Jump to content
  • Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  
alvaro

Reputation++ for logging in? Really?

This topic is 2576 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Can we at least change it from being logged in to +1 per ~10 page views or something (with a cap)? I mean I am logged in all the time, but not necessarily 'active' let alone contributing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement

Can we at least change it from being logged in to +1 per ~10 page views or something (with a cap)?


We have the ability to cap all points you can earn through site interactions. In the case of logging in, this cap is one point per day. Mike did allude to this:


It's also important to note that 365 points a year from logging in will ...


There's still a lot more about the system we need to explain in further upcoming staff journal updates

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, what I meant by "I should points for posting in the Lounge" is that there's no need to disable the upvote and downvote in certain forums if you can get points just for logging in and similar activities.


Regardless of the reputation system changes, among the moderators and staff it's pretty unanimous to not have up/down voting in the social-type forums. Up/down voting will earn you points in the 'scholar' category if you are on the receiving end. To get a boost in the scholar category you have to be posting in one of the technical/creative/business forums.. not in the lounge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Alpha_ProgDes' timestamp='1336738597' post='4939277']
Also, what I meant by "I should points for posting in the Lounge" is that there's no need to disable the upvote and downvote in certain forums if you can get points just for logging in and similar activities.


Regardless of the reputation system changes, among the moderators and staff it's pretty unanimous to not have up/down voting in the social-type forums. Up/down voting will earn you points in the 'scholar' category if you are on the receiving end. To get a boost in the scholar category you have to be posting in one of the technical/creative/business forums.. not in the lounge.
[/quote]
And why not a boost in the Participation category?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And why not a boost in the Participation category?


Good question. Reputation systems are always (usually) designed with a mindset to reward particular actions. We just made the decision that it was more important to share and produce game development related articles/journals/topics/etc than anything else. At the end of the day we want to encourage and make available a really good platform for people to share what they know.

So many of our members have really great insight into a multitude of development topics and that is driving our decision-making process with what to reward most. While it would be great to NOT do any rewards for participation, we also need to grease the wheels so to speak to keep the system moving along. If giving out a few points helps people start using the up/down voting to reward good content then it's absolutely worth it. Our thought process is that if we DO do that, then we better counter balance it by rewarding more significant contributions more.

I think in general people are pretty good about contributing in a positive way to a community when they realize the greater good. Wikis \ open source thrive on that idea. Edited by Michael Tanczos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think in general people are pretty good about contributing in a positive way to a community when they realize the greater good. Wikis \ open source thrive on that idea.


Ok this is the last time I intend to log in, I have no need for epenis points.
I just wanted to ask is the gamedev wiki an example of this? You know the one which tore another community apart?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We believe it's a Good Thing™ to try to recognise and encourage valuable contributions to the community -- but if you're not interested in that the system comprises of a couple of small UI elements around forum posts and it's a simple matter to just ignore it as you did with the previous incarnations. Honestly, leaving the community because we're altering the reputation system (in a way that can't possibly have a negative impact on your usage mind you) just seems like a childish tantrum.

Some of the previous systems have had issues with not recognising some contributions whilst perhaps giving an over-abundance of recognition to others, but that's something we're working hard to try to balance out with this version, and I simply fail to understand why anyone would object to something that recognises the time our members spend making posts and submitting articles.


As for the wiki, I'm not really sure why you're bringing up something so unrelated from quite a long time ago, but... well, it's not at all related to the discussion at hand -- but to directly answer the first part of your question, yes, gpwiki is an excellent example of a system thriving based on positive recognition of that value of contributions. The attempted integration and subsequent low usage of the wiki was unfortunate, but given the original maintainers had (and exercised) the right to fork the content and continue independently I don't really think you can blame GDNet for "tearing another community apart".

Trying to take a cheap shot at GDNet by bringing up past problems -- especially those unrelated to the current topic -- certainly isn't going to help the community move forwards, but given you don't intend to log in any more I suppose you don't really care about that.


We would however love feedback on the current system, and any suggestions for potential improvements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Cornstalks' timestamp='1336751373' post='4939325']
And why not a boost in the Participation category?


Good question. Reputation systems are always (usually) designed with a mindset to reward particular actions. We just made the decision that it was more important to share and produce game development related articles/journals/topics/etc than anything else. At the end of the day we want to encourage and make available a really good platform for people to share what they know.

So many of our members have really great insight into a multitude of development topics and that is driving our decision-making process with what to reward most. While it would be great to NOT do any rewards for participation, we also need to grease the wheels so to speak to keep the system moving along. If giving out a few points helps people start using the up/down voting to reward good content then it's absolutely worth it. Our thought process is that if we DO do that, then we better counter balance it by rewarding more significant contributions more.

I think in general people are pretty good about contributing in a positive way to a community when they realize the greater good. Wikis \ open source thrive on that idea.
[/quote]

So, IMO, +1 for logging in is the same as an +1 for posting in the Lounge. Let me be clear, I don't care nor do I want to get upvotes or not for the Lounge.

Now, as far as participation points, why not give people an extra point for joining and taking part in workshops? Game Dev Competitions, IOTD, demos, or completed games?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It looks like people here think of the reputation system as a mechanism to reward people for desired behavior, and the complications that are being proposed (over the +1/-1 system that we had until very recently) are geared towards promoting specific behaviors. This is similar to how the US tax code developed, which is why it is a mess. No, I am not expecting the reputation system to ever get as complicated as the US tax code.

I generally prefer simple systems that are easy to understand, and let people do what they want. In my opinion the only relevance of the reputation score is that when somebody gets an answer they can use a high reputation as a prior that there is probably some value to the answer (because a lot of people have found the answers of this user valuable before). A more comprehensive reputation system like the one that we seem to be transitioning towards makes the score harder to interpret, and therefore less useful. Is the score high because the user's answers are helpful or because he's been around for a long time? Or perhaps because he contributed some articles, or did some useful work for the community that got rewarded, although their answers are generally not helpful?


Anyway, I'll continue contributing to the community the best way I know (trying to share what I know, especially to newbies) regardless of what gets me brownie points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, I'll continue contributing to the community the best way I know (trying to share what I know, especially to newbies) regardless of what gets me brownie points.


+ 1 (Virtual biggrin.png)

At the end of the day that's what its all about.

Edit: Well that and the community of peers and the learning of new things and whatever else that works to make this site a great place.

Edit 2: Trivia


It looks like people here think of the reputation system as a mechanism to reward people for desired behavior, and the complications that are being proposed (over the +1/-1 system that we had until very recently) are geared towards promoting specific behaviors. This is similar to how the US tax code developed, which is why it is a mess.


Taxes do promote behavioural changes

[font=tahoma,geneva,sans-serif]

[/font]
[font=tahoma,geneva,sans-serif]

In the seventeenth century Amsterdam was Europe's wealthiest trading city. Its golden era saw the development of town planning in the capital. Houses were built along the rings of city canals, the wealthiest merchants living in the city centre. Houses were narrow and high as there was a tax on the width of the buildings.[/font]
[font=tahoma,geneva,sans-serif]

[/quote][/font] Edited by Stormynature

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

GameDev.net is your game development community. Create an account for your GameDev Portfolio and participate in the largest developer community in the games industry.

Sign me up!