Settle The Great MGoPoint Controversy

Sidenote: Do we actually know that people have created proxy accounts to vote themselves up? How would we know this? It's hard for me to believe this is actually true.

At first I thought the elitism was best, because it would make mostly serious members vote, but then I realized I wouldn't be able to vote! Also I think this would really limit the amount of voters.

I would propose a free voting system (or possible elitism at a lower number), just put a cap on the votes per day per account. Maybe one or two. This way everyone can vote, and you will really limit the amount of kids inflating their points because of the amount of work it would take. This would also keep people from mass negging.

And if someone still went and made 100 accounts, I would say enjoy the traffic and they are probably going to find a loophole anyway.

By the way, really like the point system and updates.

My own personal opinion:  since the change in policy, the comment boards are less entertaining. 

Why not just implement something like Facebook does.  People can like a post, but there is no negative feedback.  This way, good posts would stand out.

my grandmother used to use a phrase, "tempest in a teapot," that describes this entire "controversy" perfectly.

people.  the points don't mean anything.

IMO I think option 3 is the way to go.

Elitism

Change the point system back to the way it was.

It was not perfect, but it worked in the area that needed it most..... quality control.

I would suggest a couple of things to consider to help appease those who are not happy with the system.

1.  There need to be two boards:  On Topic and Off Topic.  Personally, I like the OT stuff sprinkled in, especially in the off season.  However, this is a Michigan blog and I can see how sifting through the OT madness could annoy people who come here specifically for Michigan info.

2.  EDIT:  Suggestion 2 scratched.  Sounded good in my head.  Looked ridiculous in print.

Why not keep the current rules, and then allow users to trade 10,000 or 20,000 points for an MGoShirt? The people that have huge point values tend to have contributed useful information that have helped to reinforce your user base - reward them?

Earn the right to vote. If you're a troll, you won't get that right. (unless you happen to be a well-trained troll) In any case, it's nothing a banhammer can't clean up.

most of the people I see with lots of points add trivial crap, inside jokes and carry on tangential conversations for their own amusement.

there are about 10 people who post real,interestring, informed content.  the other big point people often fill our pages with crap.

I have been negbanged many times.   Most were over my disgust with World Cup soccer becoming the focal point of MGo Blog.......untl the Americans lost.  (could we have been more hypocritical?)

how about if we do away with the points altogether.  it seems to me that points just encourage people to post crap to get points.

Keeping this site troll free.  Not many trolls here and I'm a very happy UM alumnus and fan at this sight! Thank You Brian!

The points dropping off after a year? For those of us who have been around a while, but can't spend as much time on the board as they used to, our points are depleting rapidly...

People with fewer than 4000 mgopoints should not have been allowed to vote in this poll

I don't really care how the system works, just as long as I can freely neg the guy who wants me to "Check his vid..." 4 times in every single thread.

I'll be honest, I thought the old system worked really well.  When in a hurry you could scan to see what was good and what wasn't, and when you had time you could read everything.  I think increasing when you can start voting will decrease the number of trolls, and I think in increase in the number of points before you can post a thread would be nice.

One other suggestion that I'm not sure how people would feel about is maybe putting a hard cap on the total number of pos and neg votes, maybe at like +/- 20 or something.  This would allow people to obviously see the good and bad votes, but it wouldn't get as out of control as usual and people would get too many points just for a single point (or a funny comment).

If rooting out trolls is more important than getting new users into the frey, than I suppose I support the new system. 

As a relatively green user, it kinda sucks that the few points I get I have to spend upvoting, but I will since there are some sussinct and substantiative comments that I will use my puntos to upvote.  But that also means I will keep hovering around obscurity since I don't add much to the conversation...which is okay with me since I can't add much in terms of content; there are so many  people here with more inside info/general info that I am really just a spectator.  Most of my points have been earned by non-sports stuff that I have a small semblance of info on.

So as a sorta new user, I liked the old system where I could upvote people with substance, but in the new system if I keep on that trend I will lose the voting ability when I drop below the threshold of voting and that ain't so cool. But I can live with that if it means better posts/info gets pushed to the top of the board.

Thanks for all the info to the peeps that contribute!

Option 1: Fine.

Option 2:   Voting costs a point.  Disincentive to vote on anything, thus no way to suppress trolls (if by trolls we mean regular posters who intend to be argumentative and ornery, not drive-bys).  Result:  more trolls, not less.  Similarly, without a reward for USEFUL posts, people have no way to learn how to write a good one.

Also, with this option, the total number of points remains relatively flat over time; voting on someone's posts just transfers merit from one poster to the other, but does not increase the total amount of merit.

Option 3:  Positive incentive but no negative incentive -  surely it will result in more stinky useless argumentatie posts and not fewer, since it doesn't cost the obnoxious poster anything to stink up the joint.

Option 4:  Voting limit set that high - no one will get to the higher total, because they have a disincentive to participate in the conversation at the early stages (for example, no reason to come back often to see how one's point total has changed).  Probably will reduce traffic, and presumably you don't want to do that.

So I'm with go back to the old status quo.   Disincentive to vote = disincentive to post = disincentive to spend as much time on the board = fewer folks around = harder for Brian to make a living.

Sounds like another euphemism for masturbation. And an apt one, too.

... especially on the neg side; I view my -4 last night as a badge of honor (for taking a potshot at golfing).

With this, you gotta really want to neg--you're owning it.   No longer just a random click by a bored dude in his Spiderman jammies.

Combine options three and four and maybe drop the threshold down to 200-250. I think it would keep the trolls and negbangs at bay.

Make mgopoint totals invisible. Problem solved.