How "should" the rep system work?

[Rophs]

How should the rep system work?

[DARK DEMON]

This was already asked about and changed a while back, and currently is exactly how the community wants.

[Rophs]

The long and ongoing discussion in comments of BFH's recent forum status indicates otherwise.

[DARK DEMON]

No one in BFH's status has stated that rep system should be changed

 

 

Oh, and I found the link  http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/14321-forum-reputation-system-poll/

 

BFH could have made a forum thread himself if it was needed.

[Azthor]

Generally, if I go as far as to express formal disapproval, I feel it is only fair that I address how and why so, likewise giving the other party an opening to address the complaint. While I certainly appreciate the gesture when others do the same, I do not presume upon it as a mutual obligation.

I would not use the reputation system as you just did, against each other, for instance, but nor do I believe that to be an incorrect usage passive to public admonishment.

(...)

What occasion in particular brought forth BFH's comment is rather clear; likewise, from that comment, I can imagine how BFH believes the reputation system should be used. Yet so, in this case, imagining is the most I can do, and hence I'd very much rather read it from his own words.

[Chewett]

This was already asked about and changed a while back, and currently is exactly how the community wants.

We have a review every now and then, we do not change it and then fix it forever. It was changed before you came here, and it shall change after you leave. I keep asking the community every now and then.

[Burns]

BUMP

 

Due to a recent report we got, the mod team started a sort of internal discussion about what reputation should be used for and how it all should work. I halfway remembered this thread, so we decided that 'every now and then' is more now than then.

 

To spark the discussion, i'll summarize what we talked about internally:

1. Should reputation be used for all posts you generally like, or just for posts with content you agree with? (Think of +1 on birthday wishes, hello-threads etc. compared to +1 for input on game development discussions etc.)

2. Should all subforums yield reputation, or should some be excluded? (again, think of say hello, goodbye or something else compared to new ideas)

3. Should reputation stay indefinitely, or should it 'decay' after a while?

 

I'll post up our personal opinions at a later point (if still needed), but as mods, we thought that this was not really a discussion about some rule we should figure out internally, but more of a community thing. After all, you guys (as a total) need to be happy with out work, else it gets pointless.

 

So, happy discussing!

 

EDIT: Also, you're obviously not limited to the 3 things we came up with, if you have any other input, let's hear it! :D

Edited March 8, 2016 by Burns

[Ungod]

I think the way it works right now is ok, even if there are sidetracks, it's fine overall.

If you wanna change it, that's fine as well, but don't eliminate some 'silliness' for the sake of 'efficiency'. Imperfect systems are more fun, generally.

[lightsage]

I'll argue for two different options:

• Vote based on rather you agree or disagree with the post and do not show user reputation.

There's a (relatively) small amount of topics that have an objective right or wrong answer. Most topics (such as this one) have many options and well argued alternatives can provide a positive contribution to the discussion even if they are not in line with the popular opinion. As such, the "reputation" of each user would reflect over the posts they've made on topics where people could be bothered to vote, whether they are with or against the popular opinion. This is not a very interesting metric in my opinion. I'd also say "reputation" is a rather misleading name for it.

• Vote based on rather the post is in good form and do show user reputation.

Another alternative is to vote based on rather the post is a good addition to the topic (or a solid topic start). For example, a well argued point you disagree with would be +1. An unexplained statement you agree with might be -1. This would make the reputation for each user the overall contributions they've made in their posts. You do not have a measure of popular support for options. Instead, you perform discussions based on the quality of the arguments. Then, if you do want a quantitative measure of the community support you could open a poll.

 

[Rophs]

Does the existence of the rep system improve the forums? I don't think it should exist in the first place. Seeing a red or green number next to a post will influence how someone thinks about it subconsciously and can tend to lessen the quality of discussions and turn the forums into more of an echo chamber.

[Jubaris]

Does the existence of the rep system improve the forums? I don't think it should exist in the first place. Seeing a red or green number next to a post will influence how someone thinks about it subconsciously and can tend to lessen the quality of discussions and turn the forums into more of an echo chamber.

 

Only when you get to skip a bunch of "I agree", and "I disagree" posts, in most of cases, to me it seems counter-productive.

It works as an extended hand to the in-game image, turning MD system into a social network, rather than... something else :P

[Ary Endleg]

What about posts that vote for a person in contest yet that same person +reps them, conflict of interest?

[Miq]

But who and why even cares about the forum rep..... (besides occasional voting), remove it.