Reputation Points - Discussion

[Perfect Balance]

Could someone provide a link to this thread, I can't seem to find it by searching.

 

[Dave A]

I'll see if I can find it, but it's an old thread now.

 

[Jay]

Wasn't it "Get Scaff the badge"?

 

[exigeracer]

In my view the badge is still something for a user to work towards, not being able to see your rep points isn't a big thing though imo because you can still view comments after your post, picking up on your points or replying directly etc. Like I said before, you don't need any superior intelligence to work out if your post is a good one or not, if your posts are consistenly good you will eventually get the badge, not knowing how close to getting it you are might be frustrating, but the fact that it prevents pissing contensts is a bigger plus than that is a negative imo.

You points about people whoring the system are valid but that's why Jordan has chnged it, so it's a lot harder to manipulate the system. I understand what your saying, I just don't see the system as useless or pointless, it's something newer members can see and hopefully try to achieve properly.

I never saw any sort of time when "I have more points than you" has been brought up, and if it were to be used by someone, then it is obvious that neither party should be close to having anything significant if that's what they're falling back on. This is another time when the system is showing its faults. If a member is immature enough to use his point number as a weapon, he clearly doesn't deserve what he has in the first place.

But so far, the only thing that you can manage to bring up about the system is "something newer members can see and hopefully try to achieve properly," but then you also reiterate how it doesn't take a lot of intelligence to differentiate a poor post with a quality one. So a newer member is expected to not be able to do this, why? He can easily tell the difference, so why need a badge there?

Let's even look at the given benefits of the system, laid down by the Administrator:

This system is designed to only reward the highest quality posters with the badge. Any abuse of the system could result in individual banishment or removal of the reputation system entirely.

We've already determined that the badge receivers did not and do not need to have a label to set them apart (not to mention nobody has been banned because of the system).

Listen, I'm really not trying to be difficult here, but together we've failed to come up with any reason why we really need the system. We've come to the conclusion that current badgeholders don't need it for themselves, badgeless members don't need it to tell other people's posts apart, and now you've restated that it doesn't take an idiot to tell apart good posts with bad ones, 3 year veterans and newbies alike.

It comes down to one question: does the badge system, as a reward, make you post better?

I can't say, but I know that haven't changed at all since it was introduced. The answer cannot be determined in a poll either, the answer lies in the general quality of the forum. If you ask me, I do not think that there is any proof that the badge system has at all improved the quality of GTP.

My end.

 

[GT4_Rule]

I have to agree with exigeracer on that one, even though I'm still a "new" member compared to you guys here. Bad posters will keep on posting bad no matter the negative reputation points they might get. Only a handful of people, in my opinion, have attempted to improve their post quality; but this was met with no rep points. I, for one, experienced this. I'm sure a lot of people try their best, but does not get rewarded points simply because they're a low-key member, etc.

 

[Dave A]

Nobody has said we need the system, I do however see it as a possible benefit to members without the badge trying to work towards acheiving it. In that case it could improve their posts, at least in principal.

Viper - It might have been Scaff or Swift, I can't really remember exactley it was a while ago now.

 

[Poverty]

I forgot the system was in place, until recently. One day I had like minus 80 rep points and then the next it was back up to plus 10. I worked out what kind of things would get you minus rep points though, and I suppose if you really want the badge you could manipulate the system, by posting what people want to hear, instead of speaking what in your mind is the truth. BX loved to negative rep me though.

 

[Dave A]

I've recieved rep for posting something that people have dissagreed with yet they thought I put my point across well, I've alsorepped people that I've dissagreed with too I never rep somone for simply agreeing with them, I always base it on how good their post is whether I agree with the point or not. So it's not just a case of agreeing or dissagreeing though I won't deny that that happens, it happens to everyone, but I think the number of points you need to get the badge has taken that into account.

 

[exigeracer]

I've recieved rep for posting something that people have dissagreed with yet they thought I put my point across well, I've alsorepped people that I've dissagreed with too I never rep sooner for simply agreeing with them, UI always base it on how good their post is whether I agree with the point or not. So it's not just a case of agreeing or dissagreeing though I won't deny that that happens, it happens to everyone, but I think the number of points you need to get the badge has taken that into account.

This is ture. You've repped me several times before on things of which we have vastly different views on.

I, however, have only given out reputation I think 3 times now, and I can only recall once specifically. If someone states something with perfect clarity, good intent, and a convincing argument, I will rep them.

 

[FormulaGT]

...However and this is a big however, it doesn't take an IQ of 1000 to work out what a good quality post is or isn't...

...Like I said before, you don't need any superior intelligence to work out if your post is a good one or not...

Exactly. So why do you need a badge to advertise this? (Don't mean to single you out, live4speed, but this is what I'm talking about) It separates members, into "good, 'Quality' posters" & "not-so-good/poor 'Quality' posters", to put it generally. The intention of the system is very good:tup:- To attract better quality posts from members, in short. However, I have not yet seen any serious change in the way people are posting. If anything, it's the same as before the system was introduced. It might just be me, but I think people can tell if you're good poster or not without the need to exhibit a badge saying so. To some (including myself), it just seems discriminatory to some extent and is a bit of a detractor to posting as the potential for bias is still very real, even with some of the aspects removed. In essence, this a synopsis of what you said exigeracer.

As I said previously, if this were decided by people rather than points, you would have to legitimately earn the badge, not be given it for reaching a number. Quality of posts over Quantity of points. That's how I feel it should be.

Once again, these are just my honest views on the subject & I don't aim to downgrade/degrade the site or its members, so please do not take this post personally.

Regards,
FormulaGT

 

[Dave A]

Nobody has said we need the system

I agree, we don't need the system.

I also don't view people without the badge as not so good posters or poor posters in general, I view each member individually and I don't see it as discriminatory in any way at all, that's like saying that the winner of a Presidential election is discriminating against the loser. The one point of yours I do agree with besides my opeing comment is that the standard of posting may not have altered since at least with regards to members who were already active on the site, but...

The only thing really wrong with the reputation system is how badly it is misunderstood. We actually do have many people here who have been with GTPlanet for several years and have made incalculable contributions to the community. That's who this badge is for - those with us for the long haul who really care about the site. When you look at it from that perspective, it seems to be working fairly well.

I still see nothing wrong with the system when you view as Jordan said it's intended here. It's to reward long term members who have contributed over the years to the site, simple as, it doesn't need to be a more complicated system than that, it doesn't need to have another purpose than that. Jordan wanted to give members who'd contributed well and been here a while something to show for it. Sure the longer term mebers of the community don't need to see the badge to know who posts what etc, but theres new members joining every day and some stick around, theres a lot alot of regualr members I don't know because I don't cross paths with them. And I see it as something new members might look at and try harder to achieve than if theres nothing there. At the end of the ay, having something for them to try and work for is better than nothing, the system doesn't do any harm to the site so even if it benefits just one new member, it's done better than not having it at all.

 

[Greycap]

I suppose if you really want the badge you could manipulate the system, by posting what people want to hear, instead of speaking what in your mind is the truth.

That's why I'll never get the said badge, I'm too honest to begin writing things that please other people but not myself. I would feel like a cheater if I did that, truth beats points 6-0 in my opinion.

Maybe the system isn't needed in a way, but I'm quite sure many members try to gain points by making better posts, and that enhances the quality of the forums. Everyone wins.

- R -

 

[Poverty]

Yeah I agree, but anyway as of now most of the memnbers with the quality post badges do indeed deserve them, However is the quality post badge requirments made larger after time, because surely if a persons here long enough, he will eventually get that badge over time.

 

[Dave A]

Not if he never gets positive rep, get's more negative rep than posistve or just never gets any rep at all. I'm sure theres a lot of members who've never been repped yet.

 

[Perfect Balance]

Jordan said if too much people start getting the badge, then he will raise the requirements.

I just noticed the last 4 posts before L4S's all started with something like, "I agree" or "exactly" or "true"

Seems that we all agree we don't need the rep system......but its still "there." I would also say we don't need it, but I like it, and I don't want it to go away.

 

[DuckRacer]

Question for all the badge wearers...

Does the badge really feel like a reward?

 

[Duke]

I will say that all you guys are waaaaaaaaaaay too obsessed with it. Don't belabor it to death. Just let it be. Let it sit in the background. Pay attention to it if you wish, or don't; but endlessly rehashing it is just giving it TOO MUCH IMPORTANCE in the grand scheme of the Planet.

 

[Sage]

Yeah, you guys are taking it too seriously. It’s just a feature – it’s not the be-all-end-all of your existence here.

Do we need custom titles for members who’ve earned it? No. Is it a nice little feature? Sure.
Do we need Quality Posts badges for members who’ve earned it? No. Is it a nice little feature? Sure.

 

[Perfect Balance]

I don't see why liking the idea means I'm obsessed with it.

All I said is that I like it and I don't want it to go away. It's a neat feature, and I would keep it if it was my choice. I'm sorry if you misunderstood my post.

 

[Sage]

“You guys” is plural. Both Duke and I were aiming our posts at “everybody” in the last page or so of this thread.

 

[Perfect Balance]

Well then why was my post quoted as (I'm assuming) an example? I really don't see anything in my post that shows that I am obsessed with the rep system.

Sorry if I sound like I am arguing here, but this isn't the first time one of my posts were used like this when talking to "everyone" in the thread.

 

[Duke]

Fine. I'll remove it. Sheesh.

In general, there's absolutely no reason that this thread should have dragged on for 35 pages. The subject of the badge, and who has it, and who doesn't, and why or why not, and how it could be better or worse or gone, or whatever, just isn't that important in the grand scheme of life at GTPlanet.

 

[exigeracer]

The subject of the badge, and who has it, and who doesn't, and why or why not, and how it could be better or worse or gone, or whatever, just isn't that important in the grand scheme of life at GTPlanet.

So why does this thread even exist? I'm hoping that there is someone up there running this machine who cares about what its members think of the system. If not, then we've got a problem...

 

[Duke]

We do care what the members think. If you go through this thread, you'll see that nearly all of the regular mds, admins, and Jordan have all chimed in with their thoughts and responses.

It's just clear from reading through this thread, also, that a number of people are very concerned about how to get the badge, and have questioned what it means to not have the badge, etc. The fact that this thread has gone to 35 pages - even allowing for all the simple 'congratulations' posts - shows that too much emphasis is being placed on the subject by the members.

 

[FormulaGT]

Well, the name of the thread is " Reputation Points Discussion". It is not merely a thread for quick, 'yes' & 'no' responses. If you're concerned about the length of the thread, then why not consider closing the 'GT4 General Discussion & Questions' with over 110 pages?. This is a thread comprised of extended communications from members to you in the sites hierarchy. I would've thought that you'd want the most feedback possible. But, it's your call

FormulaGT

 

[Dave A]

I think your missing the point. Eventually any thread will get long, this one has got long relatively quick wehilst dealing with a much smaller subject than GT4. But it's the lines of discussion being taken regarding the rep system that arn't inline with it's purpose. Feedback is great, but if I ask for feedback on how my car drives from somone I don't want them talking about the lack of functionality in the cigrarette lighter.

 

[G.T]

I just find it a little funny that this thread was originally created for a problem/bug I found with the system. I was told it was the way it works, and thought it would end at that. I wasn't expecting this thread to reach 3 pages, let alone 18...

I find nothing wrong with this turning into a discussion thread, as we need some discussion publicly on the subject, it's just now that it's reached this length we've got a little carried away.

I still mainly stick with what I originally said a month or two back though, except now I feel the getting rid of the amount of points you see people have has improved the situation dramaticaly. 👍

 

[FormulaGT]

Regardless of the size of the issue, this is a discussion or an extended communication about a topic. The faster a thread grows, shows that there is more interest in that topic, for example, the 300MPH club gained 3000 posts within a year, it is a topic of very high interest and this is no exception. You cannot improve without some constructive criticism or comments, regardless of how big or small, it's the basis of learning/improving.

Is the 'Quality Posts' badge not part of the reputation points system? Is it not the reward/appreciation for 'succeeding' in the system? I certainly think it plays a bigger role than the cigarette lighter in a car.

I think this is a great discussion which has brought out a range of opinions on the issue and it is good to see all levels of users involved, from New Members to Admins:tup:. This is what forms the basis of a useful discussion.

G.T., I know what you mean, your one finding leads to 18 pages of discussion, but the name invites people to comment, which is good!

Regards ,
FormulaGT

 

[Duke]

You guys are missing my point.

It's not that the thread is too long; it's not that we don't want feedback; it's not that we think your ideas are bad.

It's that I think the volume of this discussion means that people are paying too much attention to something that was never intended to be more than a background feature of GTP.

The length of this thread and the quantity of discussion are symptoms of a problem, they are not a problem themselves. Does that make more sense?

 

[G.T]

Ok, so this is how I see it now, trying to make sense from what you and the other Mods have said.

The reputation system is just a nice feature we should all enjoy and not get hyped over about. It's fine discussing about it, what's wrong and what's very good and any suggestions, but not to discuss into the very deepest parts like we have in here, right? What I'm thinking is that we'll ALWAYS get someone who will discuss it to death, it's just human. Most of us on this board are very opinionated anyway, so it'll be hard to stop people from being so on this subject. I can see why you just want it to be a simple thing, but I see we'll never get away from that.