Important: User Reputation

[Wouter Melissen]

Included in the new forum software package was a system to rate posts positively or negatively. Each post rating is reflected by adding or deducting a number of points to or from the poster's tally. More than anything this is intended to get the quality of the posts up.
We have been running this system for a week now and have now set definitive numbers for the various variables.
These variables control who can rate and how many points they can rate with.

Minimum post count to rate: 100
Minimum reputation to rate: 25
Reputation power:
Default reputation power: 1
For every 5000 posts: 1
For every 100 reputation points: 1
For every membership year: 1

So in my case with around 220 posts, 41 reputation and less than a year memebership, every rating I do would add remove 1 point.

It's also important to note that you can only rate 20 times per day and that you have to rate 20 other members' posts to rate the same user's posts again.

Remember: you are rating posts not members! We want to increase the quality of the forums and not start a popularity contest.

Thank you for your time and enjoy your forum vistits,
Wouter Melissen

[r34_296kw]

Most people actually rate members rather than posts. Just thought I'd let you know.

[Egg Nog]

Minimum post count to rate: 50
Minimum reputation to rate: 20
Reputation power:
Default reputation power: 1
For every 1000 posts: 1
For every 100 reputation points: 1
For every membership year: 1

I just thought I'd say that I'm really happy with this system. It seems pretty well thought-out, and should work quite a bit better than our system so far...

[henk4]

It's also important to note that you can only rate 20 times per day and that you have to rate 20 other members' posts to rate the same user's posts again.

Remember: you are rating posts not members! We want to increase the quality of the forums and not start a popularity contest.

Thank you for your time and enjoy your forum vistits,
Wouter Melissen

I am not totally convinced yet.
I would like to point out that the first para and the second are contradictory. If one member does two posts that I like, do I have to wait for 20 other posts before I can express my appreciation?

[Motorer1]

I bet I am the only one with a negative rep!

[white devil]

I bet I am the only one with a negative rep!

i gess so lol
how r we suposed to make it go up and i just saw i guy who just signed in and he has only 2 post and has double of my rep and i have a bout 800 post WTH is that

[Egg Nog]

I have two qualms with the system, and this is what I'd do to fix them:

• Make an increment of 1 the minimum, so any user can rate people
• Get rid of the "spread more reputation around" thing

If you think about it, the whole "spread more reputation around" thing goes against the whole principle of the system. If people can't rate the users who they actually beleive to be making good posts without forcing themselves to go and find half-decent posts by others, then what use is it?

[henk4]

I have two qualms with the system, and this is what I'd do to fix them:

• Make an increment of 1 the minimum, so any user can rate people
• Get rid of the "spread more reputation around" thing

If you think about it, the whole "spread more reputation around" thing goes against the whole principle of the system. If people can't rate the users who they actually beleive to be making good posts without forcing themselves to go and find half-decent posts by others, then what use is it?

This is what I posted earlier


"I would like to point out that the first para and the second are contradictory. If one member does two posts that I like, do I have to wait for 20 other posts before I can express my appreciation?"

so I am with you.

[V12 Disord3r]

I would expect my reptuation to be blow zero begofe long

[V12 Disord3r]

I bet I am the only one with a negative rep!

Some guy has negative 3

[AutoMotivated]

I fail to see any reason to quantify someone's 'reputation'.
You guys are kidding yourself if you think that ANY form of quality control can be applied to a person's opinions.
Who has the right anyway?
Is it THAT important that you apply a 'system' to this site that seeks to distinguish between individual's opinions, let alone infringe upon their rights of free speech.
Are you trying to say something?
Come out and say it, are you afraid of being flamed?
Please explain your reasons (if you can be bothered) for such a system, I would appreciate the thought processes that go towards such a concept.
Don't get me wrong I'm not trying to impugn the idea, I'm only concerned about it's worthiness.

[Wouter Melissen]

Since this system was implemented the number of posts consisting of just 'lol' or a smilie have all but completely disapeared. These are the type of threads that need to be rated negatively, just like derogatory and deflamatory remarks. Not agreeing with someone is not a reason to rate that particular post negatively.

[AutoMotivated]

Since this system was implemented the number of posts consisting of just 'lol' or a smilie have all but completely disapeared. These are the type of threads that need to be rated negatively, just like derogatory and deflamatory remarks. Not agreeing with someone is not a reason to rate that particular post negatively.

Thank you for your reply.
I'm sorry, but again I preface my question with 'what is the point?', and what's wrong with a 'laugh' or a 'smilie'.
I can see that some people have an extraordinary number of posts, do you you seek to reduce the number of posts and if so, is this in an effort to reduce someone's workload?

[mechanixfetch]

Should we rate negatively for poor grammar and therefore improve user's english as well as the quality of their posts? The question is how far do we rate posts?

[mechanixfetch]

How is it that people who joined 1 day ago and are yet to post have 10 reputation? where I've been here since October and tried to give positive input and useful posts and have the same Reputation? Doesn't strike me as fair.