those who don't care about post count also won't complain.

I guess it doesn't hurt to keep this in mind.