Do we keep the reputation system or not?

[John Stone]

OK, the Reputation System has been running for a couple weeks now (if you are not familiar with the Reputation System it is explained here). I want to know if the JSF community wants to keep it or get rid of it. The vote is simple: YES or NO.

This is an anonymous poll. I encourage everyone to vote. I'll leave this poll running for about a week.

You can post comments if you want, but they won't play any part in the decision: majority will rule here.

Please keep in mind that if we elect to keep the system you can still opt out at any time.

[needachange]

It doesn't really matter to me that we have them or don't, some will use it some won't simple as that. Has it encouraged me to post more? No. Have I repped anyone? No. Do I care that I've been repped? No. That doesn't mean it will be that way for others though. But it would be annoying to start seeing threads that start with " (Insert Thread Title Here) Reps for answers!!!" Maybe make a rule that that's not allowed?

[Zilla]

I just figured out what this reputation thing was the other day. I think it's silly and plays into the hands of those that have issues with post count numbers. People seem to feel that by having 4,000 posts versus 800 makes them exceptional or something even though a majority of those posts don't have an value in terms of content. I know this because I've post stalked some of those people.

I don't give them out, so whatever. I respond to content, not a green bar.

[gitoutmyi]

What if it's a tie in the end? ha

[dkmahkee]

Originally Posted by Zilla

I just figured out what this reputation thing was the other day. I think it's silly and plays into the hands of those that have issues with post count numbers. People seem to feel that by having 4,000 posts versus 800 makes them exceptional or something even though a majority of those posts don't have an value in terms of content. I know this because I've post stalked some of those people.

I don't give them out, so whatever. I respond to content, not a green bar.

why would you post-stalk someone?

[guava]

Originally Posted by dkmahkee

why would you post-stalk someone?

Because they have a high post count. People who have a higher rep are more likely to be post-stalked as well. Whether this is a good or a bad thing, I'm not too sure.

From my experience here, it appears that the people with the most rep power (those with highest post counts and those with paid memberships, and those who've been here the longest) are giving the most reps to the posters who make them laugh or feel good about themselves. So rather than people attempting to make more helpful posts, it's encouraging people to make more funny or memorable posts. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but I'm voting no anyway.

[Zilla]

Originally Posted by dkmahkee

why would you post-stalk someone?

Because I like to. *shrugs*

There are some people that I enjoy reading their posts more than others. For the ones I like, I don't always have something to say in response, they're just fun to read.

As for the others, I don't make a habit of post stalking them. I just know we have a handful of people around here that will reply to anything just so they can have a higher post number.

[akm3]

I originally voted yes, but Zilla's comments have swayed me and I'd like to vote no.

I even repped her for it.

/edit: But seriously, I do think we shouldn't have it. It does turn into a popularity contest that encourages bad behaviors for no benefits.

[needachange]

Originally Posted by akm3

I originally voted yes, but Zilla's comments have swayed me and I'd like to vote no.

I even repped her for it.

ok that one got me

[Ectomorphic]

Originally Posted by guava

From my experience here, it appears that the people with the most rep power (those with highest post counts and those with paid memberships, and those who've been here the longest) are giving the most reps to the posters who make them laugh or feel good about themselves. So rather than people attempting to make more helpful posts, it's encouraging people to make more funny or memorable posts.

Exactly. It's like a high school student body election - 90% popularity, 10% serious. You can't be sure that people with high reputation actually got it from being helpful instead of just being funny or "cool". As always, you have to stick to the tried and true method of just hanging around for awhile and discerning for yourself from individual posts and feedback from others about who seems to knowledgeable and who simply seems to be a post/rep whore.

At least that's how I envision it. However, since the goal of the system was apparently to simply encourage more posting in general, rather than quality over quantity, I guess it's working. /shrug.

I am happy, however, that John is going democracy on this one and leaving the decision/fate to a simple majority vote. I wish every forum did this with every change/feature/decision.

[Zilla]

Originally Posted by akm3

I originally voted yes, but Zilla's comments have swayed me and I'd like to vote no.

I even repped her for it.

[Foley]

Originally Posted by Zilla

I just figured out what this reputation thing was the other day. I think it's silly and plays into the hands of those that have issues with post count numbers. People seem to feel that by having 4,000 posts versus 800 makes them exceptional or something even though a majority of those posts don't have an value in terms of content. I know this because I've post stalked some of those people.

I don't give them out, so whatever. I respond to content, not a green bar.

Most of these people probably don't leave a certain thread in the private forums......

I listen to what you're saying but I haven't really seen anyone use how many posts they have to boost their opinion on a subject matter though. Nor with reps.

[Ectomorphic]

Originally Posted by Foley

Most of these people probably don't leave a certain thread in the private forums......

[CA$ON]

The reputation system has encouraged me to post again in other topics. People want to post good information of not half-arsed blah blah if they know that they could receive a rep point if the information being posted is good.

I would really like to keep this system in place. Not sure what issue someone would have for it. I read above and I think the whole ego trip thing is not even a factor since you can't rep yourself. Other members are going out of their way to say good advice of congrats. This should be a team builder type attitude not one person huge ego.

Well thats my little post and I hope we keep the system.

[leftyx]

How does the rep system count points? I may have missed that part in the original post. Can someone point me to that? Or explain?

[Foley]

Originally Posted by leftyx

How does the rep system count points? I may have missed that part in the original post. Can someone point me to that? Or explain?

Each person has their level of rep power. It's something like, 1 point per year as a member here, plus 1 point per 1000 posts plus 1 point per 500 rep points. Go check the original post for a more accurate explanation.

[MannishBoy]

Originally Posted by Foley

I listen to what you're saying but I haven't really seen anyone use how many posts they have to boost their opinion on a subject matter though. Nor with reps.

I've seen that on other boards (bb.com, etc), but there seems to be more maturity here. I know it's probably happened at some point, but if somebody talks sense even with 10 posts under their belt, if they provide good information they seem to be respected for it.

[leftyx]

Originally Posted by Foley

Each person has their level of rep power. It's something like, 1 point per year as a member here, plus 1 point per 1000 posts plus 1 point per 500 rep points. Go check the original post for a more accurate explanation.

That's weird. I have 19 points. But I have 3 years of JSF = 3 pts. About a 1000+ posts = 1 pt. And I know 500 people haven't repped me so that's = 0 pts. So I should have a total of 4 points by your formula David. I guess I'll have to go back and find that first post.

[Foley]

Originally Posted by leftyx

That's weird. I have 19 points. But I have 3 years of JSF = 3 pts. About a 1000+ posts = 1 pt. And I know 500 people haven't repped me so that's = 0 pts. So I should have a total of 4 points by your formula David. I guess I'll have to go back and find that first post.

No! I was talking about how many rep points you are able to give. The amount of rep points given to you is the rep power of each of the people who have repped you. So your 19 is a combination of people who have repped you, and when you rep, you can give out say 2 or 3 or whatever rep points every time you rep someone! Phew!

[dkmahkee]

Originally Posted by leftyx

That's weird. I have 19 points. But I have 3 years of JSF = 3 pts. About a 1000+ posts = 1 pt. And I know 500 people haven't repped me so that's = 0 pts. So I should have a total of 4 points by your formula David. I guess I'll have to go back and find that first post.

well everyone started out at 10pts, which means you got 9 points from somewhere. what foley was referring to was YOUR repping "power" which is determined by your years here, posts, and whether you're paying or not (I think). so lets just make up the number 6. lets say according to this formula your repping power is 6. if you give reps to someone, you add 6 points to their reputation. so that 9 pts you got could have come from one person with a rep power of 9, or maybe it was 3 people with a power of 3. if you click on your user c/p, you can see who repped you, and what post(s) this was for. i think its pretty neat to see who repped you for what, its also a nice way of seeing that people might actually be reading your posts.