In the "My mgopoints" section, it lists off how you've gotten your points as we all know, but when you see the negative points, there's no way to know where they came from. It was already pointed out that this anonymity can hide cowards, so why don't we have this section also display who gave the positive/negative points. This way a person could express their personal opinion using their personal definition of how to give points without necessarily having to write a whole post about it.
question about the newest point system and your opinion.
Yeah, that would be a real improvement - cluttering threads with posters showing off their e-manliness by calling out the guy who gave them negative points. No offense, but how is knowing who gave you a thumbs-down going to help? In most cases I've seen where a post has received a large number of negative points, it's because of blatant douchery by the poster. I don't think there's much random thumbs-downing going on.
I could see that getting out of hand. Another potential fix:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think sub-20 users can see what types of posts by other users are being awarded/deducted points, nor can they see when their own comments are being awarded/deducted. I think that information would help any well-intentioned new users get to basic user status more quickly.
I think this is a crucial point. For users with less than 20 points, the whole plus/minus system is a mystery. We can't see how many pluses and minuses we're getting for each post. I've posted three times since the +/- system went into effect. At one point, I had two points. As of a few minutes ago, I had 10. I have no idea where any of those points are coming from or what people are liking or disliking.
If you want people to learn what kind of content is acceptable on this board and what's not, let all users see what posts are getting pluses and minuses. With more transparency, you'll have fewer accusations of secret cabals conspiring to steal our precious, precious MGoPoints.
It's worth keeping in mind that the point system essentially creates a two-class system of elite posters and junior posters. If you're a megaposter, you may view this as a good thing--it separates the real posters from the noobs, and it marks you as one of the elite.
But it also creates a sense of inferiority and outsiderness among new posters, making them less likely to join the community because they don't feel like they're part of the cool kids club. The snobbery that can result from this kind of thing is unappealing to me.
It very well may be that this is a sacrifice worth making, that you have to slap people around a little in order to keep the quality of the content high. But I would encourage Brian, as he continues to tinker with the system, to view the two-class system as a necessary evil, and to minimize the sense of exclusivity as much as possible.
Are you calling me a member of the bourgeousie?
Your recreation of the Bolshevik revolution as applied to Michigan football has managed to come full circle: in tearing down the old regime in the hope of creating a classless society, you've created a new class structure with yourself at the top. On the bright side, when Lenin did it, it took years and cost millions of lives. Thanks to the efficiency of the Internet, you've done it in a matter of months.
Also, I now have (for the time being) over 20 points. So, as an official member of the in crowd, I take back everything I said in my prior posts. Viva la revolucion!
We only killed like 3 people, too.
Yeah, that could be a problem. It's probably a good idea to keep it anonymous.
Personally I think if cetain people knew who were giving them thumbs downs they would retaliate to that poster. I have not used the thumbs down (except on my own post when I first saw and didn't know what it was), but I hate them. I am sure I have been docked MGO points for simply disagreeing with others epinion. Everyone know people will disagree and mini fueds are bound to start and this feature will be abused.
the best way to deal with trolls, posts or topics you don't like is to ignore them. Negative votes increase the incentives to attention getters like McFarlin.
The best troll repellant is ignoring.
Except this has never happened in the history of message boards.
a few boards previously, and let me assure you: ignoring them only makes them work harder to get noticed.
The best solution (ie, one that solves mostly everything) is to completely remove their posting privileges.
They could make 2 accounts. Pad their posts so that they make a bunch of nonsense posts and then also vote up one of their monikers (or both) and then go on a negative voting rampage that screws up the whole voting system and we all go back to the "stone-age".
It would take a lot of time and effort but... trolls don't measure things in terms of time or effort just how much it pisses people off
I haven't seen the behavior you're afraid of yet; after an initial surge where everything on every thread had +/- points associated with it it's settled back down into something more reasonable where the bulk of the comments have no points associated with them, with a few votes here and there.
As far as the chilling effect of reposting something that had already been asked and getting negative-pointed for it... well, that's the point. 1) Instead of four people replying to you that you are a dumbass they just clicked the button. 2) A post that is noise was discouraged.
So a bunch of noise posts didn't happen and the one that did was accompanied by a light slap on the wrist. The full-on flamewars that used to happen here have been dampened considerably, as people take into consideration the potential that their annoying back-and-forth will bring down the wrath of the mob. This thread has a quality reply rate approaching 100%, something that I seriously doubt would be the case otherwise.
From one perspective the point system is stifling, sure, but I think it stifles the things that I -- and I think we as a community -- would rather not have to wade through in an effort to have a conversation. To me, the voting has worked beyond expectations.
So... get used to it, I guess. I am always listening for tweaks that would make things run more smoothly.
Although I don't know if it's necessary now that the initial surge has settled down, but I think having everyone limited to a certain number of votes per day/week/month/whatever would help avoid the stifling. Instead of voting on anything a poster agrees or disagrees with, they would need to save the votes for posts that are truly trollish or insightful.
I guess I think about voting the same way Mitch Hedberg thinks about car horns.
install isn't perfect, that there are certain problems.
I think this new point system is far from perfect and will need adjustments, but overall, this is going to be quite an improvement.
is that trolls need to improve their pad-level.
Ok, I'm gonna stick around and see how this plays out, but only because those who have a lot of points say things will bet better. I am ashamed for being a reactionary **bangs head against wall** In the interest of my health, is a tweak possible whereby I can deduct a bunch of points to punish myself?
I've noticed that some people with the largest point totals have some of the sharpest elbows, with no fear of retribution, they immediately make things personal or negative. It makes me think I should post meaningless, "thank you" posts or other such drivel at every chance I get, just to up my point total. I'd rather have the freedom to voice an unpopular truth to spur discussion than have 50 'me too' posts.
Someone tried the "Me too!" trick in a blatant bid for points in one thread and ended up with like -83 or something.
Political designs, of course.
Also pyramid schemes
and then hammer some poor, unsuspecting poster all the way to -50 pts.
you better watch your ass, OC!
it will depend on how things will evolve, but, that is what the "up arrow" is for. I suspect that poster that post insipid "me to" posts will get docked a point or two, making his effort self-defeating.
Additionally, I think that people will react to a post's points and react to them. There have been a number of times that I have seen a post get docked (unfairly IME) a point or two, and I have purposely offset it.
And Brian is right, things have settled down, most posts are not receiving points either way.
I thought the arrows were for scrolling. And since I start at the top of a thread and move my way down, well...you know...my bad. Sorry.
6-9 so fine
Anyone who reads this post and does not give it a positive point is admitting their gayness. Not that there is anything wrong with that. But, not giving this post a positive point = you are gay. Which is ok. But you are.
This is exactly the kind of drivel that should be avoided.
if it's funny, interesting, well written, well presented, sincere, or cool it gets a +.
if's just there, it gets nothing.
if it's actively sucking (i know mlive when i see it) and/or a transparent deliberate attempt to piss people off then it gets THE HAMMER (of -1).
^^^^ My policy as well.
I typically will only give a single -1 to a poster for the initial assclownery, no matter how many subsequent stupid posts he/she makes in the same thread.
I'll also give multiple plus points to people that make really well reasoned post, but have <20 points. I've noticed a couple posts where the post is +12 and the poster has 20-25 points overall. It seems like people are making an effort to get people that contribute quality posts over 20 points so they can create topics on their own. Example.
quite a bit that is run by and used by mostly Blues fans. Blues fans hate the Wings. They came up with a + or - system, except + is replaced by Blues and - is replaced by Wings. If have a good post, you get Bluesed, if you have a bad post - you get Winged.
The best part about the system over there is if you Blues or Wing a poster, the forum is set up so that you cannot Blues or Wing that same poster for an hour. (I'm not sure if the system here is set up that way or not considering I'm not even close to 20 points and haven't been able to utilize the function)