Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Constructive suggestionFollow

#1 Jul 26 2005 at 1:03 AM Rating: Default
***
3,653 posts
Guys you're probably sick of me posting in here by now but i've just seen something which illustrates my idea well.

This Thread.

It's pretty obvious this thread has been nuked into oblivion by one if not more people who haven't actually taken part in the thread.

My suggestion is to have some accountability for the rating system.

The Idea: No post in the thread, no rates.

Even if you don't like the idea...the person(s) that nuked the thread should be looked at, as it seems they have no intention other than ruining ratings.

Edited, Tue Jul 26 02:08:27 2005 by blowfin
#3 Jul 26 2005 at 1:18 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,653 posts
IMHO the guy had a legitimate question and deserved a bit more than he got. Not as if he was trying to cause trouble or anything.
#4 Jul 26 2005 at 2:09 AM Rating: Good
****
7,861 posts
This suggestion has been brought up before, and the outcome was that it works as intended. Angsty is right, some things need to be rated and NOT replied to.
____________________________
People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome. ~River Tam

Sedao
#5 Jul 26 2005 at 3:36 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,653 posts
Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of tools out there on this site who will cause trouble just for the sake of it. Yes they deserve the same treatment they dish out but the crap threads are going to drop off the main pages even without being rated down as they won't get bumped, pretty simple really.

The thread I've linked to in the BLM forum is a great example where the thread has been rated on what someone else beleives to be correct strategy. A completely subjective measure, if you don't agree with someone on a stragtegy at least take the time to explain to them your viewpoint. Rating down without response on a thread like that reminds me of George Orwell's 1984, big brother is watching your BLM strat., or at least they'd like to think they are.

Some form of rating accountability would go a long way to stop issues like this.

Angsty:
Correct me if I'm wrong but there's no trolls that I can see in that thread.

"Don't feed the trolls" just doesn't hold water for me as an arguement for such a rating system. A forum system by it's very nature discards crap threads, anyone with a modecum of experience on these boards knows what not to reply to.

There's a large amount of users on this site who abuse the rating system to their own ends and finding some way to restrict the damage they can do shouldn't be something that's brushed off with the troll feeding arguement.

I'll give you guys an example, one of the other places you'll find a ratings system around web forums is on tech support sites. These sites work in a way where useful information is rewarded and users who continuosly help are given points for each situation, you know who to trust and who is providing good information as a result of this. For the record, there is no way of rating down on these sites, so ratings are earnt by being truly useful. In some situations the orginal poster can pick the best response out of the bunch. Not the situation we have here where ratings can be earnt by pandering to popular opinion or those who can rate. Not the situation we have here where differences in opinion are often met with contempt, but no response.


I'm probably just banging my head against a brick wall trying to explain this to everyone but I think in the long run some form of restriction on ratings would lead to a much healthier web site. I hope you can all take this onboard and think it over for a bit.


EDIT: I also think if you looked carefully you'd find a lot of trolls on these boards are caused by the ratings system in the first place.


Edited, Tue Jul 26 04:52:24 2005 by blowfin
#7 Jul 26 2005 at 9:41 AM Rating: Good
**
299 posts
Quote:
This site has... what, 70 some odd fora now?


I apologize for the stupid question..but what is fora?
#9 Jul 26 2005 at 10:34 AM Rating: Good
**
944 posts
Quote:
There's a large amount of users on this site who abuse the rating system to their own ends and finding some way to restrict the damage they can do shouldn't be something that's brushed off with the troll feeding arguement.


Just an FYI - this arguement is purely anecdotal in nature. Once you believe that "a large amount of users" do something, you will continually look for examples to prove your theory.

Do some threads occassionally get rated into oblivion? Absolutely. Does it happen all the time? Absolutely not. If it truely were "a large amount of users" abusing the rating system, you would have the following:

- Users signed up to do nothing but rate people down because it's fun.
- 4 legitimate users who survive despite the thousands of folks that sought out Alla just to abuse the rating system.

Here are examples of posts I'll rate down without ever replying to the threads:

- Gil buying advertisers
- People that advertise "free" macs, XBoxes, Botox or Dried Salmon (and whatever else)
- People that get onto the site and post incoherent racist and sexist remarks just to be inflamatory
- People who make 30 posts in one forum in an attempt to spam the forum and clutter the boards with nonsense
- People that make uncalled for personal attacks (our server forum had a user banned for posting a link to what he claimed where photos of another player in a compromising position)
- People who start karma-orgy threads (these are the real abusers who usually are looking to rate up a sock to be nasty - an incredibly small minority of all users)

In all of these cases, my replying to the these threads just to rate them would bump these threads to the top. I cannot take a 3.0 post to sub-default with a single rating. So, if I'm the first one to rate the poster "awful," I both open myself up to potential sock abuse AND bump the post up to the top of the forum list.

Look, if you suspect a user of abusing the karma system, all you have to do is PM one of the admins. They will review the users ratings and determine whether or not the user is abusing the rating system. (By the way, a single thread does not constitute "abuse.") If the user is abusing the rating system, the admin can do several things:

- Warn the user that their ratings appear to be abusive in nature & explain that they will risk losing rating ability and/or a site ban if the behavior continues.
- Chose to no-rate the user ID in some cases (meaning, you can click "awful" all you want & it won't matter).
- In extreme cases, ban the user from Alla outright.

But, they can't do this if you just come in with the generalized "everyone abuses karma!" complaint. Because, as a majority user of Alla that would fall into your "large amount of users" category, I must be some freakish outlier who forgot to abuse the rating system. OR - just maybe, it's not a "large amount of users."
#11 Jul 26 2005 at 11:35 AM Rating: Good
****
7,861 posts
YSU wrote:
I thought fora was plants or flowers?

I believe that's flora.
____________________________
People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome. ~River Tam

Sedao
#12 Jul 26 2005 at 8:13 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,653 posts
Quote:
A person's opinion, on matters of opinion, is never right or wrong; it's simply their view.


That's what tends to bother me, a lot of people get rated down on opinion or the way that they choose to play a game.

Quote:
Once you believe that "a large amount of users" do something, you will continually look for examples to prove your theory.


I don't just beleive it, I've seeen it happen enough times in my 400+ post to know it happens fairly regularly. Trust me i'm not going to be continually looking for examples.

The examples you've given are pretty obvious ones to avoid, as I said before, anyone with any sort of common sense knows to avoid posts like that.

Quote:
Look, if you suspect a user of abusing the karma system, all you have to do is PM one of the admins. They will review the users ratings and determine whether or not the user is abusing the rating system. (By the way, a single thread does not constitute "abuse.") If the user is abusing the rating system, the admin can do several things:


Ok, so before I die from the irony I'd be perfectly within my rights to stick my hand up on this thread and say "Please , someone with a wit far surpassing that of normal human beings has rated down all my posts on this thread, can you please do something about it" (that's a real question by the way).

I need to see some evidence of the police being policed before i'm convinced.
#13 Jul 26 2005 at 8:56 PM Rating: Decent
****
7,861 posts
Blowfin wrote:
Ok, so before I die from the irony I'd be perfectly within my rights to stick my hand up on this thread and say "Please , someone with a wit far surpassing that of normal human beings has rated down all my posts on this thread, can you please do something about it" (that's a real question by the way).

People are rating you down because you're complaining about something that's been complained about before. Any time somebody complains about anything relating to karma...they get rated down. If people would stop worrying about their damn karma, this sh[red][/red]it wouldn't happen. My Smiley: twocents.
____________________________
People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome. ~River Tam

Sedao
#14 Jul 26 2005 at 11:53 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,653 posts
Bah, just because someone's 'complained' about it before doesn't mean it shouldn't still be discussed occasionally. How long has it taken for Isreal and Palestine to have a lasting cease fire and some hope of peace like they have now? How exactly are we going to tackle the problem of gloabl warming without experts constantly presenting research material to goverments? Extreme examples I know, but I hope you see my point.


#15 Jul 27 2005 at 6:59 AM Rating: Decent
**
944 posts
Just an FYI - it's not irony. The expected outcome of complaining about Karma is a rate-down. Sorry, that's the truth. And I was trying to give you concrete things to do rather than complain about the system as a whole.

That out of the way:
http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/forum.html?forum=3&mid=1122455537749958316&num=1

Just look at the thread (it's above yours) and check out the way that the user presented their arguement vs the way you presented yours.

- You gave a broad sweeping generalization using a thread as an example.
- You asked that the entire Karma system be changed so that folks would have to post in a thread in order to rate a thread
- You base this on the claim that "a lot" of abuse takes place
- You've come back and complained when others who have seen these arguements (and I've personally seen this suggestion at least 10 times)tried to offer you some solid advice

Result: Same Karma, additional rate-downs from others that don't like to see complaining about Karma.

Now look at what the other poster did:

- Didn't act as if they knew this was a case of abuse (no J'ACCUSE!)
- Just asked if it was one person or many

Result: Admin checked, found out who it was, saw a pattern to their rating & sent them a lovely note

In all honesty, this isn't the Middle East Peace Accords, nor is it Global Warming. See, those things are incredibly important. When someone wins a Nobel Prize for constructing a fair rating system on message boards, we'll pretend that they're the same thing. =)
#17 Jul 27 2005 at 8:08 AM Rating: Default
**
299 posts
You are getting rate downs because this whole arguement about karma is stupid and childish. You should listen to Stephmo, she is very wise.
#18 Jul 27 2005 at 11:05 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,653 posts
I don't know how you guys all missed this sentance, I do remember writing it as plain as day.

Quote:
Extreme examples I know, but I hope you see my point.


Check it's meaning at Dictionary.com.

Those comments about it being a small thing are true, but are moot in the context of this thread. My examples have been taken way out of context on more than one occasion. It's a really bad habit, and possibly as annoying as soapboxing "FYI's" at the top of posts.

Really, I don't care about the rate downs in this thread, would I honestly keep posting if I gave a ****? I'm putting forward a suggestion and some ideas, not complaining or whinging or arguing or whatever you want to label it. The vast assumption seem to be that anyone who raises the issue of the Karma system must just be some sort of whinging *****, it's a fantastically ingorant assumption. Until you all understand that I'm not here on some personal crusade I'm afraid we're speaking on different levels. IMHO if as many people raise the point as you all seem to think then I don't see how you can reach any other conclusion that there are problems with the system.

Angsty has by far given me the most reasonable response on the topic, much respect.

'nuff said, and still not convinced about the value of the Karma system as it stands.


Edited, Thu Jul 28 04:51:53 2005 by blowfin
#19 Jul 28 2005 at 8:53 AM Rating: Decent
**
944 posts
hmm...you did't like my FYI.

Sorry, the mis-use of the word irony is a personal annoyance of mine. Everyone who has ever heard that song now believes Ironic = Things that Suck. I was trying to help you look like you knew what you were saying.

Honestly Blowfin, you really should read your responses. The reason people jumped on your extreme example was because it was inappropriate. In the planes of metaphor and smilie, the conflict in the Middle East and the Karma system are simply not on the same field. If you want to say that Karma is like something and get your point across, you can't use "extreme" examples.

You would have been better off saying something like this:

Karma is like getting picked on at the playground, you know you shouldn't care, you want to ignore it, but there are just days when it seems like the Karma Bullies are intent on pushing their game until everyone's fun is ruined.


I know you think you're being picked on in this thread, but I used that other thread as an example of how to report Karama abuse. Truthfully, my impression is that you care very little about the thread in question - that you want your system in place and nothing else. After all, your reports of Karma abuse thus far have been cursory.

Bottom line, I have no desire to see a whole new breed of post - the "okay, here's the name of everyone that posted in the thread, so I know it's one of you camping me!" threads. The culture here is too established to believe that this would not happen. Folks already look at recent visitor lists and try to compile their accusations from those lists.

The Admins can run a quick query and see all the ratings for a post. They have tools where they can see all the ratings for a user. They can see if there's actual abuse. Why add an antagonistic feature that will a) bump worthless posts & b) create more animosity and distrust?

#22 Jul 28 2005 at 3:41 PM Rating: Decent
**
503 posts
Sorry to say, but I think that the karma/rating system works rather well or has worked rather well...

People who constantly make posts that are worth something to everyone else as opposed to trolling and such are rated up much of the time (Not all the time though).

People who constantly make poor posts in terms of material, grammar, and a strong bias are rated down as are trolls.

People who make extremely good posts such as guides and such are rated through the sky...From what I read if one rates someone up past 5.00 it still affects their karma...

If one posts redundant material or asks questions that have been answered 500 times in the last 10K threads, he is rated down into oblivion. If a question is insightful and has bred much conversation and little trolling, then it is wonderful and people rate it up.

Quite simple an idea. Though there are people who either rate down others if they say something they don't like, or even worse people who don't rate others at all, there are people who when they see something well written and thought evoking they will rate it up despite it being not to their personal liking but seeing that this person can come up with ideas that are well thought out.



I must still say though, I really like Slashdot's rating system so much more, but Alla is not filled with as many caring people as Slashdot is, though I can definitely go farther to say that Slashdot has plenty more trolls than Alla, but those trolls rarely get to rate;-) On /., it is also nice that there is a limited number of ratings, so material posted earlier is going to stand out.

Still there is no perfect system. Live with it Blowfin. You are quite capable of understanding how you are going to be rated on various topics. Honestly you knew how people were going to react to this thread therefore you don't care about your ratings.

Some people are just too stupid to understand that it would help them portray themselves as a smart and understanding person if they were to read the rest of the boards or search elsewhere on some query, such as this person's thread you posted in OP. Some people don't care what others think about them and troll on anyway. Some people are too lazy to read back. Some people also lack common sense. These people deserve to be rated down. The person who started the thread you pointed to was one of those people.

No rating unless you post in the thread is absurd. Some poeple like to lurk and post whenever they have something smart to say...myself being one of those people. I constantly rate people up those who meet my criteria aforementioned and rate those down who are redundant, etc. Others excercise their rating privilege unfairly or not at all, but a good deal of people will applaud intelligence when they find it.

It's not a perfect system, but this is by far one of the better ones I've seen. The best advice I can give you at the moment other than to live with it is to go and start making posts people will love to read and will rate up. When you get scholar status, you will be able to rate too. Therefore, you will be able to counterbalance those who rate other into oblivion more effectively. Now if only more people did that...



Oh, and AngstyCoder, I second that request. These threads are like a weekly thing more like it. Still makes this forum cluttaru since as I understand it it was made for people to post conscructive feedback about the forum in general, not to complain about karma farming and nuking, etc.

Also, good job in figuring out and enlightening some of us with the proper plural of 'forum'. Props to you.

Ugh...now to see how much I actually wrote and proceed to think of how to dispose of half a kilo of magnesium shreds in as little time as possible via oxidizing it.

EDIT: /em is open to suggestions on the latter portion of the message dealing with burning magnesium.

Edited, Thu Jul 28 16:46:56 2005 by Bagira
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 2 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (2)