META: How Might New Points Rules Impact Behavior?

Submitted by Mmmm Hmmm on
Now that the initial glow of having a points system has faded to "warm summer day" from "ten feet from the sun," I thought it would be interesting to look at what type of behavior the new system might incentivize and what effects it might have. Here are my thoughts; I am looking forward to your reactions.

1. Comments designed to be popular and resonate with the community will lead to very quick points increases. Because each upvote is 2 points, a poster who has his/her finger on the pulse of the blog will be able to ascend much more rapidly in points than a "volume poster" whose posts are upvoted as much.

Corollary 1: Posting endlessly in game day threads (where responses are rare--and up votes likely will be going forward) will have less impact on points, relatively speaking, than offering an insightful snowflake post or two.

Corollary 2: I do not believe that mgoblog suffers from a lack of diversity of opinions (or a "hive mind"). However, because a highly upvoted post could have a huge points impact, some posters may go for popular opinions or jokes over more contrarian opinions. Also, those with popular opinions who can articulate then well will probably become the biggest point holders over time.

2. The primary justification for adding a points system according to my unscientific survey of user requests (ie my memory) was to reduce trolls and trolling. Although the justification was based on down voting, trolls (especially newer trolls) will also be harmed by being passed quickly in points by more responsible posters that get upvoted.

3. The point threshold for "respected posters" in posters minds (which is an individualized subjective standard) will likely gradually increase as point totals increase more rapidly.

I want to also note that I am presenting these for discussion, and not as a criticism or endorsement. Brian mentioned that the point system was not set in stone, so I figured this could start the discussion.

(Also, please excuse the lack of formatting and typos--posting from an iPhone)

MikeCohodes

December 13th, 2013 at 2:12 PM ^

It gives you an "access denied" when you try to pull up his posting history

http://mgoblog.com/users/i-have-gnarly-face

I was looking forward to watching him get downvoted like crazy.

In the meantime, it amuses me that your username is straight out of GoT and the first reply to your comment was by a Jon Snow. +1 to both of you for your usernames.

Joined: 08/28/2012

MGoPoints: 4805

mgowake

December 13th, 2013 at 3:05 PM ^

Moderating MGoBoard had to be just about the worst job ever for the past several months. Now, I think our intrepid moderators will have a bit of an easier time, leading to fewer ragequits. This is important because keeping the peace around here is a key difference between the smart and passionate MGoBlog crew and the insufferable dweebs on other sites.

Joined: 11/23/2009

MGoPoints: 1062

akim

December 13th, 2013 at 12:05 PM ^

Maybe lurkers will feel obligated to post more as if you just neg you could spend your points so you can't vote/post anymore, at least the ones that have enough points to do so.

I personally don't upvote the meme-y stuff unless I think it was really clever, but you may see a lot more of that from people trying to earn points cuz y'know its like money you can't spend.

Joined: 12/30/2010

MGoPoints: 530

quigley.blue

December 13th, 2013 at 12:05 PM ^

WRT the jokes, I expect that the people I find funny will continue to be funny, and for some of them, points might even prod them to go the extra mile, which seems great!

WRT to gamethread dilution and such, I don't necessarily think that moment-to-moment thoughts really need much accolade, and insightful/useful information does more attention.

I think there will certainly be vocal contingents that share a (generally) popular opinion on the blog that others disagree with, but I don't think it will change the landscape of the forum/blog any from what it was 1, 2, 3 or 4 years ago.

Joined: 03/01/2010

MGoPoints: 5365

Lost in Champaign

December 13th, 2013 at 12:15 PM ^

I have to agree with you 100% on this. I really don't care about point totals (you can see mine), but there has been a increase in the quality of posts and threads in general.  As this change coincides with a relative lul in sports-related things to talk about, we'll see if this trend continues as people get more to talk about with the basketball team's performance and whether or not the football team can execute in the bowl game. 

Joined: 11/12/2012

MGoPoints: 87

a2_electricboogaloo

December 13th, 2013 at 12:07 PM ^

If you hold a contrarian opinion, and want to not get negged just becasue people disagree, include a gif of an adorable animal with your post.

For example

I think that we are doing a decent job developing our O-line, and we will improve with time. Also this:

See.  Now people can't downvote it.  Because they don't want to be the asshole who downvoted the adorable puppy.

Also this:

Joined: 04/21/2011

MGoPoints: 9660

LSAClassOf2000

December 13th, 2013 at 12:09 PM ^

It really has had an immediate impact on the relative amount of trolling in the last few days. Some of the people who were very good at walking the line in that they trolled but not in a banhammer sort of way are getting what they likely deserve now. There are a persistent few, but there are some familiar names that I have not seen as much or at all in a few days now. 

I will say, the "karma" system made trolling apparent in that you would look for masses of grayed out posts as a place to start reading, but it didn't really punish anyone unless they were caved or sent to Bolivia on a temporary basis. The advantage to this system is that it forces people to think a bit about downvoting (as it costs a point), but it does punish the trolls in a more precise way and limits their ability to vote and even post at all to some extent. 

Joined: 01/07/2011

MGoPoints: 130505

MGoShoe

December 13th, 2013 at 12:11 PM ^

...First Rule of MGoPoints?

Screw it. 

1. Yes, that's how it used to work in practice. 

Corollary 1. Perhaps. But different thread types serve different purposes and attract different MGoUsers. Upshot: who cares?

Corollary 2. Probably, but so what? The most respected posters contribute in a variety of ways. Sometimes it's insight into a specific issue. Sometimes it's a witticism or well played meme. Sometimes it's an unpopular opinion that they may feel more comfortable expressing precisely because they don't care about being downvoted. Still, painting with a broad brush here doesn't work. The psychology of message board posting is pretty variable based on the motivations and psyche of the individual poster.

2. Troll control is the most laudable aspect of the voting system. e-Peen displays are its most unfortunate side. Both will happen. 

3. Perhaps. But point total has never been the only determinant of what makes a "respected poster". Real recognize real, I'd say. 

Joined: 04/23/2009

MGoPoints: 20734

hart20

December 13th, 2013 at 12:12 PM ^

One of the most frustrating things under the old downvoting system was that having a different opinion than the general MGoPopulation would mean that your comments would be hidden with a lack of regard for the validity of the comment. Hopefully this new system alleviates that problem but I think that anytime you have a group of people together, you'll be vulnerable to groupthink.

Joined: 05/25/2011

MGoPoints: 5692

Mmmm Hmmm

December 13th, 2013 at 12:19 PM ^

True, but somebody who regularly comments in ways that resonate with the board (and thus get upvotes) will see their point total increase faster than those whose opinions don't resonate as much. The latter group may not get downvoted, but they will see their point total increase more slowly relative to posters with more popular opinions.
Obviously, this isn't a hard and fast rule; bald pandering probably will wear thin over time and posters who can articulate disagreement well will always be valued by at least a portion of the community. That's why I am not particularly worried about a "hive mind" here.

Joined: 09/12/2010

MGoPoints: 5144

bjk

December 13th, 2013 at 2:42 PM ^

was excessive in the old days when it was free; several well-articulated opinions were mobbed with downvotes if the mob mentality got ahold of them. I think the one-point toll for downvotes will curb the exhiliarating and undiscriminating generosity with which some folks used to throw them around.

Joined: 11/26/2009

MGoPoints: 3993

Monocle Smile

December 13th, 2013 at 12:19 PM ^

Mob mentality is not the same thing as majority opinion. Conflating the two has been going on for a while on a board, and it's tiresome.

If your opinion is unpopular, it's probably not because you're the victim of groupthink. It may be the case that the majority feels differently for legitimate reasons. Or perhaps your opinion is uninformed or just plaind dumb.

Joined: 09/17/2009

MGoPoints: 23017

CompleteLunacy

December 13th, 2013 at 12:38 PM ^

There are many that share the majority opinion, which is fine. But there are inevitably some posters who like to "stick it" to the guy who is voicing an unpopular opinion, and they feel emboldened to do so because they know most people on the board agree with his opinion (even if he is being a complete dick about it).

My opinion is any sort of internet forum is prone to groupthink. Because we're a group of like-minded individuals...and humans inherently want to protect their group. So any dissenting opinion has a greater chance of being "flamed" for the sake of the majority opinion. Now, most people don't act this way on this blog, but there are some. And they were obnoxious this year.

I think MGoBlog has generally been one of the better forums out there in preventing the "groupthink" mentality, and this voting system was the biggest reason for that. Because there are many intelligent posters on this board who will downvote the guy who says "FIRE BORGES" the billionth time because, dude, we get it. Shut up.

And by the way, just because it's not a popular opinion doesn't mean it's uninformed or just plain dumb. That's kind of exactly what groupthink is...assuming that a small minority who disagree is always wrong and dumb because, hey, they don't share the majority opinion.

Joined: 11/13/2010

MGoPoints: 12910

Space Coyote

December 13th, 2013 at 1:45 PM ^

I am assuming that your intention is sincere, but the way you led with "it majority feels differently..." and then closed with kind of the back-handed "or you're just stupid" kind of came across as saying "you're probably just stupid". I think CompleteLunacy was elaborating on his point and giving fairly realistic examples. JMO.

Joined: 06/18/2009

MGoPoints: 38962

Monocle Smile

December 13th, 2013 at 1:49 PM ^

But I'm not going to use kid gloves. There are plenty of uninformed, irrational opinions spouted by people who then bitch that "groupthink" is holding them down, man. Yes, maybe I could have phrased my meaning slightly differently, but I thought I was pretty clear.

Joined: 09/17/2009

MGoPoints: 23017

Reader71

December 13th, 2013 at 12:46 PM ^

It could be any of the three. Stupid opinions are common on the internet (and IRL). Groupthink is an actual scientifically-proven phenomenon. I certainly think that it exists on this board, the same way that it exists in almost all social settings. And of course, sometimes its just majority rules. But not everyone is casting an up/down vote. Generally, people only vote on things they really like/dislike. And the mood of the voters depends on the general tone of the site. Two years ago, we loved Borges. Last year, we were split, but a Keep Borges post would probably not have gotten hammered because even the Fire Borges guys didn't feel that strongly about it. This year, a Keep Borges post will get you negbanged because more people hate Borges and the ones that do hate him do it very passionately and are more likely to down vote rather than silently disagree.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

Reader71

December 13th, 2013 at 4:23 PM ^

I just used the Fire Borges thing because it is a hot topic around here. It was the same with RR, CC, etc. It can be anything. If Blue is Good is the majority opinion, someone who says Red is Good doesn't really deserve a neg so long as his opinion is founded. Only really fanatic Blue fans/Red haters would care to actually vote on it. That's all. I suppose you knew that. Not everything is a Borges apologia.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

LB

December 13th, 2013 at 12:39 PM ^

caved for a short period of time, but that eventually enough people would vote it back to a positive number. That isn't a counter for the hive-mind, but there is no real cure for that other than disconnecting your modem.

I can deal with just about any of the negatives if it helps the mods to take out the trash.

Joined: 09/26/2009

MGoPoints: 25494