Interesting Idea: Karma

[ecoli]

I was looking at another forum, and I got they used this thing called Karma.

 

 

With the new forum system upgrade, TPS has been given an optional Karma feature. This karma feature is simply a fun add on to make the forum more interactive between users. What it is is simply a rating system, if you like the member or their poetry, you may "Exalt" them or if you particularly do not like the member or their poetry you may "Smite" them.

 

You can only access this voting Karma feature by either going to the members profile or viewing one of their posts. You can also only "Exalt" or "Smite" one member per hour. You cannot vote for yourself.

 

We have the option of disabling this feature at any time.

 

 

I know this could lead to some problems of competition. But it also might be good. Users who regularly post good coherent information get good karma. Perhaps we could modify this idea to suit SFN? Maybe by having only mods be able to issue karma.

[Phi for All]

We are considering something very similar. We used to have a reputation system. The problem with it is that some people who make great posts can also make some folks angry. Then these folks destroy the member's reputation (karma) with bad points on every post and much bickering ensues, good posters lose interest, etc.

 

We were thinking of a system where members can only assign good reputation points when they like a post. Staff can assign both good and bad points. People who achieve a certain high level of reputation will receive spa treatments, overseas vacations, a set of steak knives, new cars or glowing praise (we're not sure which yet).

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Actually, I think the reason we abandoned the reputation system was that it was completely messed up.

 

I added up the sum of all of the points I had taken/removed from me, and it came out wildly different than what I actually had. Somehow a minor negative one would have more effect than a positive one by even a moderator, which made no sense at all--it came out that the system was completely borked.

 

I like Phi's idea, however.

[ecoli]

there are obviously flaws with the system. And sometimes you get the weirdo who likes having negative points. But its a good idea, because people with a good ability to make posts should have something to show for it. It could also be an indicator to other members... a flag that lets you know that you're probably dealing with someone who knows what they're talking about... or at least can make it sound like they do.

[john5746]

We are considering something very similar. We used to have a reputation system. The problem with it is that some people who make great posts can also make some folks angry. Then these folks destroy the member's reputation (karma) with bad points on every post and much bickering ensues' date=' good posters lose interest, etc.

 

We were thinking of a system where members can only assign good reputation points when they like a post. Staff can assign both good and bad points. People who achieve a certain high level of reputation will receive spa treatments, overseas vacations, a set of steak knives, new cars or glowing praise (we're not sure which yet).[/quote']

 

Maybe the points could be weighed by the quality points of the person giving them? Maybe too complicated.

[RyanJ]

Sounds like an interesting idea though the implimentations and fairness of it could be quite challanging.

 

Cheers,

 

Ryan Jones

[timo]

Apart from possible technical difficulities and potential abuse I think an interesting advantage would be that people get a feedback on the quality of their posts. But then, the question whether people who need their value being expressed in numbers really can read those numbers correctly.

- How many people being assigned low ratings would think beyond "the others are all too dumb to understand me and can´t think out of the box" and consider that he/she is simply posting crap.

- How many people being assigned good ratings would think beyond "yay, I´m the greatest/smartest with the longest" and consider that he ("she" would be a bit curious here) perhaps is simply good at ass kissing.

 

Apart from the "does these rating really give you a usefull feedback"-consideration there´s another potential problem I see. I can imagine that some people would be tempted to post what they think the others want to hear. In the worst case this leads to a forum full of zombies which throw the commonly agreed upon standard phases towards every newcomer who accidently enters these forums. I definitely prefer a forum with 50% crap posts over one with 95% zombie posts.

 

 

[x] No. I do like the idea but I wouldn´t want to have it realized in these forums (I guess that´s how to understand the poll). I think the negative effect of a possible fear of confrontation outweights the positive effect of getting (questionable - just think about the topics "religion" and "politics") feedback for your posts.

 

As a sidenote: I think there already is the option to rate a whole thread; it´s just that noone uses it. That´s a possible way of giving people feedback. Another one is simply writing "thank you" of someone was extremely helpful of "well, that didn´t help me much" if the respective person´s posts were completely useless. It´s a much more powerful system of giving feedback than any number-based system could be.

 

 

EDIT: One thing I didn´t consider in above but wanted to comment on, too:

But its a good idea, because people with a good ability to make posts should have something to show for it. It could also be an indicator to other members... a flag that lets you know that you're probably dealing with someone who knows what they're talking about... or at least can make it sound like they do.

- People with a good ability to make posts get good posts to show as return.

- What good would the indicator do? "oh, that member has such a low number, I don´t have to read the post"? "Oh, such a high reputation, so it´s probably my fault that I don´t understand anything"?

[ecoli]

- People with a good ability to make posts get good posts to show as return.

- What good would the indicator do? "oh' date=' that member has such a low number, I don´t have to read the post"? "Oh, such a high reputation, so it´s probably my fault that I don´t understand anything"?[/quote']

 

that's not what I meant. i mean "oh that user has a high rating, maybe I'd better consider what he/she says more carefully." - It's not that you shouldn't read everyone's post.

[swansont]

We are considering something very similar. We used to have a reputation system. The problem with it is that some people who make great posts can also make some folks angry. Then these folks destroy the member's reputation (karma) with bad points on every post and much bickering ensues' date=' good posters lose interest, etc.

[/quote']

 

 

I'ver seen a few such systems, including the one tried here. A major flaw is that some people react badly to the truth; if the post isn't what they wanted to hear, they give it a bad rating. Even though they have no way to evaluate its veracity - if they knew the answer they wouldn't have had to ask in the first place. (e.g. someone being told that their proposed perpetual motion is impossible, or a creationist being taught basically any science principles)

 

And a reputation system used in an subjective topic is just death - too many people evaluating posts on whether they agree with the opinion, not on whether a post was well-presented.

[Phi for All]

And a reputation system used in an subjective topic is just death - too many people evaluating posts on whether they agree with the opinion, not on whether a post was well-presented.

This is precisely why letting members give "bad" points is a bad idea. To some, everything is subjective, and it's hard for anybody to look past personal opinion to acknowledge a well-thought-out post.

 

Giving kudos is important and too often I don't do it for fear of derailing a thread or seeming partial (if I told In My Memory how great all her posts were my post count would double and she'd think I was crushing on her; I used to praise Pangloss's posts a lot until he PM'd me to tell me he's happily married). A positive feedback system would be a nice addition for those who spend a lot of time here.

[timo]

@Ecoli: I was exaggerating a bit, of course. My point is: This is a scientific forum. Is it really a good idea to be biased when reading someone´s posts? I don´t feel so. Of course you could claim that you are not biased towards someone´s post only because he has a certain personal rating but -besides that saying so you´re probably lying to yourself- then, your argument I refered to imho would become invalid.

 

Much more helpful than a number telling me how much other people like the poster imho is the info people (usually don´t) give in their personal profile. A good share of the time it takes me for formulating a post is guessing the appropriate "level" the reply should be.

 

@"only positive ratings": This eliminates the problem of people voting you down because they don´t like your viewpoint. But it still leaves the problem that people subjectively vote you high because you are on "their side". It also leaves what my main horror of a rating system is: People posting what they think the others want to hear and not what their own opinion is.

[john5746]

And a reputation system used in an subjective topic is just death - too many people evaluating posts on whether they agree with the opinion' date=' not on whether a post was well-presented.[/quote']

 

-100 karma points for you May you be confined to a creationist website in your next life!

 

...Just kidding!

[cosine]

How easy would it be to implement something like that around here? Is there any possible way of testing something like that out?

 

Also, as a suggestion to the score system. The "score" could be adjusted by how many posts the person has posted. That way, a bright newcomer could get rating comparable to someone who has been here a while. For example:

 

Newby joins and posts 10 posts, and gets 50 points. So lets say his "karma rating" is 50pts/10psts = 5.

 

Oldie has been around for a while, has posted 10 million posts, and has 50 million points. so 50 million pts/10million psts = 5.

 

So you can see that perhaps these two have comparable user ratings.

 

You may also want to argue though that Oldie should have a bit higher rating for being able to sustain his status, where the next 100 posts of Newby could give him 0 points.

 

I think the "postive feedback" point system is a nice idea to work with.

[RyanJ]

How easy would it be to implement something like that around here? Is there any possible way of testing something like that out?

 

I wrote a simple one of these for phpBB once but I did not account for the abuse factor and that complicated things to no end, I had to put in features like rate only for this post if you have posted in the thread and then only allow you to rate once - the implimentations get quite complex when dealing with abuse to the system as any mod writer will attest too.

 

The basic system should not be to hard to impliment but the actual anti-absuse stuff is normally the killer...

 

Cheers,

 

Ryan Jones

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

vBulletin comes with it built-in.

 

I don't know if it accomodates only allowing moderators to use negative reputation, however.

[swansont]

-100 karma points for you May you be confined to a creationist website in your next life!

 

...Just kidding!

 

Don't make me run over your dogma with my karma.

[cosine]

Don't make me run over your dogma with my karma.

 

[math]\frac{karma}{dogma} = \frac{kar(ma)}{dog(ma)} = \frac{kar}{dog}[/math]

[ecoli]

*groan*

[cosine]

I'm really excited to see that done here though. What can we do to get it implemented?

[Bio-Hazard]

It's an elitest system. I've seen it for many years. I understand its benefits.. I also understand it can bring people down negatively.

 

I would be all for it if you were not able to give a person negative points, or else bring them down below 0.

 

Having a negative status is the same as giving someone a warning without ban.

I just don't approve of it anymore.