Main Menu

Reputation

Started by maverik, April 24, 2009, 02:56:05 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

maverik

What's with this reputation thing? ???
KC9SFU
Fresh from the Mint C/LT
"Hard pressed on my right. My center is yielding. Impossible to maneuver. Situation excellent. I am attacking." Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne

davidsinn

Former CAP Captain
David Sinn

dwb

Quote from: SARADDICT on April 24, 2009, 02:56:05 PM
What's with this reputation thing? ???

It's so the cool kids can pick on the squares.  Just like high school.

Aren't you happy they added it?  I sure am.

MIKE

It is a way to express your approval or intense displeasure at something a poster does... Like a particularly boneheaded post... Or for some people, just the poster themselves.

Obviously, the smite button gets a lot more use.  Applaud is mostly so the mods and admins can pat each other on the back.
Mike Johnston

davidsinn

Quote from: MIKE on April 24, 2009, 03:14:47 PM
Applaud is mostly so the mods and admins can pat each other on the back.

Aren't there only 3 of you? From what I can see you are upstanding guys so I know you're just kidding.  ;D
Former CAP Captain
David Sinn

Larry Mangum

So why do the controls not appear until a persons 500th post? Seems a little arbitrary, I doubt it takes 500 posts to determine if someone is a poser or not.
Larry Mangum, Lt Col CAP
DCS, Operations
SWR-SWR-001

dwb

My problem with "smite" is that it leaves people with unpopular opinions exposed to a passive aggressive form of ridicule.

I cruise a board that uses vBulletin, which has the ability to "thank" an individual post.  I think that's the best solution: if someone offers something insightful, regardless of who it is, that individual comment can be recognized.  I'm opposed to most karma systems on message boards, but the "thank" feature is an exception.

What we have now is just dooming the minority opinions to losing childish popularity contests.  How does that raise the level of discourse?

davidsinn

Quote from: dwb on April 24, 2009, 03:21:57 PM
My problem with "smite" is that it leaves people with unpopular opinions exposed to a passive aggressive form of ridicule.

I cruise a board that uses vBulletin, which has the ability to "thank" an individual post.  I think that's the best solution: if someone offers something insightful, regardless of who it is, that individual comment can be recognized.  I'm opposed to most karma systems on message boards, but the "thank" feature is an exception.

What we have now is just dooming the minority opinions to losing childish popularity contests.  How does that raise the level of discourse?

I totally understand what you're saying but I don't think this affects the way posts are displayed so I'm not too concerned about it. If any of you are familiar with slashdot.org the moderation system actually changes the way posts are displayed.
Former CAP Captain
David Sinn

notaNCO forever

 I really don't see any point to having the feature. I also don't see any big deal in having it; I really don't care if I have a big positive or negative number.

a2capt

Quote from: dwb on April 24, 2009, 03:13:12 PM
Quote from: SARADDICT on April 24, 2009, 02:56:05 PM
What's with this reputation thing? ???

It's so the cool kids can pick on the squares.  Just like high school.

Aren't you happy they added it?  I sure am.

Ugh. Great. Just like communism, it's perfect on paper, until you put people into the mix.

maverik

I officially don't like this. If I may voice my oppinion if it takes 500 posts to get the controls that means I must sit here about ohh 3+ hours a day posting on every single thread I come by.
KC9SFU
Fresh from the Mint C/LT
"Hard pressed on my right. My center is yielding. Impossible to maneuver. Situation excellent. I am attacking." Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne

wuzafuzz

#11
Quote from: dwb on April 24, 2009, 03:21:57 PM
My problem with "smite" is that it leaves people with unpopular opinions exposed to a passive aggressive form of ridicule.

I cruise a board that uses vBulletin, which has the ability to "thank" an individual post.  I think that's the best solution: if someone offers something insightful, regardless of who it is, that individual comment can be recognized.  I'm opposed to most karma systems on message boards, but the "thank" feature is an exception.

What we have now is just dooming the minority opinions to losing childish popularity contests.  How does that raise the level of discourse?

What he said!   :clap: :clap: :clap:

Sounds like a poll opportunity.  Until then: Down with the reputation feature!
This is my opinion only and I understand the board owners can do whatever they want.  Unless they get economic stimulus money and become Uncle Sam's slaves.
"You can't stop the signal, Mal."

MIKE

Quote from: SARADDICT on April 24, 2009, 04:13:07 PM
I officially don't like this. If I may voice my oppinion if it takes 500 posts to get the controls that means I must sit here about ohh 3+ hours a day posting on every single thread I come by.

The idea behind it is to prevent some newbie from just applauding and smiting frivolously (Not saying that some people who have the option don't do this.) ... it's the same with other post count based privileges... to prevent abuse.  So, if you spam posts just so you can use the feature... it'll probably earn you a few smites.
Mike Johnston

es_g0d

So much for an open forum.
Good luck and good hunting,
-Scott
www.CAP-ES.net

Smithsonia

#14
I do not care for this new system either. However, my criticism is for different reasons than those previously stated.

I know why most people use a name other than their own. Anonymity is important if you want to fully express your opinion. I've chosen another direction: Use my real name and comment only when I can do so both appropriately, with courtesy and respect, AND talk with some authority about realities/things/events/ more than offer opinions. (Although I do offer opinions such as this writing.)

For me this works. I don't post on more than a couple of boards and post on but a few topics within each. I think anonymity is good but easily abused. Less anonymity has it's own moderating influence, at least upon me. It makes me think before I post, regard the thread with some dignity, take more time in my editorial, consider how my words might be viewed, and maintain respect for the reader.  That said, do as you think best... this isn't preaching but observation, and I suppose opinion too.

Offering an opinion or taking a stand often means also taking some responsibility for that stand and opinion. Taking responsibility for ones own words and not hiding behind some bloggers tag means you are going to think before you write.

By the way, I know some will say; "Well why do you use Smithsonia?" It is just to keep the Google Bots away, but I always sign with my own name, always... and as I do not speak for CAP, my Squadron, or Wing, I choose not to include my rank, etc.

This might be cheese for the trap, grist for the mill, or food for thought, please consider as you like. Insight and responsibility for the words you write are different, and I think more productive, than the "rate that record" concept that is currently being used.
With regards;
ED OBRIEN

pixelwonk

that applause-only SMFforum mod is startin to look prittay prittay prittay good

dwb

For those that don't know, I spent a few years moderating another popular quasi-CAP-related web forum.  So I'm not just a random idiot with an opinion; I actually have a little prior experience with how this medium works.

As a forum admin, one of my principles was to allow arguments to stand on their own merit.  This had a couple of side effects:


  • I would defend people who posted valid points, even if they were otherwise unpopular in the forum community.

  • Users were allowed to remain anonymous, even if they got stoned by the community to post their credentials.

It was difficult to guard against tyranny of the majority; when you have a group of long-standing forum members that are a lot more similar than they are different, and someone comes in to disrupt that ecosystem, it's easy to stand back and let a dogpile ensue.  But ultimately, it's not productive.

I can think of a few users on CAP Talk that have some pretty unpopular opinions and/or personality traits.  But if they can make a good argument, that argument should be respected regardless of who is saying it.  When you intoduce a negative karma system (like smiting), it allows people to take cheap shots at the person, rather than debating the content of the post.

I have no special forum powers around here, so all I can do is suggest, like anyone else.  But I think I can make a pretty compelling argument that allowing users to passively poke fun at people they don't like isn't a good idea.

es_g0d

Hear, hear.

Let the logic of argument and the wisdom of words stand or fall on their own.  No artificial preservatives necessary!
Good luck and good hunting,
-Scott
www.CAP-ES.net

Smithsonia

I suppose there are 2 more reasonable arguments against this "reputation" idea:

1. One may win the argument/debate/idea/point/discussion but hurt a feeling and thereby incur a disreputable "reputation." Particularly if a "sub-500" devotee takes on a "500-plus' devotee.

2. I've had several disagreements (debates) with various members. As what I had written was misunderstood by the reader... and it took a back and forth to straighten out our disagreement... then the minus sign (and plus sign) needs to be removable. (modifiable) over a long time. This would be helpful as some of these discussions go on for a week or more and the modification button works only for an hour (or few hours).
With regards;
ED OBRIEN

maverik

I have 1 more question someone smited me do you feel better? Now I voiced my opinion of what I thought was appropriate and non-disrespectful and you went ahead and smited me because I went against or corssed you or somethin like that in this or another thread correct? Isn't that kinda want socialism and communism is? Don't cross the leaders or else. That is my main argument.
KC9SFU
Fresh from the Mint C/LT
"Hard pressed on my right. My center is yielding. Impossible to maneuver. Situation excellent. I am attacking." Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne