Shoutbox

This is the first major decision in planning a new reputation system... should we vote on individual posts, individual users, or maybe both?

There was a big discussion starting here that you might want to read: http://shoutbox.menthix.net/showthread.php?tid=20...d=189210#pid189210

Before I post a poll, I want to put together lists of the facts/advantages/disadvantages of each option. Here's what I came up with so far... I'd like to get some input and find out what's missing or wrong...

Posts
- Every post can be rated by every one of the voters.
- All the votes for a certain user's posts make up that user's overall reputation.
- Unlimited voting opportunities as long as the user keeps posting.
- Voters might be too lazy (or not have enough time) to vote for many posts.
- A comment can be submitted for each post, allowing posters to see what people think of their individual posts.
- More open to abuse: if a voter hates a certain poster, he/she could give negative reputations to many of the poster's posts.
- Possibility: More voting limitations could be implemented to help prevent the above problem.
- Possibility: Reputation-giving could be disabled in T&T, because even the most respected members like to spam once in a while.
- Possibility: A maximum number of votes that one post could recieve.
- KeyStorm System
-- The average of all votes by a voter for a certain poster is what's added to the poster's reputation.
-- Harder to abuse, because each voter can only hurt or improve a poster's reputation by so much.
-- The more votes you give to a poster, the less effect they have on the poster's reputation. Eventually, it would be almost pointless to continue.
-- More complex than other systems.

Users
- Voters would give their opinions of certain users, not of certain posts.
- Fewer voting opportunities: each voter could only submit one vote per user.
- Would replace the existing "rate" feature in profiles.
- Respected users could have a high reputation even if they have a low post count.
- Voters might not be bothered to change their votes if a user's behavior changes. With the post-system, the reputation would more likely "evolve" with behavior.
- Guido System
-- Rate a user "positive," "neutral," or "negative"
-- Optional comment

Stuff that could be done with any system
- Allow voters to change their votes.
- Show reputation and some stats in profiles.
- Option: vote anonymously or not
- Voters could specify how many points to give. For example, an Admin who can give up to 3 points could add or subtract 1, 2, or 3 points from a user's reputation.

Who Can Vote
- Elite Members.
- Staff (Mods/Admins).
- Maybe user others, based on some simple rules. [Will be decided some other time]