Shoutbox

that's the thing that comes in my mind immedialty... With the current system, your postcount doesn't rely on other people... Although mods should be objective (I'm not saying the currents ones aren't!) in their job modding the forums, the new point-system will take it a step further. This means the job of moderator will be more difficult, as it is a hell of a job to stay objective ALL the time (and we're only human)... That's the drawback of the new system...
Afcourse, to more people who can vote, the more accurate the point-system will be....

But then again, every system has his drawbacks...

Maybe to combine those two systems? (like some other forums do) Keep the post count, (loose the "special" title's though) and implement the point-system. IMHO, this is the best way of seeing who's who:
a respected good poster will have a big postcount and good points (green)
a spammer would have big postcount but bad negative points (red)
a new poster will have no points and no postcount
a respected member who doesn't post much will have low postcount but good points (in the current system he/she's considered a newbie)

Anyways, like WDZ said, every new implemented system will draw comments and you have to get used to it. It is always a hasle to change some long-running thing into something new....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeronimo
What if when you reach a certain level of reputation, you are allowed to vote? In a way, it would be like the staff members voted you in to do that. Or is this open to abuse too I wonder?

---

That probably would find some sort of flaw as you suggest...

I reckon more oldies than just the elite members should be allowed to vote... I would suggest either senior members or posting freaks but then you can get mers so maybe a combination of joining date and posts could allow a wider collection of members participate in the reputation system?

Jeronimo, similar to my idea. Anyway, having spoken with fluffy_lobster, it seems server load would be a large factor in this, and I have refined my idea a bit. As I said, if any mod/admin wants to hear it, I'd be happy to post it... but while no one asks for it, I'll save my fingers.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
Maybe to combine those two systems? (like some other forums do) Keep the post count, (loose the "special" title's though) and implement the point-system. IMHO, this is the best way of seeing who's who:
a respected good poster will have a big postcount and good points (green)
a spammer would have big postcount but bad negative points (red)
a new poster will have no points and no postcount
a respected member who doesn't post much will have low postcount but good points (in the current system he/she's considered a newbie)

---

i think this is a great idea. that way, ppl like dwergs, who are respected but have 8 posts get high ratings. and it makes it MUCH easier to figure out if your the only person whohates someone

quote:

---

Originally posted by billywoods1
Jeronimo, similar to my idea. Anyway, having spoken with fluffy_lobster, it seems server load would be a large factor in this, and I have refined my idea a bit. As I said, if any mod/admin wants to hear it, I'd be happy to post it... but while no one asks for it, I'll save my fingers.

---

i'd like to hear it. whats the point in ahving ideas if they arn't expressed?

Yeah, ok, sure. I just didn't want to suggest anything that would never be added anyway. Still, I'll explain it.

My original idea involved a lot of complicated maths that I've barely got my head round myself, but basically it was cumulative reputation based on agreement/disagreement from those in power.

Anyway, my 'refined' idea involves a reputation variable (yes, I'm talking in programming talk again ) which can be fixed, say at 100 for elites, 150 for mods and 200 for admins, or whatever. Then when one person votes and a person with a reputation votes for the same thing, both mutually profit by a percentage of the reputation value of the other.

Example: A has reputation 0, B has reputation 50. A and B vote for the same thing. Assume the percentage gained is 4% - that way, A gets 4% of B's reputation (which is 2), and B gets 4% of A's reputation (0). So now A has 2 and B has 50.

Now say they both vote for the same thing again. A and B will get 4% of each other's reputation, leaving A with 4 and B with 50.08. Then if a third person, C, with reputation 2500 (absurd, but to explain the point ) votes for the same thing:
- A and B get 4% of C's reputation (which is 100) each.
- C gets 4% of A's and B's reputation (some horrible number, about 2.1632).

A similar idea can be used for the actual status, dependent on the reputation of the voters, and maybe even a depletion of reputation for disagreement from those with a high reputation.

Basically, the more reputation a member has, through sensible voting, the more their votes count towards members' status and other members' reputation.

Told you it was complicated.

Edit: CookieRevised's idea is good too, and a lot simpler, but it places a lot of initial strain on the elite members, and can also be subject to bias. In my way, it can all be hidden so people can't intentionally vote for their friends' ideas, and so on.

Yeah... I didn't say don't express it now you've left us all waiting you might at well. (Edit: blah, seems you got there before me )

I also didn't say that the server load was significant, but that wdz is sure to insist that it would be   I think the idea would be pretty cool if possible

Yeah, it'd be quite difficult though... I don't mind doing all the maths and stuff, my brain thinks that way. But ultimately it's WDZ who has to code it, and this server that has to hold it all. Not really up to me or anyone else.

What's the meaning of the post count? It could be nothing, many people rate member's reputation by the post count, others just think they're spammers...

My idea is to give a meaning to the post count, to rate members reputation with it, and a good reputation in this forum would mean someone that has contributed in a good way... so... to the point... disable the post counters in all General forums, *dodges rotten tomatoes and trout slaps* the thing is that General forums have general interest information that should have nothing to do with Messenger Plus, and the post counter should rate a member's reputation for the Messenger Plus Forums... yeah, is a very harsh idea... so, what do ya think?  *

quote:

---

Originally posted by D:Frag
disable the post counters in all General forums, *dodges rotten tomatoes and trout slaps*

---

* billywoods1 applies the proverbial trout to D:Frag

The post counts are necessary, and besides, we're a msgplus support forum, why would you bother just regulating spammers in non-msgplus forums?