04-20-2012, 12:06 PM
(This post was last modified: 04-20-2012, 12:07 PM by Silverthorn.)
Okay, here are my opinions on the suggested improvements:
Only allow admins/mods/random priviledged people to rep somebody
Whilst it would certainly reduce the amount of spammy reps to a minimum, there is a major flaw in this: only a handful of people decide upon how the vast majority perceives this member. Sure, it prevents the mob-like behavior that usually ensues when X posts a negative comment about Y and then receives negative reps from 5 or more people that are all related to it. Things can easily be changed when it becomes obvious that the member improves his/her behavior. However, here is the deal: it all seems a bit like a democratic system. A few people are elected and, for the next couple years, direct their country's fate without anyone interfering. Often times, there are situations that the general public does not agree with but "seem" necessary. Some countries have a referendum which does allow the political participation of everybody regardless of for whom they voted. But really, does this sound like a practical solution in our case? Frankly, I don't think so. A poll for every member that goes like "Would you give X a +1, 0, or -1?" is way too much hassle for this. Therefore, I guess I'll have to go with a no on this one.
Have 1/a few rep-mods
I'll have to agree with what YinYin said; if you don't have a disastrous gossip-fetish and like to read every single rep-comment, you'll quickly get bored and want to quit. This will inevitably happen. Also, let's say the rep-mod has a bad day and only approves negative reps that day. It's unlikely but the chance is there to let that happen. Errare humanum est.
Up-/Downvote of individual reps
I have thought quite a bit about that (thanks for reminding me, I really forgot about this) and, upon first glance, this seems like the perfect system for us. It'll be probably interesting to deduct a good rating from a few comments and their respective agree/disagree-ratios but let's just say we find the perfect algorithm. The thing I am unsure about is, again, the mob-behavior which will make it, for newcomers especially, extremely hard to get a decent rating once they mess up. Yes, people will just need to change their thumbs-up to a thumbs-down or something like that to help bring the negative rep into the background but some people are either extremely critical, lazy, or forget about it altogether. So, the rep-comment might stay above a certain offset and will count into the overall rep, etc. I guess you get the point.
From all suggestions, this is probably the most practical and reliable, but it does have its flaws as well. Mostly in regard to how to deal with the mob-phenomenon. It's kind of hard to predict and when it strikes, it does it well and efficiently. Any suggestions on that issue?
Only allow admins/mods/random priviledged people to rep somebody
Whilst it would certainly reduce the amount of spammy reps to a minimum, there is a major flaw in this: only a handful of people decide upon how the vast majority perceives this member. Sure, it prevents the mob-like behavior that usually ensues when X posts a negative comment about Y and then receives negative reps from 5 or more people that are all related to it. Things can easily be changed when it becomes obvious that the member improves his/her behavior. However, here is the deal: it all seems a bit like a democratic system. A few people are elected and, for the next couple years, direct their country's fate without anyone interfering. Often times, there are situations that the general public does not agree with but "seem" necessary. Some countries have a referendum which does allow the political participation of everybody regardless of for whom they voted. But really, does this sound like a practical solution in our case? Frankly, I don't think so. A poll for every member that goes like "Would you give X a +1, 0, or -1?" is way too much hassle for this. Therefore, I guess I'll have to go with a no on this one.
Have 1/a few rep-mods
I'll have to agree with what YinYin said; if you don't have a disastrous gossip-fetish and like to read every single rep-comment, you'll quickly get bored and want to quit. This will inevitably happen. Also, let's say the rep-mod has a bad day and only approves negative reps that day. It's unlikely but the chance is there to let that happen. Errare humanum est.
Up-/Downvote of individual reps
I have thought quite a bit about that (thanks for reminding me, I really forgot about this) and, upon first glance, this seems like the perfect system for us. It'll be probably interesting to deduct a good rating from a few comments and their respective agree/disagree-ratios but let's just say we find the perfect algorithm. The thing I am unsure about is, again, the mob-behavior which will make it, for newcomers especially, extremely hard to get a decent rating once they mess up. Yes, people will just need to change their thumbs-up to a thumbs-down or something like that to help bring the negative rep into the background but some people are either extremely critical, lazy, or forget about it altogether. So, the rep-comment might stay above a certain offset and will count into the overall rep, etc. I guess you get the point.
From all suggestions, this is probably the most practical and reliable, but it does have its flaws as well. Mostly in regard to how to deal with the mob-phenomenon. It's kind of hard to predict and when it strikes, it does it well and efficiently. Any suggestions on that issue?
Silverthorn / Blue Phoenix
~ Breaking LFE since 2008 ~
"Freeze, you're under vrest!" - Mark, probably.
» Gallery | » Sprites | » DeviantArt
~ Breaking LFE since 2008 ~
"Freeze, you're under vrest!" - Mark, probably.
» Gallery | » Sprites | » DeviantArt