PDA

View Full Version : Reputation System


Joseph Visscher
11-13-2009, 12:44 PM
Reverie World Studios Public Forum has enabled a Reputation System which we will be evaluating in the coming weeks whether or not to keep it long term, we might decide to revert this system and go back without it.

The Reputation System will prevent new members from doing anything with it, mature members will be able to give reputations to mature posts and members. This system will differentiate mature and wise members from immature. It will give a person guidance on who to trust and take advice from, just because a person has 738 posts does not mean that that person is mature enough to take good advice from.

The bad part about this system is that members wont all be equal anymore, which some find is a bad idea. On the otherhand, we already have inequality with members’ post count.

Reputation abuse, ah yes, we have a few nice features to battle this:

50 posts are required for that user before his reputation hits count on others.
This means if you have under 50 posts, you can't give or take anyone's reputation.

25 Reputation is required for that user before his reputation hits count on others.
This means if you have default or under 25 Reputation you can't give or take anyone's reputation.

Then there is 'reputation-altering power' which is the number of reputation posts you give or take to other people, this is based upon Register Date, Post Count and Reputation itself.
New members wont be able to influence the system at all until someone gives them rep for mature posts.

We would however like to hear your opinion.

Puppeteer
11-13-2009, 02:07 PM
I'm not sure this system is necessary - I think one could differentiate between the junior wise members and the senior foolish members by the content of their post. It's not like anyone here is truly immature at the present, and new members can be instructed when they're doing something wrong.
Plus, the four status bears the same description as the three status.

Off topic: Now that you've used differentiate, now all I can think about is:
dy
dx

Jean=A=Luc
11-13-2009, 02:48 PM
A rep system can be fun and can even distinguish some members who truly conduct themselves well.

On the other hand it encourages "rep whoring" and annoying behavior.

All in all you could try it out and remove it later if it becomes too much of a nuisance (which I just noticed you're planning to do anyway :p).

nickson104
11-13-2009, 02:54 PM
just because a person has 738 posts does not mean that that person is mature enough to take good advice from.

I dont like how close that is to my number... ;)

This system may be useful, however I think that it may just be a waste... Pretty much everyone here respects each other as equals. Most seem to make a positive contribution and see the validation in others points, and new members soon learn who the most reliable people are... And that has now been aided strongly by many of them getting Mod positions, it not only gives them the ability to upkeep the forums but it signals to others that they are responsible and important...

However, i think the system could work, rating systems tend to make people make better contributions (desire to be rewarded) however... it also leads to competitive natures and allowing some to see themselves as 'better' than others... Hopefully it wont happen :)

LiTos456
11-13-2009, 03:42 PM
I voted no - I think it's unnecessary, and as you yourself said it will make users unequal and it will be just a fairly annoying bit that could even go as far as causing flame wars and arguments. Besides, people could also possibly fake reputation points, asking someone to give it to them? Either way, I think we'd be better off without it.

Kire
11-13-2009, 03:56 PM
As ppl already said it could be fun ....
but hierarchy is not good =P, could be also abused and it also is not needed.... why would complicate things =P.
The truth is also that the "mature" rep person could argue with one not "mature" rep person but in truth the not rep mature person would have right but because mature rep person has some kind title you would trust "the wrong" solution more .... you cannot know all the time everything and having the title that it says "i know more" is just confusing =).
Like in wow forums (if you take out trolls) ... there are many ppl that post few times just to answer the person which is asking x stuff. And there forms many many opinions that you can choose from. Ofc you can look armory to see who is the best to trust ...... so here could have some avatars (when the game will be released) with some kind info on how you do in mmo or anywhere (your rank).

But here on forums ... let each ppl judge who is mature on who not on their own and not that titles doing that for them.

Josh Warner
11-13-2009, 04:02 PM
The only thing we need to be on top of is people that abuse the rep system and removing their rep. If we do that and the rankings are very clear on how they work they're fairly useful for the community. As beta and early release wears on and the inevitable undesirables that come with an active community in the form of doomsayers and trolls, it lets the community know exactly who those people are, and who the respected members of the community are.

Again, the trick is making sure people don't abuse the system, also when they inevitably do that they get de-repped by one of us mods/staff to a number far in the negative, and a post that explains how the rep system works along with a brief description of what the sort of people that might have that rep should be like.



Kire, there are negative ranks, or at least should be. Someone at 1 rep would just be a new person, not an untrustworthy or 'bad' member of the community. People with negative rep would be the ones that should be disregarded. The other reason this is nice is it lets us as a community reward people for things.

When the game is released there will inevitably be members of the community that either post FAQs, guides, or just consistently answer any question they can. These people should stand out among the rest, it's not about being 'better' or 'more mature' it's about people that take the time to do something for the the community beyond just regular discussion. They could be dumb for all it's worth, and not be able to argue at all - if all they do is just copy and paste dev posts to answer questions that's still something worth noting and rewarding.

Swift sword
11-13-2009, 04:15 PM
I personally think it's a useful system. I think it would carry more weight if a couple options like
"Ignore posts of x rep status". It might even force the immature members to become mature.
My 2 cents

Kire
11-13-2009, 04:29 PM
The reward for ppl that contribute to forums and help ppl with answers can be just a cosy feeling in their heart that they did something nice. =)
But still, i think there are/will be holes that could not be filled.
I see this sistem just good with handling with trolls but as i see .... the bad trolls usually are just at mmorpg or sometimes at shooting games ... Sure there are here and there also exceptions at other kind of games but not much worth for taking this sistem (tho this rep sistem would be good at blizzard forums =P).
But anyway .. they are your forums so if you think it would be good than just try it and will see how would work. But sill i am/will be against =P.

sneaky_squirrel
11-13-2009, 04:34 PM
I always liked monarchy, I voted yes.

It would be nice to see wise people ;p.

Darathor
11-13-2009, 05:20 PM
It will give a person guidance on who to trust and take advice from, just because a person has 738 posts does not mean that that person is mature enough to take good advice from.

That post count seems oddly close to Sparrow's...;)

I believe that it's worth a try, it might become more useful when we get more members (aka, when the beta/game is released).

Generation
11-13-2009, 05:46 PM
Hmmmm I see time to b awesome. WHAT! 1 REPUTATION? ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Joseph Visscher
11-13-2009, 06:34 PM
Reputation abuse, ah yes, we have a few nice features to battle this:

50 posts are required for that user before his reputation hits count on others.
This means if you have under 50 posts, you can't give or take anyone's reputation.

15 Reputation is required for that user before his reputation hits count on others.
This means if you have default or under 15 Reputation you can't give or take anyone's reputation.
You start with 10 reputation.

Then there is 'reputation-altering power' which is the number of reputation posts you give or take to other people, this is based upon Register Date, Post Count and Reputation itself.

New members wont be able to influence the system at all until someone gives them rep for mature posts.

Chris Harshman
11-13-2009, 07:39 PM
I like rep systems, as long as they can be opted out of.

LiTos456
11-13-2009, 07:53 PM
Joe that seems pretty difficult. I mean... Then it's kind of useless for anyone who doesn't have enough reputation but wants to reputate a mature post and such. So that kind of kills the meaning of it until they're capable of doing so. Also, if everyone here is 10, and noone is allowed to add/remove reputation... How will anyone ever get to 15? xD

Henry Martin
11-13-2009, 07:57 PM
I voted yes as I think it would show who are the respected, helpful people and the people who are on the forums just cause they are board. Like any other system there is going to be abuse by people.

The way Josh Warner puts it, it sounds like a good idea.

Joseph Visscher
11-13-2009, 08:06 PM
Joe that seems pretty difficult. I mean... Then it's kind of useless for anyone who doesn't have enough reputation but wants to reputate a mature post and such. So that kind of kills the meaning of it until they're capable of doing so. Also, if everyone here is 10, and noone is allowed to add/remove reputation... How will anyone ever get to 15? xD

I somewhat agree, so I've changed it to 11, this way it is a sort of referrer system, you can not get in until you actually post a meaningful mature post that someone gives you rep for.

Btw, Admins/Reverie gives 10 rep, I'll be giving mature posts instant rep not to worry.

The Witch King of Angmar
11-13-2009, 08:55 PM
Personally, I think the option is cool (and flattering :p) but, as said before, kind of just thrown in there.

LiTos456
11-13-2009, 09:14 PM
I somewhat agree, so I've changed it to 11, this way it is a sort of referrer system, you can not get in until you actually post a meaningful mature post that someone gives you rep for.

Btw, Admins/Reverie gives 10 rep, I'll be giving mature posts instant rep not to worry.

That sounds better. Let's see how it turns out then.

wills370
11-14-2009, 03:57 AM
I think it is a nice idea. it will give a quick summerize of a player and what you can expect from them. Although i beleive if you are going to give somone a bad rep then you have to attach it to a post and then a breif summery as to why it is bad. This can then be (anonomous of cource) sent to the player and if he beleives it is an abuse of rating system. forward it to a mod etc for an appeal. although this may increase the work load to much for the mods it would be a good way of ensuring there is no abuse of the system. Where thoose who are willing give others bad rep to make themselves look better by having a positive one

LiTos456
11-14-2009, 08:31 PM
I think there should be a different amount of pips for each reputation level... Because as of now the first pip for example contains like 2 levels. Or even 3. Default Reputation, fair reputation, and above average reputation. I think each of those needs their own amount of pips (1, 2, 3, 4, and so on) so it's easier to understand. You could even make a little reputation guide that describes what level each numbers of pips represents.
Pips are these little things http://reverieworld.com/forums/images/reputation/reputation_pos.gif if you didn't understand what I meant by the way.

The Witch King of Angmar
11-15-2009, 03:35 PM
Personally, that seems to be a little overly-complicated. I wouldn't want to add anymore to the system: I think it would be placing unnecessary attention on a semi-necessary feature. Again, just my opinion.

Thanks

Puppeteer
11-15-2009, 04:16 PM
I still don't see the need for it! It promotes favouritism, and detracts away from the fact that it's pretty obvious by the content of each post which members are mature! I fail to see why we would need this unnecessary hierarchy.

zach12wqasxz
11-15-2009, 04:40 PM
i think this reputation system will turn out to be just a big headache in the future. and plus i think that if a person has a bad rep. then they will be discouraged to post there ideas and opinions at all, and isnt a forum about reading and seeing what people have to say? also just becasue a person has a good or bad reputation, doesnt mean the information they give is always bad or good, everyone has there "inmature" moments. and i also agree with a post before that this will cause flame wars. so i vote no. but i do appreciate you guys takeing the time to think up this sorta thing and ask us formumers about it.

Josh Warner
11-15-2009, 10:15 PM
i think this reputation system will turn out to be just a big headache in the future. and plus i think that if a person has a bad rep. then they will be discouraged to post there ideas and opinions at all, and isnt a forum about reading and seeing what people have to say? also just becasue a person has a good or bad reputation, doesnt mean the information they give is always bad or good, everyone has there "inmature" moments. and i also agree with a post before that this will cause flame wars. so i vote no. but i do appreciate you guys takeing the time to think up this sorta thing and ask us formumers about it.

I'd like to say all posters are but some people's posts are inevitably going to be more accurate/helpful than others, it's a way to show appreciation for those that help the community and disdain for those that troll among other things. Maybe I'm missing something but I'm not sure how this system would exactly cause flame wars either.

Those with too many "Immature" moments should control themselves :confused:. If they're routinely acting like that their posts should not be given the same merit as those who are regularly helpful and nice, always doing things for the community.

Reputation systems are mostly for the benefit of new members so they know who to listen to and who not to, and I don't see an issue with 'favoritism' everyone here knows certain members are indeed going to be more helpful than others. The only thing is that people need to understand low rep means nothing not something bad, negative rep means generally unhelpful/troll high means helpful. The people that end up posting their own guides/faqs/consistently answer questions - I want new members to see their reps and listen to them, not the guys with negative rep, and no for new people they shouldn't have to sift through tons of posts and make their own opinion on every member of the forum.

Puppeteer
11-16-2009, 03:00 PM
Reputation systems are mostly for the benefit of new members so they know who to listen to and who not to
New members should follow the code of conduct that all forums operate on - that every member is valid, should be listened to and not discriminated, regardless of the opinions of other people (which is what a reputation system boils down to). Bots and trolls are above and beyond this system - this system affects only the moderate members.
You also speak as if we have members here whose posts should be sifted, or generally ignored. Firstly, you shouldn't promote that kind of action, and secondly, like we really have anyone like that here.

The Witch King of Angmar
11-16-2009, 06:21 PM
Lol, agreed. Personally, I think it just comes down to better, and, in some cases, stricter moderation and observation of new and existing members of the forum. A reputation system won't do much to stop this kind of behavior. No disrespect is intended.

Thanks

wills370
11-16-2009, 06:41 PM
I agree although it does need more encouragment for people to use it. Possibly a message to all members telling them about it etc. As thoose who are more helpful (myself i beleive being one of them). Still dont seem to be getting any better rep out of other peoples lack of knowledge to the system or how it works. (so a tutorial possibly wouldent go amiss on the media section/main)Or lazyness. Id go with the former though :P .
*note please dont take that as myself whining about having no rep. I used myself merely as a example.

Josh Warner
11-16-2009, 11:49 PM
New members should follow the code of conduct that all forums operate on - that every member is valid, should be listened to and not discriminated, regardless of the opinions of other people (which is what a reputation system boils down to). Bots and trolls are above and beyond this system - this system affects only the moderate members.
You also speak as if we have members here whose posts should be sifted, or generally ignored. Firstly, you shouldn't promote that kind of action, and secondly, like we really have anyone like that here.

Who not to is directed at people with negative, not normal rep - ie: those who troll and inflame the community. There will be some, as the forums become more popular they will come, and it's simply not practical to go around banning everyone that is negative or unhelpful, the rep system gives people an idea of who these people are before reading a bunch of their posts and getting a poor view of the community and the game.

I'm not seeing how a troll is above and beyond this system, unless you're suggesting they're going to all go to the length of creating new accounts with new IPs every time they go negative rep or something, very few actually do that. And I never said regular members should be ignored if they have low rep. I'm talking only about negative, and yes I do indeed believe that certain people's opinions carry greater merit. And as much as I'd like to say everyone's an equal, that's not really how it works. There will be people that are nicer, more helpful, and add more to the community than others, why wouldn't we want people to in general listen to them over others?

Not everyone, especially newer members are going to be able to pick up on who's trolling and such based on the merits of a post or two of them unless it's blatantly obvious and even then some will fall for it. You're giving people way too much credit.

And lastly, it gives everyone a way to visibly thank someone and show appreciation for what they've done to help the community - and that's really the most important part of it to me. Those who go above and beyond and do something that really adds to the community should be recognized for it.


Edit: Clarifying. I don't think any member we have short of sparrow right now who doesn't even post anymore ought to be ignored, but there will be more like him, many more. The way I've seen rep systems used, when done right - those with negative rep are the only ones dismissed, everyone else is treated pretty much the same unless they've got a very recent join date in an established community which is independent of the rep system anyway (Right or wrong, established communities WILL develop a hierarchy of forum personalities, it happens inevitably and newer members will be treated differently. In some worse, in some better, but always one or the other. I've never seen a forum without one) It should have no effect on moderate members, only truly exceptional ones should stand out for their services to the community and negative ones that should stand out. And really, for high reps it shouldn't do anything but show publicly we appreciate their help. Only negative ones should actually be treated differently.

I agree although it does need more encouragment for people to use it. Possibly a message to all members telling them about it etc. As thoose who are more helpful (myself i beleive being one of them). Still dont seem to be getting any better rep out of other peoples lack of knowledge to the system or how it works. (so a tutorial possibly wouldent go amiss on the media section/main)Or lazyness. Id go with the former though :P .
*note please dont take that as myself whining about having no rep. I used myself merely as a example.


It'll take a few weeks, if not months until the system is leveled out. Right now there aren't a whole lot of people so it won't be working for a bit.

Puppeteer
11-17-2009, 01:34 AM
it's simply not practical to go around banning everyone that is negative or unhelpful
Yes it is - I am also a moderator on a forum far larger than this one, with a more general purpose (many games, RPGs, creativity and the like) and we have no need for a reputation system because you can ban those who are causing harm. The sudden influx of members, which is what you're hinting at, won't carry vast amounts of trolls who will be uncontrollable. Anyone stepping out of line can have infractions and bans placed upon them.

I'm not seeing how a troll is above and beyond this system
Why would they care what their reputation is? If anything, they'd be trying to get it as low as possible! The only way to deal with trolls is following the general procedure of warnings, followed by infractions, followed by bans.

I do indeed believe that certain people's opinions carry greater merit.
I guess this is the crux of the debate then. I disagree, but it's not something you can be right or wrong on.

Josh Warner
11-17-2009, 02:27 AM
This isn't a private forum however, it's a business one - we can't go around banning everyone we don't like. Those who break the rules will indeed be infracted and then banned if need be, but many will not and still be a negative influence. And if you start banning people on a forum like this for reasons other than breaking the rules it ends up looking like we're trying to silence anyone who isn't a fanboy and believe us infallible - it's just not good press.

And it's not about what they want, it's about letting people know who they are without them needing to read a bunch of their posts before realizing what their motives are.

Now I don't want someone like sparrow to be outright ignored - but everything he says should indeed be taken with a grain of salt, yes?

Kire
11-17-2009, 04:49 AM
Josh Warner .... Pup. and Wich. have more green marks than you..... so we should believe them more about what are they saying =P.

Anyway =), how about if a new member post his first topic, asking about something that has been posted same day 1000 times so ppl feel irritated and bam the give him bad reputation ?=)
Oh and if you remove sect there wont be ppl that spam to get fast post number =P . So if you want to reduce that you could also remove it(and when game will be out ppl will rather play then spam here for sects =P)? Beside i still think that something like WoW have armory (could be also here with ingame data) would be better (maybe how you do in mmo or in multyplayer skirmish if will be some sort of ranking).

Josh Warner
11-17-2009, 06:00 AM
Josh Warner .... Pup. and Wich. have more green marks than you..... so we should believe them more about what are they saying =P.


It'll take a few weeks, if not months until the system is leveled out. Right now there aren't a whole lot of people so it won't be working for a bit.

^ Not to mention I've said several times the only ones that should influence your opinion are negatives. For those that have high rep it's simply a way of showing we appreciate what they've done, nothing else.

Anyway =), how about if a new member post his first topic, asking about something that has been posted same day 1000 times so ppl feel irritated and bam the give him bad reputation ?=)

If the question is answered in an FAQ or another post that's on the front page, I wouldn't really mind. And really - there's a search feature for a reason. If someone asks something in the faq thread something that's answered already be it in the thread or elsewhere then that's fine, but to go and post a whole new thread before using search is a bit much.

Oh and if you remove sect there wont be ppl that spam to get fast post number =P . So if you want to reduce that you could also remove it(and when game will be out ppl will rather play then spam here for sects =P)? Beside i still think that something like WoW have armory (could be also here with ingame data) would be better (maybe how you do in mmo or in multyplayer skirmish if will be some sort of ranking).

WoW is a PVE game with a PVP sideshow, armory is already abused. I don't know if they changed it - but I know back a long time ago the top teams routinely looked up their opponents on armory to see their specs and how to counter them by putting on specific sets of gear and using certain counter-strats. And that's just a pve game - in a real pvp game where losing can actually hurt you.. This game has PVP with consequences and far more open. A ladder ranking for stats like win/loss might happen, I believe it has been brought up before, but detailed info like the armory... No way.

Imagine if someone attacks you, and you could go look up their name on a site that shows detailed statistics about them? Then you could just avoid anyone that you don't have an overwhelming advantage against, bad. And worse if you're suggesting it show army makeups rather than just overall strength.

Puppeteer
11-17-2009, 12:15 PM
This isn't a private forum however, it's a business one - we can't go around banning everyone we don't like.
If they break the rules or consistently the code of conduct you can. That doesn't mean we ban left, right and centre for the hell of it. Infractions already serve as your 'negative' reputation, and this 'positive' reputation just seems like sycophancy.
Those who break the rules will indeed be infracted and then banned if need be, but many will not and still be a negative influence. And if you start banning people on a forum like this for reasons other than breaking the rules it ends up looking like we're trying to silence anyone who isn't a fanboy and believe us infallible - it's just not good press.
Implicitly it appears that you would give negative reputation to those who aren't fanboys and don't see Reverie as infallible. If this is so, this is a flagrant abuse of power and favouritism. If not, this renders your last point moot - the current system of warnings, infractions and bans works fine - we won't weaken the criteria to silence more people.

Josh Warner
11-17-2009, 02:10 PM
If they break the rules or consistently the code of conduct you can. That doesn't mean we ban left, right and centre for the hell of it. Infractions already serve as your 'negative' reputation, and this 'positive' reputation just seems like sycophancy.

Implicitly it appears that you would give negative reputation to those who aren't fanboys and don't see Reverie as infallible. If this is so, this is a flagrant abuse of power and favouritism. If not, this renders your last point moot - the current system of warnings, infractions and bans works fine - we won't weaken the criteria to silence more people.

Sycophancy? That's a little hyperbolic : p. And can regular members see infractions or warnings? I honestly don't remember :S edit: they can't, in fact it took me a while to figure out where current infractions/warnings etc were shown for members lol.

And no, I would give negative reputation for things which are in a grey area between giving infractions and doing nothing, warnings I see as a first time offender thing, not so much grey area. Assuming I ever give any negative rep, I'd prefer to stay away from the system as dev. Of course not everything is black and white.

And lol, no, we wouldn't be using it as a system of favoritism, in fact I'd encourage mods/devs to avoid using it outside of rare circumstances after the system matures and more regular members can add/lower reputations. It's a community feature, not one we really use as moderators or devs. I'd rather the community itself decide who should be elevated/lowered, it's a fun little system that outside of those in the negative, really shouldn't have a huge effect on opinions of people.

High rep is simply something that shows the members/devs appreciate what someone has done for the community, I don't see why that's bad, it's a way of rewarding someone and making them feel appreciated. How often do people actually say 'thanks' on a forum heh.


Oh and this an interesting discussion, it's a shame there isn't enough info we can release yet so we end up discussing things like this instead of the game itself :p I enjoy the back and forth.

Kire
11-17-2009, 06:07 PM
This sistem is also made for lazy ppl .... if topic is long ppl will bother to read just ppl with more green marks and skip others =P.

Josh Warner
11-17-2009, 06:43 PM
This sistem is also made for lazy ppl .... if topic is long ppl will bother to read just ppl with more green marks and skip others =P.

lol.. anyone that lazy wouldn't be reading it either way I'd think.

wills370
11-18-2009, 07:16 AM
lol.. anyone that lazy wouldn't be reading it either way I'd think.

i agree with that and even if they did read the posts with people who have high greens we can see from this discussion that both sides of the argument are reprosented so in all if they wanted to do that it would give them a well put togetheer synopsis of the main points of the argument as genrally they are either the most informed or helpful members :).

Puppeteer
11-18-2009, 01:26 PM
And can regular members see infractions or warnings?
The point is not to humiliate, but to re-educate. Warnings and infractions help to show people the error of their ways and, if they persist and to such an extent, they are banned. Whereas this negative system would just anger and victimise people, primarily based on their opinions and their eloquence of speech. It would have two repercussions: provoking some turned-malcontents to gain as many red pips as possible, and down-heartening those with fewer green pips into feelings of mediocrity. Why participate in discussions, they'll just be ignored in favour of their 'betters'

High rep is simply something that shows the members/devs appreciate what someone has done for the community, I don't see why that's bad,
When you move the boundary and create this positive 'high' rep, to be accompanied with feelings of gratitude, you inadvertently create a positive 'low' rep, to be accompanied with feelings of worthlessness and futility.
it's a way of rewarding someone and making them feel appreciated. How often do people actually say 'thanks' on a forum heh.
Sometimes you hear 'good post' or 'well said' - that's gratitude enough. Must people really be told that they're doing well? The proof is in the pudding, so to speak.

we can see from this discussion that both sides of the argument are reprosented so in all if they wanted to do that it would give them a well put togetheer synopsis
You're assuming that this is the case in every debate; you can't generalise like that - again you're reinforcing the point that some people shall be ignored, or skimmed over, in favour of others. Are these members substandard to others? Why treat the members with more green pips as infallible?

zach12wqasxz
11-18-2009, 01:28 PM
ok heres my take on this whole thing. i do not wish that there be a reputation system becasue i like the fact of being equal among my peers, i would not like being under, or over them in a forum heirarchy, thus is why i voted no. and i also see most people who voted no or argued against the reputation system post a topic, but no one other than devs posted anything about why they want a reputation system, so evreyone that voted yes pls state why and make clear that this is what the community wants. in my opinion i think you should just make infractions seeable to other forum members, this way it doesnt as effectivly hurt a persons reputation, while telling people that he isnt the first guy to trust. i wouldnt ban a person for giving false information, or posting completly off topic once or twice, but for every time they did just simply give them a warning/and/or a minor infraction, if that person continues repeatedly and wont stop ban them from the forums.

Josh Warner
11-18-2009, 02:00 PM
The point is not to humiliate, but to re-educate. Warnings and infractions help to show people the error of their ways and, if they persist and to such an extent, they are banned. Whereas this negative system would just anger and victimise people, primarily based on their opinions and their eloquence of speech. It would have two repercussions: provoking some turned-malcontents to gain as many red pips as possible, and down-heartening those with fewer green pips into feelings of mediocrity. Why participate in discussions, they'll just be ignored in favour of their 'betters'

Heh, I'm afraid that's just not true. I don't care who you are - warnings, infractions, temp bans, these all make people angry and feel like victims unless they were intentionally trying to cause trouble. No way reputation is going to be worse than that. It doesn't mean they're going to become bitter or anything, but they WILL be angry and feel slighted. An infraction or warning is an authority figure telling you to stop it or there will be real consequences, the rep system is just people thinking you're immature, abrasive or plain mean. People are going to have a much bigger problem with the first.

Who said anything about opinions and eloquence, this is to do with how helpful and mature they are, or unhelpful and immature. Several of the members on this forum even now are hardly eloquent, but they're still nice, and generally helpful. I just imagine English isn't their first language or something along those lines, I don't hold their poor grammar/spelling/sentence structure against them if they're actually trying to add to a discussion. And I just cannot see how a well adjusted person is going to feel mediocre because of fewer green dots, I can however see how someone would feel appreciated with more.

By your logic we should remove post counts and join dates as those do the same things. Every system has it's problems, puppet. But they have positives as well.


When you move the boundary and create this positive 'high' rep, to be accompanied with feelings of gratitude, you inadvertently create a positive 'low' rep, to be accompanied with feelings of worthlessness and futility.

So... you think people are going to take it so seriously as to feel worthless because they have fewer green pips? That's hyperbolic. Showing appreciation to someone making someone else feel UN-appreciated is a personal issue with entitlement not an issue with the system. I'm not inclined to not show appreciation because someone else feels entitled to it.

Sometimes you hear 'good post' or 'well said' - that's gratitude enough. Must people really be told that they're doing well? The proof is in the pudding, so to speak.

No, but they should be told if you appreciate what they're doing. I'm not buying into this appreciating one person makes someone else feel worthless. That's just too far.

Darvin
11-18-2009, 02:26 PM
I always find reputation systems unnecessary. You build a real reputation based on your behavior on the site, and people come to know who you are and what you contribute, if anything, to the community. If you think that a reputation system will improve behavior, then by all means go ahead, but people very quickly identify who is reputable and who is not even without it.

zach12wqasxz
11-18-2009, 02:28 PM
this debate is starting to get argumentative between some people. can moderators infract you for argueing with them?

Puppeteer
11-18-2009, 02:32 PM
Heh, I'm afraid that's just not true. I don't care who you are - warnings, infractions, temp bans, these all make people angry and feel like victims unless they were intentionally trying to cause trouble.
This is false - moderators are the only ones with these abilities because it is to moderate the forum, not partition it. Warnings and infractions have meaning and justification. It's a personal way of sorting out issues, as opposed to making it public.
No way reputation is going to be worse than that. It doesn't mean they're going to become bitter or anything, but they WILL be angry and feel slighted. An infraction or warning is an authority figure telling you to stop it or there will be real consequences, the rep system is just people thinking you're immature, abrasive or plain mean. People are going to have a much bigger problem with the first.
I disagree - those members who are going to stick around (and not be deserving of a ban, but perhaps may have only slight issues with the subjective code of conduct) will not be angry by being told how to reform. Being publicly shown up as disliked will because these (moderate) malcontents will after a while feed off the animosity.
Who said anything about opinions and eloquence, this is to do with how helpful and mature they are, or unhelpful and immature. Several of the members on this forum even now are hardly eloquent, but they're still nice, and generally helpful. I just imagine English isn't their first language or something along those lines, I don't hold their poor grammar/spelling/sentence structure against them if they're actually trying to add to a discussion.
I'm afraid that eloquence and presentation are large factors into it, whether you choose to accept them or not. In theory it shouldn't, but people are easily convinced by the layout and ease of legibility of a post.
And I just cannot see how a well adjusted person is going to feel mediocre because of fewer green dots, I can however see how someone would feel appreciated with more.
If they don't care when they don't have any pips, why care when they do have them? It makes no sense! Either they are being appreciated, with the green pips, or not being appreciated, without the green pips. The negative pips show depreciation, and hence the lack of green pips shows apathy towards that member. Those with red pips are likely to be flamers and trolls, whereas those without green or red are normal members who are under-appreciated by the community - either because they're new, have broken English or differing opinions. This reputation system is just a way of consolidating favour to those who have been here a while, and have their own supporters. This is favouritism!
By your logic we should remove post counts and join dates as those do the same things. Every system has it's problems, puppet. But they have positives as well.
Not really - post counts and join dates do not have this as their function, whereas this reputation system is designed exclusively to positively and negatively discriminate between members. Only the immature view post counts as integral to someone's worth, and I feel the same about the reputation system - regardless of the pips, each member should be treated the same and not made to be feel inferior, or superior. Because they're not.
I can't see the positives at all waying out the negatives. It's just so unnecessary.

To zach: no, it's not an argument, and no to the question - moderators may have the powers, but they won't abuse them.

Josh Warner
11-18-2009, 02:37 PM
this debate is starting to get argumentative between some people. can moderators infract you for argueing with them?

It's still a civil discussion lol.

And while I agree Darvin, I don't see why this is a bad system. I rarely if ever see people complain about a rep system, but I know that they do increase activity and give people an incentive to be a mature, helpful member of the community. It gives people something to do outside of just posting, most like it be they high or low rep. It's a fun little addition to the forum.

zach12wqasxz
11-18-2009, 05:02 PM
well frm the looks of it wether or not me or the other 9 ppl who voted no were still outvoted 16 to 9 so i guess ill stop argueing and let the rep system happen.....unless 7 more ppl decide to vote no, then the war will continue lol

Darathor
11-18-2009, 05:40 PM
The reputation system won't ever go to extremes like make someone feel super uber(might happen occasionally) or make someone hate their life unless they are already super insecure about themselves and then it doesn't really matter because just about anything would set them off.

It seems like a nice addition to these ever-improving forums. I don't see anything wrong with it. If you don't want to make the person you are down-repping to just feel bad, then tell them why their post was immature or wrong or stupid.

zach12wqasxz
11-18-2009, 07:50 PM
i see by te green dot by my name/info that you have started the re system, does everyone start out with the same rep?

wills370
11-19-2009, 03:09 AM
i see by te green dot by my name/info that you have started the re system, does everyone start out with the same rep?

yes everyone starts with the same rep :) im one bip just like you.

Blatant7
11-19-2009, 02:38 PM
I personally think it's a good idea. It may lead to problems, but it should also encourage people to contribute to discussions and be more mature overall. I say go for it, and if it doesn't work out, you can always scrap it.

Darathor
11-19-2009, 06:54 PM
You might want to put how it works in the general forums if you are going to keep this long-term, it's annoying to have several people every day say "my reputation is only one dot i dont get it plz help me idk what to do." You would need to explain it, and it does sound rather complicated. Still, people will still whine about their rep.

Joseph Visscher
11-19-2009, 09:14 PM
This sistem is also made for lazy ppl .... if topic is long ppl will bother to read just ppl with more green marks and skip others =P.

lol.. anyone that lazy wouldn't be reading it either way I'd think.

What, I didn't see you.

this debate is starting to get argumentative between some people. can moderators infract you for argueing with them?

I'll kick their butt if they do. This is a good place for augments over the rep system, aslong as it is civil, argue and debate please, I personally don't really care what the poll results are. There could very well be low rep people voting! Oh No! ;)

Josh Warner
11-20-2009, 07:25 AM
This is false - moderators are the only ones with these abilities because it is to moderate the forum, not partition it. Warnings and infractions have meaning and justification. It's a personal way of sorting out issues, as opposed to making it public.

I disagree - those members who are going to stick around (and not be deserving of a ban, but perhaps may have only slight issues with the subjective code of conduct) will not be angry by being told how to reform. Being publicly shown up as disliked will because these (moderate) malcontents will after a while feed off the animosity.

Of course they have meaning and justification - I didn't suggest otherwise. That doesn't mean those subject to them don't feel anger or like victims. Public or not - it does make people angry even if they know they were in wrong.

I'm afraid that eloquence and presentation are large factors into it, whether you choose to accept them or not. In theory it shouldn't, but people are easily convinced by the layout and ease of legibility of a post.

Nobody should be getting derepped over a poorly constructed post, that's not the purpose of the system. It's for maturity and helpfulness and their negatives, I really doubt people are going to start derepping someone just because english isn't their first language. Rep isn't supposed to be a popularity contest, though I suspect the most helpful/nicest members will also be popular people because of how nice and helpful they are not the other way around.

If they don't care when they don't have any pips, why care when they do have them? It makes no sense! Either they are being appreciated, with the green pips, or not being appreciated, without the green pips. The negative pips show depreciation, and hence the lack of green pips shows apathy towards that member. Those with red pips are likely to be flamers and trolls, whereas those without green or red are normal members who are under-appreciated by the community - either because they're new, have broken English or differing opinions. This reputation system is just a way of consolidating favour to those who have been here a while, and have their own supporters. This is favouritism!

Why is someone under-appreciated if they haven't done things that make others wish to +rep them? And of course 'favoritism' is in to a certain degree. Some people will be liked more than others, we're not the borg we're human and even without a reputation system there WILL be favorites on the forum, there already are people here now that are well liked and respected and those that well, aren't lol. And I fail to see how a normal member is under-appreciated, it's there to create an incentive to go above and beyond the norm and provide a guideline for new people on who to believe/ask questions, they're statistically more likely to be helpful/provide a good answer. It's not quite as accurate, but the same can be said for those members that have been here longer and have more posts. They are likely to be more helpful, and far more likely to know more about the game. These are just statistics. There are exceptions as there are with any system, but for the most part it holds true.

Not really - post counts and join dates do not have this as their function, whereas this reputation system is designed exclusively to positively and negatively discriminate between members. Only the immature view post counts as integral to someone's worth, and I feel the same about the reputation system - regardless of the pips, each member should be treated the same and not made to be feel inferior, or superior. Because they're not.

Now you say that only the immature view post counts as integral to someone's worth - I say the same about the reputation system. It's a rough guideline, not the end all be all of someone's worth. Statistically speaking those with high rep will be more likely to be helpful, no?

And I really hope nobody is insecure enough to feel worthless over little green pips.

I can't see the positives at all waying out the negatives. It's just so unnecessary.

I'll agree it's not necessary that much absolutely is true - but in all the forums I've frequented, they're a fun little addition and serve as a rough guideline on who to believe/ask questions for new members. And I've yet to see any of these negatives on forums with them.


And lol, Joe. Aren't you just the nicest guy around. Not to mention my boss which doesn't influence my statement at all ;)

I'd have replied sooner but was busy with my birthday yesterday, a year closer to being wormfood, yay.

Henry Martin
11-21-2009, 06:44 PM
LOL, apparently I almost got banned for my user name. I'm sorry if I offended anyone with it.

Anyway this rep system reminds me of the one on total war forums. To me it seems people are reading into it too much, but every one has their opinions.

again sorry if I offended anyone.

zach12wqasxz
11-21-2009, 11:49 PM
LOL, apparently I almost got banned for my user name. I'm sorry if I offended anyone with it.

Anyway this rep system reminds me of the one on total war forums. To me it seems people are reading into it too much, but every one has their opinions.

again sorry if I offended anyone.

dont worry you didnt offend me, in fact i found it quite funny :)

Supreme
11-22-2009, 06:34 AM
I feel quite offended to be accused of having krabs. :(

zach12wqasxz
11-24-2009, 09:56 PM
question for whoever can answer, what is the golden thumbs up icon for ( top left hand side under my name)? i just recently had a post and it showed this, and could you explain all the icons and such so i know, and other forumers know, what they mean?

LiTos456
11-25-2009, 12:00 AM
I assume it means someone gave you good reputation for that particular post.

wills370
11-26-2009, 06:11 PM
Im alittle confused i have a blue pip on my cp screen with a positive comment. Does that mean someone clicked the negative rep button by accident if so is there a way to change or get it changed. ?? :(

LiTos456
11-27-2009, 12:22 PM
heh, I never knew negatives were blue.
edit: just checked my thing, I got one green one blue. Don't worry about it wills, it won't do too bad. Just keep on rollin' and you'll at one point reach prosperity of reputation.

Espadachim
11-27-2009, 12:55 PM
Heh, I have 2 blues and one green. Blue pips aren't negative ones. Otherwise my reputation would be far smaller.

zach12wqasxz
11-27-2009, 01:35 PM
where do you guys see if you have blue pips?

Espadachim
11-27-2009, 01:57 PM
In the User CP

zach12wqasxz
11-27-2009, 02:44 PM
In the User CP

thx, i feel stupid now lol

LiTos456
11-28-2009, 01:52 AM
Heh, I have 2 blues and one green. Blue pips aren't negative ones. Otherwise my reputation would be far smaller.

Thats not true. I bet they dont do much in small numbers. Besides, you start off with a normal reputation by default.

wills370
11-28-2009, 07:22 AM
hmm fair enough. stilll guess it will take a few months for the rep system to cvatch up with everyone anyway.

Darathor
11-28-2009, 08:00 AM
I think some people don't know what it is and that the give reputation button is on the top right of the person's post. It took me a little while to see that.

Supreme
11-28-2009, 09:05 AM
Those dots dont say anything about the quality of the posts, only about the popularity of that person.

Thats my opinion anyway.

Espadachim
11-28-2009, 09:18 AM
Agree with Supreme. Also, apparently, blue dots or worth 5 or 0. Green dots either 15 or 20.

zach12wqasxz
11-30-2009, 07:46 PM
how do we know who gave us rep?

Darathor
11-30-2009, 09:43 PM
I don't think you can, one of the people who gave me rep was nice enough to tell me who it was.

Josh Warner
11-30-2009, 10:45 PM
It's either in your User CP's main page, or only visible to moderators/admins.

nickson104
12-01-2009, 10:42 AM
It is on your CP with a big header 'Latest Reputation Recieved'

Hard to miss really... but excusable... i suppose... :p

zach12wqasxz
12-01-2009, 12:22 PM
It is on your CP with a big header 'Latest Reputation Recieved'

Hard to miss really... but excusable... i suppose... :p

i have looked in my CP and where it says "reputation received", it does not state who gave me the reputation. is this to prevent favortism?

Supreme
12-01-2009, 02:27 PM
Aww cant find it, though this could be because im still at default :(

I found my (expired) infraction though ^^

nickson104
12-02-2009, 07:51 AM
i have looked in my CP and where it says "reputation received", it does not state who gave me the reputation. is this to prevent favortism?

Indeed I think so, although my rep'ers were kind enough to tell me who they were :p :)
To be honest, it really doesnt matter what rep you are or who gave you it, in the end it is peoples opinions of you that matters... For example some people could admire person X however others could find him arrogant and annoying... the persons rep would not matter either way, those people will discard that and continue to see the person in the same way...

Puppeteer
12-02-2009, 02:23 PM
is this to prevent favortism?
Preventing favouritism? You know what this system is, right? Favouritism, pure and simple.

nickson104
12-02-2009, 04:55 PM
Preventing favouritism? You know what this system is, right? Favouritism, pure and simple.

And no-one could ever change that... :)

Who wants to win the popularity competition?

Joseph Visscher
12-26-2009, 12:49 PM
Preventing favouritism? You know what this system is, right? Favouritism, pure and simple.

if you ask a question of for example:

Question: what is 5X7?

Answerer 1: you are that stupid omg, go back to school!

Answerer 2: 35, with 5X,,, simply add a 0 to the end of the next number then divide by 2 makes it so much easier. 5X80 = 10x80=800 /2 = 400.

Answerer3: you must be completely ******ed, dummy.


Who would you favor? Answerer 2 right?

Overall this system is favouritism, but only for 2 types of people to really favor or disfavor, good and bad.

wills370
12-27-2009, 10:02 AM
if you ask a question of for example:

Question: what is 5X7?



Who would you favor? Answerer 2 right?

Overall this system is favouritism, but only for 2 types of people to really favor or disfavor, good and bad.

The only people who are going to be hzving a bad rep are thoose who are being stupid or counter productive. thus the rep system has showed its worth :)

Darathor
12-27-2009, 01:40 PM
I don't know, favoritism has already bled into the system I believe. We already have someone with a red pip.

LiTos456
12-28-2009, 06:53 AM
Really? Heh, I don't pay attention. That's interesting. I believe there's no way to avoid that, think how bad it could get when a lot more members get here.

Puppeteer
12-28-2009, 11:54 AM
if you ask a question of for example:

Question: what is 5X7?

Answerer 1: you are that stupid omg, go back to school!

Answerer 2: 35, with 5X,,, simply add a 0 to the end of the next number then divide by 2 makes it so much easier. 5X80 = 10x80=800 /2 = 400.

Answerer3: you must be completely ******ed, dummy.

Who would you favor? Answerer 2 right?

Overall this system is favouritism, but only for 2 types of people to really favor or disfavor, good and bad.

A farcical scenario where the content of the post speaks volumes, far more than these pips ever would.

Oh dear, two members with red pips. One perhaps is understandable, though it's rather petty since he's not been here in a while and so someone has pathetically, actively pursued a vendetta, but the other...

Supreme
12-28-2009, 04:08 PM
What an akward metaphor.

(Ps: Not everything is black or white)

Puppeteer
12-28-2009, 04:33 PM
Where's the metaphor?

wills370
12-29-2009, 08:27 AM
A farcical scenario where the content of the post speaks volumes, far more than these pips ever would.

Oh dear, two members with red pips. One perhaps is understandable, though it's rather petty since he's not been here in a while and so someone has pathetically, actively pursued a vendetta, but the other...

Cant mods alter the rep of members? To correct agaisnt theses vendetas or if the - reps have no worth then taking the ability of the member who abused the system?

Puppeteer
12-29-2009, 11:09 AM
Cant mods alter the rep of members?
Which is abusing the system...

To correct agaisnt theses vendetas or if the - reps have no worth then taking the ability of the member who abused the system?
Only contextual instinct will determine which are vendettas and which aren't. The system is abusive by nature.

DaFatalGigabyte
02-06-2010, 05:14 PM
What have the pros of a "rep" system ever been? I have a natural rep system for identifying mature posters, who I then identify with their avatar. I've never needed a rep system. It is a good indicator, and it confirms my instincts (generally about the post itself, not of the poster), but other than that, it's not useful.

Better yet, we should have an artificial intelligence that will soon take over the world, rate our posts, and while it's at it scratch our butts for a small fee to Reverie...

wills370
02-07-2010, 08:45 AM
It is mainly a guide to new players who have yet to make a decision on members and gives them a brief summary of a player. As to how liked and respected they are :) PLus somehting to work towards if they wish to have a higher rep them selves. Thus haveing a larger consiquence if they choose to be nasty etc as there will be negative rep added to there score. etc.

ash12181987
02-07-2010, 02:50 PM
Actually to reflect back a moment: 5x7 is a standard size that you can get a photo printed at kinkos.

Back to the System. Puppeteer is absolutely right, this is a ridiculous system that should go away. It encourages favoritism, which is something that should be avoided at all costs, due to it's ability to fast infuriate many people who are new to something.

Another problem I've seen with rep systems is that in joining, you get cliques, something people gravitate towards naturally, forming in forums. X likes Y so he supports most all of his posts. It's human nature. Hell, I like Puppeteer's posts from the past, that's one factor behind actually expressing my opinion. Personally, I refuse to use it. If I like someone they can figure it out through my words, not whether I click 4 buttons to compliment them on something. Why? Because I can't trust myself to not encourage the kind of behavior I'm condoning right now.

zach12wqasxz
02-08-2010, 10:03 AM
Actually to reflect back a moment: 5x7 is a standard size that you can get a photo printed at kinkos.

Back to the System. Puppeteer is absolutely right, this is a ridiculous system that should go away. It encourages favoritism, which is something that should be avoided at all costs, due to it's ability to fast infuriate many people who are new to something.

Another problem I've seen with rep systems is that in joining, you get cliques, something people gravitate towards naturally, forming in forums. X likes Y so he supports most all of his posts. It's human nature. Hell, I like Puppeteer's posts from the past, that's one factor behind actually expressing my opinion. Personally, I refuse to use it. If I like someone they can figure it out through my words, not whether I click 4 buttons to compliment them on something. Why? Because I can't trust myself to not encourage the kind of behavior I'm condoning right now.

its here wether some of us like it or not, the votes for the rep system beat us that are opposed so theres nothing we cna do now

wills370
02-08-2010, 10:23 AM
I dont think rep should be given out to a point you merly like. I have given out rep before for points i dont agree with but have demonstrated high levels of evaluation. Well thought out or often diffrent views to which i myself have not thought of etc. :)

ash12181987
02-08-2010, 04:30 PM
its here whether some of us like it or not, the votes for the rep system beat us that are opposed so there's nothing we can do now

That doesn't mean that you just go with it. If you don't like it, don't use it. If you don't agree with it, don't use it. If you don't care, then go ahead. Optional means that total neglect is allowed, and I intend to neglect this feature.

metman
02-21-2010, 12:14 PM
That doesn't mean that you just go with it. If you don't like it, don't use it. If you don't agree with it, don't use it. If you don't care, then go ahead. Optional means that total neglect is allowed, and I intend to neglect this feature.

I personally will use it but I agree with ash if you don't like it just don't use it. :D

Negthareas
02-21-2010, 03:37 PM
Same here.

HolyPollo
03-19-2010, 07:15 AM
Reverie World Studios Public Forum has enabled a Reputation System which we will be evaluating in the coming weeks whether or not to keep it long term, we might decide to revert this system and go back without it.

The Reputation System will prevent new members from doing anything with it, mature members will be able to give reputations to mature posts and members. This system will differentiate mature and wise members from immature. It will give a person guidance on who to trust and take advice from, just because a person has 738 posts does not mean that that person is mature enough to take good advice from.

The bad part about this system is that members wont all be equal anymore, which some find is a bad idea. On the otherhand, we already have inequality with membersí post count.

Reputation abuse, ah yes, we have a few nice features to battle this:

50 posts are required for that user before his reputation hits count on others.
This means if you have under 50 posts, you can't give or take anyone's reputation.

25 Reputation is required for that user before his reputation hits count on others.
This means if you have default or under 25 Reputation you can't give or take anyone's reputation.

Then there is 'reputation-altering power' which is the number of reputation posts you give or take to other people, this is based upon Register Date, Post Count and Reputation itself.
New members wont be able to influence the system at all until someone gives them rep for mature posts.

We would however like to hear your opinion.

I think a reputation system would be helpful. Not all forums members are created equal anyway, that's clear. Reputation will hopefully motivate younger members to create interesting and unique topics or add a useful post to an existing thread, hoping for some recognition. As long as the veterans continue to reward excellence, it will be a very functional system. Flamers will always exist, but they'll have a huge target on their back!

Justin
03-19-2010, 07:55 AM
I'm all for it, at least trying it out it out, it seems systems work like this on some forums but not on others and the system works best on small forums with relatively few active posters, like this where we don't have 10,000 people on a day where people will team up to take down others they don't like because on a reasonably sized forum you are much more accountable.

wills370
03-19-2010, 12:23 PM
I believe that is true although there will always be players being targeted although i believe this can be limited by having a base value of posts needed to enable the give reputation system. This will make it far easier to regulate and thoose who reach that level will not want to throw there acount away in pointless targeting of players. Which may result in them being banned or ability suspended say the minimum value of posts is either 50 or 100?

Negthareas
03-19-2010, 02:37 PM
There is a base value. I think it is 25 to have others count against you, 50 for you to count against others.

wills370
03-21-2010, 01:46 PM
There is a base value. I think it is 25 to have others count against you, 50 for you to count against others.

Hmm could possibly be raised in the future as the forums become more active as it would be easy to reach that level in one day to be hounest :)

Negthareas
03-21-2010, 07:49 PM
One day would be hard. Maybe two.

srpiccoro
10-10-2010, 05:30 PM
Well, at least we got to vote...... that way we'll know who's been messing around town

Generation
10-24-2010, 01:38 PM
I find a reputation system to be good because the mature know more :D

SilverLeaf
11-06-2010, 04:13 AM
no because people will use rep systems against folks they don't agree with. Don't like what you say? Blam.

Espadachim
11-06-2010, 05:23 PM
Yes, there will be people who will take reputations for the lulz, but I believe that most people here are well behaved and cool enough to not do this.

That's just my 2 cents, though.

SilverLeaf
11-07-2010, 12:55 AM
True. How about having a system where you can + but only mods can -? Same as how the hive workshop (wc3 mapping community) does it. Help someone, +. Violate rules, - by a mod. This will prevent people voicing their not so popular opinions from getting insta blammed. Say if I say unit X should be nerfed, and in fact it should, usually those who OPPOSE my suggestion would be the ones to rise up and blam me in an attempt to silence all opposition. Whereas those who do agree it is rigged, would keep a low profile and likely be less vocal. Also, being a PvP game, we don't want in game matches to result in rep wars on the forums... flame wars are bad enough.

TL;DR a +rep system would encourage folks to contribute, but - should only be by mods and admin.

nickson104
11-07-2010, 04:23 PM
True. How about having a system where you can + but only mods can -? Same as how the hive workshop (wc3 mapping community) does it. Help someone, +. Violate rules, - by a mod. This will prevent people voicing their not so popular opinions from getting insta blammed. Say if I say unit X should be nerfed, and in fact it should, usually those who OPPOSE my suggestion would be the ones to rise up and blam me in an attempt to silence all opposition. Whereas those who do agree it is rigged, would keep a low profile and likely be less vocal. Also, being a PvP game, we don't want in game matches to result in rep wars on the forums... flame wars are bad enough.

TL;DR a +rep system would encourage folks to contribute, but - should only be by mods and admin.

While this is a good idea, most of the devs are too busy to do such, and the mods, while being sensible guys, are still human and may suffer the same as most anyway.
Before I may have agreed with you, but as far as I can see, no-one really uses the rep system and on the most part it is ignored. Also, it has encountered no problems so far, so probability says it shall stay the same

Espadachim
11-07-2010, 04:58 PM
I remember that several months ago I was leading the reputation board, and then became horribly inactive. :p

Wolfpack
02-05-2011, 06:43 PM
It would keep all the bloodthirsty orcs in line.

MacNtoShi
02-10-2011, 11:51 AM
Well it can help against the ones who simple like to spam or start flame wars, if u get to much down voted u can get some kind of punishment or so, also if u have a nice reputation u get some kind of reward (of course the feeling in their heart that they did something nice... counts too hehe)

Corcscrew
02-10-2011, 08:12 PM
It would be interesting to see how well the reputation system works out. I voted "yes" mainly because it could possibly encourage more constructive feedback from many of the members.

Nordmann
02-13-2011, 06:17 PM
Like the idea of a reputation system. I hope it stops trolling, when it will come.

Shadoon
02-20-2011, 10:47 AM
I think that it sounds like a good idea at first. But When you think about it for a bit, it really isn't. Because you end up with what i think will be an unfair system of doing things.

grim-101
02-20-2011, 02:05 PM
:D ;) :D :cool:

Lordyoko111
02-20-2011, 02:12 PM
i WANT THIS GAME!!!!!!!!!!!!
:) :D

Lord Shadow
02-21-2011, 02:21 PM
I personally think its a bit over kill.. I think everyone is entitled not only to their own opinion.. but to also to the right to decide for themselves what is helpful and what is not. From what I've read this reputation system could & does supports influencing others that post on this forum. While I don't disagree with a trying to highlight helpful insight & those who provide it, I think this kind of system either with the proposed restrictions will be abused. Where I work we use a system for evaulating risk called the GAR model, and while I won't get into detail, one of the main aspects of this system, is the most junior person in the crew goes first and provides his input. Why? Its so he isn't influenced by the senior persons and hopefully will give the most honest answer. I know its a bit different then a RTS game forum, but I think Reverie is doing an outstanding job engaging its fans and potential buyers to get feedback and ideas. This is where I think the system poses the greatest risk for abuse. Senior people who like it the way things are might flag new ideas & concepts because they don't like change. Yet in the end opinions.. The good, bad & ugly are always helpful in the end. Why not instead create a few more forum moderators.. could do something like what stratics does with reporters for the games, or at the very least put a flag option on posts like craigslist.. Should you recieve number flags about a post or the same person keeps getting flagged you can go and review the posts and make a decision from there..

Ok I'm done.. just my "4 cents".. :)

snpiccolo
02-25-2011, 01:36 AM
sounds like a great way to get people more active on the forums, i wish it could also have a chance to offer beta key incentives.. but i think it sounds risky to be between level 25-50

AlphaReaper
02-25-2011, 04:34 PM
New members wont be able to influence the system at all until someone gives them rep for mature post

I think it is overkill and backwards also. You can have a 1000 posts and not say anything worth noting and people giving and taking rep from each other seems like it could easily be abused. Friends supporting friends, clans supporting clans, and it just allows for a ranking to say if someone should listen to you? I am a new person to the group only hearing about the game on Massively the other day and I wouldnt care what it said by your name if I had questions about an aspect of the game I would give you a read if you had something to say.

Mypoppy
02-25-2011, 05:58 PM
I think it's a good idea

Revenger571
02-25-2011, 06:47 PM
I like the idea of a reaputation system :cool:

Adamantite40
02-26-2011, 12:12 AM
i like this idea. While alot of other forums have used the "like" buttons, and such, thios could be yet another aspect that sets this game apart from others. Though like Puppeteer said in the first reply, you can usually tell if a person is immature or not by the content of their post.

Of course, this is not refraining people from being overly sarcastic or trying to trick others, such as misleading others into believing something that is a lie. If other people notice this, say so in a post, and mark down their rep. In time, people will soon be able to destinguish a good poster from a bad.

Though, another thing to look into would be people who would create multiple accounts to keep their rep neutral, though the post count barrier could keep trolls from doing such.

vietboy
02-26-2011, 12:25 PM
well reputation system doesn't sounds too bad. I think we should do it

ImmoralAtheist
03-08-2011, 04:40 AM
Depending on how this is implemented (who get's rights), this can lead to players giving these negative buttons to people who say something they disagree with. It seems more like a system where you vote wether you like the post or not (similar to youtube).
You could have a mark as spam button to flag a post as spam, and if a player gets alot of spam marks on his posts then his reputation could be decreased. Here it's more clear in what instances to use it.
There could be a like button, if you think a post comes up with something smart, and the more of these you get, the better reputation you get. I don't think there should be a dislike button that reduces reputation that they can use if they don't think it's a good idea. That would hinder creativeness.

Gerova
03-08-2011, 03:51 PM
Depending on how this is implemented (who get's rights), this can lead to players giving these negative buttons to people who say something they disagree with. It seems more like a system where you vote wether you like the post or not (similar to youtube).
You could have a mark as spam button to flag a post as spam, and if a player gets alot of spam marks on his posts then his reputation could be decreased. Here it's more clear in what instances to use it.
There could be a like button, if you think a post comes up with something smart, and the more of these you get, the better reputation you get. I don't think there should be a dislike button that reduces reputation that they can use if they don't think it's a good idea. That would hinder creativeness.

I agree entirely, the negative button option will be abused by some players for a variety of illegitimate reasons, which will diminish expressions of creativity and hinder innovative and entrepreneurial players, all to the detriment of the game experience. This oversight on the part of the developers should be addressed.

bosiK111
03-18-2011, 08:16 AM
Its good idea, ppl should know others, and it will help all players alot. Its working perfectly on e bay so it should work here same:)

C0gi
04-20-2011, 05:00 PM
Help is always needed so its nice :)

Briggsby
04-20-2011, 05:31 PM
I've got to agree with Puppeteer and others on this; there's potential for abuse for what I would have thought would be rather unnecessary. Unless reputation is used for punishment or 'perks' the quality of someone's usual posts is irrelevant to how good their current post is. Somebody might have a very bad reputation giving really bad game advice but have great suggestions for the game mechanics.
Then again I suppose it could be quite helpful for the moderators, and I can't really imagine that much abuse; I mean how many people really enjoy randomly pressing dislike on posts :P

malice
04-24-2011, 07:05 PM
sounds good might keep the spam down

unodallakorea
04-25-2011, 02:35 AM
Rep system is almost a must imho! By the way, the more stuff you put in the game, the better ;-)

WarriorKing
04-25-2011, 11:30 AM
Only if it doesnt delay the keys for friday to the next friday.

Puppeteer
04-25-2011, 11:47 AM
sounds good might keep the spam down

Ahahaha, I wish! If only it did...
No, the most spam at the moment comes from people still trying to acquire 10 posts.

Ravensshadow
04-25-2011, 04:08 PM
Pier accountantability is a must nowadays.

Wayne
04-28-2011, 12:01 PM
I dont like that idea... There is always a few who will exploit this.

Lvcifer
04-29-2011, 09:25 AM
I voted yes, Because It Is Usefull To See The Ancient And Professionnals Players !

jessemcleod
04-30-2011, 01:31 PM
In past games I have found it hard to get members of my guild to participate online. This almost makes it a mini game of sorts. Gaining experience to be elevated in position of the posters. Very cool idea.

muser11
05-04-2011, 02:46 AM
I vote yes !!

KisGeci
05-11-2011, 03:19 AM
It could really help in the long run, if they could integrate a filter system for low rep replies, so I vote yes.

Aelfwine
05-11-2011, 12:59 PM
there are always afew who exploit things and if they get caught should be punished otherwise... tbere should just be some form of regulation like a limit of how much a person could get demoted or raised per day, or maybe limits of posts per day if they are spammers/trolls/abusive... which this ranking system will probably implement. Plus on the positive side people with high points are and will be known to be highly trustable in their words... if not popular :3

Kharl
05-11-2011, 01:02 PM
I voted yes, as I do think it is good to identify those people who are posting good and accurate information. I am also glad to hear that there will be checks and balances to the system, as these sorts of things always get abused.

kelo1
05-12-2011, 01:53 AM
How about the rep sys can give you titles like soldier, ... lord .. king etc and maybe each week the guy with the best rep gets a bonus ingame.

Landrah
06-25-2011, 05:52 PM
Reputation would be a awesome idea so long as it's not one huge gigantic boring grind to get the bar for 0 to 100.

Darksinkin
06-26-2011, 06:33 AM
it should be nice the rep makes the game harder

Puppeteer
06-26-2011, 01:23 PM
It's applied to the forum, not the game. And we already have it.

Borvic
07-21-2011, 03:54 PM
ya, a system like that would do wonders for a mmorts in lederbords, and ranking thinking