I have to disagree with this, due to the problems before concerning personality downvoting.
I didn't realize something like this had been done before. Alas, I've only been a part of the monastery for a very short time.
I feel that a system like this would be abused more than its intended use.
I do see the potential for some abuse but rather than discount the whole idea, I'd prefer to see suggestions on how to make such a system less susceptible to those who might make ill use of it. If users like merlyn haters anonymou (who has -12XP) can vote at all, there is probably room for improvement. Although your points about a different system are well taken, I'm still inclined to think that an extension of the current voting/experience system makes more sense than something entirely new.
The issue that I'm trying to address is well-defined. I would like to reward people when I witness them making an exceptional contribution via the CB.
Here are a couple suggestions which might help to mitigate potential problems:
- Only allow upvoting on the personal reputation node.
- Only make the personal reputation node available when someone has been active in the last X hours.
- Make a vote on the personal reputation node less likely to affect XP than normal nodes.
Can you think of any others?
-sauoq
"My two cents aren't worth a dime.";
| [reply] |
I didn't realize something like this had been done before.
Well, as far as I know, your "personal reputation node" is a unique idea.
I do see the potential for some abuse but rather than discount the whole idea, I'd prefer to see suggestions on how to make such a system less susceptible to those who might make ill use of it.
The problem lies therein. You cannot control how people vote. The XP system is designed to show approval of someone's posted knowledge by rating it ++ or --. By rating information, you get the general (voting) public's opinion on if this information is worthwhile. The levels (and benefits obtained from friar+) are only there to allow outsiders to help maintain the site. Granted, our fearless leader has put in a lot of effort to making PerlMonks what it is, but Tim Vroom can't possibly keep track of and fix every problem in Everything. The users that have been here from early on, that showed earnest interest in helping PM grow, became editors, pmdevs and gods. They weren't chosen by their reputation number, but by their social reputation and expressed desire to assist in keeping PerlMonks running.
I think your idea to show some appreciation to another monk is a wonderful idea, however, I don't think that it should be done using XP. Seeing my XP jump by 5 points don't really mean much to me, but when someone likes my post and either posts a reply or private messages me, I reap a greater benefit than a mere XP jump. Knowing that a fellow monk that, odds are, I've never met appreciates my assistance in some way makes me feel warm and fuzzy all over. XP just doesn't do that.
My idea is not the best. It was merely an off-the-cuff example of some other means of displaying appreciation. I think, however, that expressing your gratitude or admiration in person (so to speak) would be much more flattering and acknowledgeable. Personally, seeing that five people ++ed my reputation node would mean nothing to me, despite the fact that someone either: liked my ideas/personality/rant-in-the-CB or felt like dropping a vote to use it up.
The two main reasons I must disagree with this is that (1) XP means absolutely nothing (i.e. XP + $1.00 = cup of coffee) and (2) voting would be anonymous. Now, I don't want personality contests and ego trips to run rampant across the Monastery, but the best way to show appreciation would be to openly show your gratitude towards another. It doesn't have to be public (in the form of a post), it could be as simple as a private message. Just like considering nodes, I feel that if someone is going to show appreciation or ++ a personal rep node, they should let their fellow monk know that they personally appreciate his or her work.
John J Reiser
newrisedesigns.com
| [reply] |
| [reply] |
I have to disagree with this, due to the problems before concerning personality downvoting.
Almost as bad as the "frontpaging a totally useless thread because you have an early standard response in it' problem isn't it ;-p | [reply] |
I figured this would come up.
I FP'ed this after my second reply, around midnight last night. This does seem very relevant, sauoq makes a strong argument, and my decision to frontpage this stems from the amount of articles previously written about personality voting.
Yes, I feel this is useful. No, I don't think I overstepped my bounds.
John J Reiser
newrisedesigns.com
| [reply] |