I'm glad to see a lot of effort being applied to making a good reputation system. Given that one of the reasons for having a reputation score is to provide some kind of measure of how reliable the information in someone's post is likely to be, I have a small suggestion. How about giving an extra reputation bonus to people who have certain concrete qualifications such as the following?
*) Works at a well-known game company.
*) Has an advanced degree in computer science or related field.
*) Is a published author in the field of game development.
*) Has won some kind of industry award, such as a prize in the IGF.
*) ... any other big indicator that someone knows what they're talking about.
The awards beneath someone's name used to show these kinds of things, but they seem to have disappeared, and they didn't affect reputation. The way things are now, an industry veteran working at Valve (for example) could make only a small number of posts on this site, and his reputation would show that the information he gave is no more reliable than someone who posts a lot, but has no industry experience and is currently enrolled in his first C programming class.
I'd like to see each member have the ability to apply for recognition of the above qualifications, somehow prove that he has satisfied them, and be able to receive significant reputation bonuses for each one cumulatively. Too many times, I've seen a lack of respect for highly-qualified industry game developers in this website, and I think a lot of it is due to the fact the people simply don't know who they're talking to.
Reputation bonuses for specific qualifications
I think that's a great idea to supplement the GD.net join date, but I don't know if I agree fully on why most people do or do not show respect. I find that people are generally respectful, or at least neutral when someone gives them a mostly constructive reply that is full of information on why they take a particular stance. If someone gives a mainly negative example with absolutely no information on why they take a particular stance, then most people including myself couldn't care less about showing respect. Perhaps I should try to simply ignore people who don't deserve respect, instead of correcting them with replies that are full of information. Anyway, surely respect must be maintained just as much as it must be earned? Perhaps I've got it all wrong.
Author
I didn't mean to imply that a lack of respect is widespread. In my experience, most people here are very respectful. But I have seen a few cases where people who genuinely know what they're talking about get bashed by someone else who later, upon learning who it is who they were bashing, realized they were out of line and felt compelled to apologize.
Aside from that, achieving any of the above qualifications *does* earn a person respect, in theory. That person may decide to throw away that respect by being a jerk, but he should at least initially be given the benefit of the doubt.
Aside from that, achieving any of the above qualifications *does* earn a person respect, in theory. That person may decide to throw away that respect by being a jerk, but he should at least initially be given the benefit of the doubt.
I'm glad to see a lot of effort being applied to making a good reputation system. Given that one of the reasons for having a reputation score is to provide some kind of measure of how reliable the information in someone's post is likely to be, I have a small suggestion. How about giving an extra reputation bonus to people who have certain concrete qualifications such as the following?
*) Works at a well-known game company.
*) Has an advanced degree in computer science or related field.
*) Is a published author in the field of game development.
*) Has won some kind of industry award, such as a prize in the IGF.
*) ... any other big indicator that someone knows what they're talking about.
The awards beneath someone's name used to show these kinds of things, but they seem to have disappeared, and they didn't affect reputation. The way things are now, an industry veteran working at Valve (for example) could make only a small number of posts on this site, and his reputation would show that the information he gave is no more reliable than someone who posts a lot, but has no industry experience and is currently enrolled in his first C programming class.
Respectfully I disagree. Yes sometimes good posts can get savaged incorrectly, but the advantage of a peer driven system such as what exists here is that normally this gets rectified through later posts vindicating the good advice. I cannot honestly accept that the holding of a degree makes for good advice nor working for a games company as holy gospel for opinions from within the industry. Can they be so? Yes, absolutely. I however prefer posters to stand on the merits of their posts and how those posts stand up to peer review.
With respect to a lack of respect given to people. Disrespect occasionally does happen here and there sure, usually as a result of a new person to the forums who has no understanding of basic civility or indeed an obtuseness against accepting other people's input might improve their "brilliant" thoughts. But you have to admit, we have a excellent moderating team who tend to step in quite pro-actively to forestall abuse, lockdown threads that have lost their way and general traffic control of forum content.
Do I think we should have recognition? Absolutely, but it should be generated inhouse - i.e. you authored an article for GameDev that enriched the community etc.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
