Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

We're offering banner ads on our site from just $5!

1. Details HERE. 2. GDNet+ Subscriptions HERE. 3. Ad upload HERE.


Reputation ratings


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
42 replies to this topic

#1 Stormynature   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 3392

Posted 09 April 2012 - 10:17 AM

I am not sure if this is technically feasible but am putting in a suggestion based on recent activity in the game design forum with "tit for tat" wars on reputation ratings in a number of threads.

Is it technically feasible to restrict reputation rating changes to those with a zero or higher reputation level?

Sponsor:

#2 Hodgman   Moderators   -  Reputation: 31143

Posted 09 April 2012 - 10:22 AM

To add my own suggestion, I'd like it that whenever you down-vote a post, it costs you one of your own reputation points. This would hopefully make people only down-vote posts that really deserve it.

I can see who's up/down voted those posts, and there's one particular member (with very low rep themselves) who seems to always use the down button on posts that they simply disagree with, rather than posts that are non-useful / unhelpful / trollish / factually-wrong.

#3 GeneralQuery   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1263

Posted 09 April 2012 - 10:23 AM

I think you should be able to do a kamikaze vote where you trade your entire reputation to downvote everyone on the board.

#4 Stormynature   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 3392

Posted 09 April 2012 - 10:28 AM

To add my own suggestion, I'd like it that whenever you down-vote a post, it costs you one of your own reputation points. This would hopefully make people only down-vote posts that really deserve it.


I like that -- would effectively work very well in situations with posters holding a negative reputation unable to spike replies that they simply disagree with in addition to your point. Though from a moderators perspective if giving a gentle slap on the hand, it might drag their rep points down like quicksand.

#5 GeneralQuery   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1263

Posted 09 April 2012 - 10:29 AM

Although, being serious, I noticed that the troll who was active in the GDLounge a few days ago went through my posts and downvoted them. Not that I'm particularly bothered but I can imagine it would rile someone who has worked hard to build up rep. Maybe undo all voting for troll accounts who get banned or something?

#6 SimonForsman   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 6188

Posted 09 April 2012 - 11:36 AM

I am not sure if this is technically feasible but am putting in a suggestion based on recent activity in the game design forum with "tit for tat" wars on reputation ratings in a number of threads.

Is it technically feasible to restrict reputation rating changes to those with a zero or higher reputation level?


I thought you allready needed a fairly high rating to downvote posts, did they change that ?
I don't suffer from insanity, I'm enjoying every minute of it.
The voices in my head may not be real, but they have some good ideas!

#7 Gaiiden   Senior Staff   -  Reputation: 5246

Posted 09 April 2012 - 03:06 PM

I like the system of losing a point per downvote as well. It also has the added benefit of a built-in prevention for allowing people with 0 or negative ratings to downvote.

Although, being serious, I noticed that the troll who was active in the GDLounge a few days ago went through my posts and downvoted them. Not that I'm particularly bothered but I can imagine it would rile someone who has worked hard to build up rep. Maybe undo all voting for troll accounts who get banned or something?


Where? You can't vote in the Lounge and I didn't find any other recent posts that had a negative rating

Drew Sikora
Executive Producer
GameDev.net


#8 GeneralQuery   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1263

Posted 09 April 2012 - 03:09 PM

I like the system of losing a point per downvote as well. It also has the added benefit of a built-in prevention for allowing people with 0 or negative ratings to downvote.


Although, being serious, I noticed that the troll who was active in the GDLounge a few days ago went through my posts and downvoted them. Not that I'm particularly bothered but I can imagine it would rile someone who has worked hard to build up rep. Maybe undo all voting for troll accounts who get banned or something?


Where? You can't vote in the Lounge and I didn't find any other recent posts that had a negative rating

Hodgman sorted it out earlier on. I'm talking about that troll who started all the "1-bit computer" threads on the other sub-forums. Or at least I assume it was him, that day I had 2 rep and the next I had -6, considering I post infrequently there were innocuous posts from weeks ago that suddenly got downvoted (probably because I downvoted him in his troll threads).

#9 Cornstalks   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 6991

Posted 09 April 2012 - 09:06 PM

Also... what the status on being able to see post votes without logging in?

I'd also be curious about knowing if users still have to "earn" the ability to down vote. I thought it was in place, but I'm not positive.

[edit]

I also know that being GDNet+ lets you see who rated you, but I'd also be curious if it also lets you know when a post gets rated (maybe not through a notification, 'cause that'd be a bit annoying, but maybe a tab under your profile or something that has a "rating feed" that shows ratings received in chronological order).
[ I was ninja'd 71 times before I stopped counting a long time ago ] [ f.k.a. MikeTacular ] [ My Blog ] [ SWFer: Gaplessly looped MP3s in your Flash games ]

#10 Michael Tanczos   Senior Staff   -  Reputation: 5437

Posted 09 April 2012 - 10:00 PM

Just wanted to chime in with a few things that are almost near completion.. mostly in testing right now:

Member reputation history:
member_reputation.jpg

Realtime instant member search.. sorted by rank:
member_reputation2.JPG

Member reputation profile:
member_reputation3.JPG

#11 Michael Tanczos   Senior Staff   -  Reputation: 5437

Posted 09 April 2012 - 10:02 PM

We'll be tying a range of new capabilities to reputation shortly.. also downvoting will cost the rater one point. This will only apply to replies to topics.

#12 Cornstalks   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 6991

Posted 09 April 2012 - 10:14 PM

Ooooooo, that's pretty! I'm a total sucker for charts and graphs, and I love Google's interactive charts, so I'm pretty excited for this!

We'll be tying a range of new capabilities to reputation shortly.. also downvoting will cost the rater one point. This will only apply to replies to topics.

Clarification question: what do you mean by "only apply to replies in topics?"
[ I was ninja'd 71 times before I stopped counting a long time ago ] [ f.k.a. MikeTacular ] [ My Blog ] [ SWFer: Gaplessly looped MP3s in your Flash games ]

#13 Michael Tanczos   Senior Staff   -  Reputation: 5437

Posted 09 April 2012 - 10:36 PM

Clarification question: what do you mean by "only apply to replies in topics?"


Well, if we take lessons learned from Stackoverflow.. they overturned the practice of always reducing a rater point for downvotes and went with an approach where downvoting replies cost a point, but if the topic was already set and was fine.. there was a bigger cost to be paid towards downvoting those who took the time to contribute a response. We've seen ourselves though that topics can be all over the place in terms of how they are actually formed. People posting topics are typically consumers of information where the people replying are the producers.

A couple of interesting discussions:
http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/03/the-value-of-downvoting-or-how-hacker-news-gets-it-wrong/
http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/90324/should-downvotes-on-questions-be-free
http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/7322/should-the-weight-of-downvotes-be-increased
http://meta.skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/350/downvoting-is-good-for-you-and-for-the-site

#14 Ectara   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 3019

Posted 14 April 2012 - 01:26 PM

I've given up on the reputation system. I've never gotten above 10, despite attempts to contribute to conversation and add constructive information. I recall a system, that might have been here, or elsewhere, that allowed those with higher reputation to have more weight when increasing or decreasing one's reputation. It's had the unfortunate side effect that if someone with a high reputation has an immutable opinion or a grudge, they'd downvote me into the negatives for contradicting them, and I couldn't even drop them by a point. It gets really annoying, as one's reputation is not a reflection of their ability or their character, it is simply a reflection of the people that interact with them. I get downvoted frequently whenever a debate occurs. Usually I find that the high-ranking users will upvote each other and downvote me, even on posts that were before the conflict.

I like to think of myself as civil. I don't let squabbles get personal, or under my collar, and I try to debate only the facts, and use reason. Unfortunately, this isn't good enough, and vindictive users(or anonymous people that don't take part in the conversation) will simply downvote all of your posts on a whim. I've seen debates where one person went through the thread and downvoted everyone, regardless of their stance. I'm usually on the receiving end. Even when a conversation ends with the opposition admitting that I'm not wrong (pride runs high), I still receive downvotes long after the conversation is over.

TL;DR: The reputation system almost encourages abuse, even by moderators. Perhaps a system where reputation only changes if there's a general consensus among several people that vote on that post?

#15 SimonForsman   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 6188

Posted 14 April 2012 - 02:49 PM


Clarification question: what do you mean by "only apply to replies in topics?"


Well, if we take lessons learned from Stackoverflow.. they overturned the practice of always reducing a rater point for downvotes and went with an approach where downvoting replies cost a point, but if the topic was already set and was fine.. there was a bigger cost to be paid towards downvoting those who took the time to contribute a response. We've seen ourselves though that topics can be all over the place in terms of how they are actually formed. People posting topics are typically consumers of information where the people replying are the producers.

A couple of interesting discussions:
http://blog.stackove...-gets-it-wrong/
http://meta.stackove...estions-be-free
http://meta.stackove...es-be-increased
http://meta.skeptics...nd-for-the-site


Having people lose rep when downvoting is quite likely to result in an overall reputation inflation though, (as we would get fewer downvotes of bad or overrated posts, and this is probably not a good thing), It could however be an idea to combine it with a system giving users a number of free downvotes per week/month based on their rating. and ofcourse not allowing users to downvote once their reputation hits 0.

I would also like to see the ability to change a vote you've made (atleast for a limited period of time after it was made)

It might also be worth looking at a less linear system, a +1 post can then add more rep than you'd lose from a -1 post and a +3 post could give less than 3 times as much rep as a +1 post (Diminishing returns on upvotes basically, and preferably the opposite on downvotes, a single -5 rated post should reduce your reputation by more than 5 -1 posts in my opinion)
I don't suffer from insanity, I'm enjoying every minute of it.
The voices in my head may not be real, but they have some good ideas!

#16 Ectara   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 3019

Posted 14 April 2012 - 03:41 PM

It might also be worth looking at a less linear system, a +1 post can then add more rep than you'd lose from a -1 post and a +3 post could give less than 3 times as much rep as a +1 post (Diminishing returns on upvotes basically, and preferably the opposite on downvotes, a single -5 rated post should reduce your reputation by more than 5 -1 posts in my opinion)


A sentiment like this might concern me; I'm all for a general unanimous voting on the post having more effect than one person, but I'm reluctant to have downvotes have more weight for simply having more votes. Perhaps a reform to how the votes work?

This scenario calls to mind maybe a year or two ago, I had posted that I had a problem where my textured polygons in OpenGL weren't being alpha blended, and instead were being drawn opaquely. I was uploading them properly, with alpha channel intact. However, I was told that it was in the way I was uploading them, and I needed to change my method, as it was deprecated. So I was cooperative, and I used a different function call to upload the image data. However, this confirmed my suspicions that the problem was elsewhere, as the problem persisted. However, no one would listen to me that the problem was still there, and a moderator even insisted that my problem was solved, despite me looking right at the same problems as before. I began to receive downvotes, and quickly went into the negatives.

I eventually found the problem; I neglected to change the texture mode from GL_DECAL to GL_MODULATE. Looking back, it was one of the first things I should have checked, and as a beginner, I missed it. The experts that I spoke to didn't even consider it, and were so ingrained in their insistence that they were right, that they failed to help me, and reduced my reputation severely.

It is examples like these that make me lose faith in the reputation system, as people are heavily abusive of the voting system. If the system weren't so easily swayed by one person's opinion, I would hold greater value in it.

#17 Cornstalks   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 6991

Posted 14 April 2012 - 07:24 PM

I wouldn't mind sacrificing a rep point to vote someone down, but there are some times where I seriously think a rep points should be gained for voting someone else down (this post comes to mind) Posted Image

I do like the update though!
[ I was ninja'd 71 times before I stopped counting a long time ago ] [ f.k.a. MikeTacular ] [ My Blog ] [ SWFer: Gaplessly looped MP3s in your Flash games ]

#18 JustinDaniel   Members   -  Reputation: 137

Posted 14 April 2012 - 09:09 PM

My suggestion on losing a point per down vote would be, There must be a range to lose points. Say - 5 or - 10. If you go more than that, You are not allowed to down-vote anybody, because there are some trolls who find it fun to down-vote everybodys post.

#19 Michael Tanczos   Senior Staff   -  Reputation: 5437

Posted 15 April 2012 - 07:35 AM

One of the things to remember though, in one of the upcoming site updates downvoting will be a privilege that you must also earn. So we can't have people trolling with new accounts coming in and being abusive.

As we see different forms of abuse crop up we'll be doing our best to revert it and give people a fair idea of their standing.

I think one of the things that annoys me now is that people help so much and don't ever get recognized for it.. not even from the people you are helping. That's going to change..

#20 Dave   Members   -  Reputation: 1521

Posted 18 April 2012 - 03:08 AM

One of the things to remember though, in one of the upcoming site updates downvoting will be a privilege that you must also earn. So we can't have people trolling with new accounts coming in and being abusive.

As we see different forms of abuse crop up we'll be doing our best to revert it and give people a fair idea of their standing.

I think one of the things that annoys me now is that people help so much and don't ever get recognized for it.. not even from the people you are helping. That's going to change..


This is what i was going to suggest. Alternatively you could do what Slashdot does and randomly hand out votes to the most active community members.




Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS