But isn't the idea of a reputation system simply a way of aggregating all these post-ranks so that you can see which poster consistently makes desirable or undesirable posts?

I do think it's useful to be able to keep the posts flagged, since one issue with Reputation is that if someone makes a dozen posts in one day, and that day their Reputation goes down, how do they know exactly which posts did it? (Assuming this is technically possible.)

But I'm a believer that on forums, you are what you post. Your persona on a web forum is determined by what you choose to say. So to me, I'd rather see these post rankings aggregated to the user.

Sure it is. But it's the unwanted behavior we want to stop or reduce, not the posters. The members could use the current reporting system to warn mods that, in their opinion, certain posts need their flag color changed.

For further clarity as to why the post's flag was changed, the mod could highlight the undesirable word or phrase that triggered the new flag.

It was stated earlier by someone, perhaps even you, something to the effect that "I want to know that others find something in this post offensive too" .... well, there's the proof. Yup, something, is indeed considered offensive by others.

Original posters could edit their posts to remove or amend the offensive material and have their green flag restored. Everybody can experience a bad day sometimes and post without due care and attention and wish they could rewind and redo. Great. Go for it.

Perhaps a poster with more than a designated number of standing red and/or yellow flags gets a holiday? Maybe (like at the carnival) 3 yellow flags earns you one red flag, three red flags earns you the "Big Prize"

Sure it is. But it's the unwanted behavior we want to stop or reduce, not the posters. The members could use the current reporting system to warn mods that, in their opinion, certain posts need their flag color changed.

For further clarity as to why the post's flag was changed, the mod could highlight the undesirable word or phrase that triggered the new flag.

It was stated earlier by someone, perhaps even you, something to the effect that "I want to know that others find something in this post offensive too" .... well, there's the proof. Yup, something, is indeed considered offensive by others.

Original posters could edit their posts to remove or amend the offensive material and have their green flag restored. Everybody can experience a bad day sometimes and post without due care and attention and wish they could rewind and redo. Great. Go for it.

Perhaps a poster with more than a designated number of standing red and/or yellow flags gets a holiday? Maybe (like at the carnival) 3 yellow flags earns you one red flag, three red flags earns you the "Big Prize"

I think something like this could be fair, if it's technically feasible. And I like the idea that a designated number of standing flags automatically gets you a holiday... in some ways, it becomes more fair because it's very clear that a particular number of warnings get you a vacation. You have so many chances, and this is all well-known to you.

If that means we lose a lot of people who just can't be civil, well, that's not necessarily a bad outcome.

Perhaps a better question to be asked is, how many would leave ehMac if such a policy were implemented?
I prefer thinking about how many new, quality members would join or lurkers would finally post because the noise has gone away. :heybaby:

Perhaps a poster with more than a designated number of standing red and/or yellow flags gets a holiday? Maybe (like at the carnival) 3 yellow flags earns you one red flag, three red flags earns you the "Big Prize"

Just look at how the yellow/red card system gets soccer players diving and writhing around on the grass like they've been shot every time anyone goes near them. :rolleyes:

In real life we need police because anti-social people can cause you real harm. On an online forum, the worst someone can do is expose you to some pixels you find offensive. So I think the libertarian ideal of a completely self-policing community is more realistic online, but even here I see the value in the existence of some authorities being able to step in to limit escalation if things get ugly.

Just look at how the yellow/red card system gets soccer players diving and writhing around on the grass like they've been shot every time anyone goes near them. :rolleyes:

In real life we need police because anti-social people can cause you real harm. On an online forum, the worst someone can do is expose you to some pixels you find offensive. So I think the libertarian ideal of a completely self-policing community is more realistic online, but even here I see the value in the existence of some authorities being able to step in to limit escalation if things get ugly.

I generally think that it's the same kind of people to react badly to their post being flagged who are likely to act badly in the first place. That is, I do think that most reasonable people try to behave civilly most of the time, and if flagged, most reasonable people will assume there's a reason for it and try to figure out what they have done and make amends.

bryanc, I believe you've said yourself that you tend to be someone less argumentative in real life. Clearly, you see some sort of value in not exposing others to some soundwaves that they may find offensive. How is it different from pixels? Is it the degree of social connection?

bryanc, I believe you've said yourself that you tend to be someone less argumentative in real life. Clearly, you see some sort of value in not exposing others to some soundwaves that they may find offensive. How is it different from pixels? Is it the degree of social connection?

If I've said that I'm less argumentative in real life, that is at least partially misleading. I like to argue IRL as well, but IRL there are many more social cues that will help me avoid being accidentally confrontational... I won't pursue an argument if it's obvious the person I'm arguing with isn't enjoying it; if they're getting mad or taking it personally, for example. There's also the fact that arguments IRL have to occur in real time, so I can't just sit down and start dissecting someone's position when I feel like it.

So I'm less likely to get into these sorts of arguments IRL both because of the constraints of real time communications, real time commitments, and real time variations in mood. But also because I can pick up social cues that might let me know it's not always appreciated more easily.

If I've said that I'm less argumentative in real life, that is at least partially misleading. I like to argue IRL as well, but IRL there are many more social cues that will help me avoid being accidentally confrontational... I won't pursue an argument if it's obvious the person I'm arguing with isn't enjoying it; if they're getting mad or taking it personally, for example. There's also the fact that arguments IRL have to occur in real time, so I can't just sit down and start dissecting someone's position when I feel like it.

So I'm less likely to get into these sorts of arguments IRL both because of the constraints of real time communications, real time commitments, and real time variations in mood. But also because I can pick up social cues that might let me know it's not always appreciated more easily.

I may have put that unclearly in an attempt to be succinct.

But then from what you are saying, wouldn't flagged posts or changes to karma also have a similar effect as social cues? To tone down the argument because other people are not enjoying it?

But then from what you are saying, wouldn't flagged posts or changes to karma also have a similar effect as social cues? To tone down the argument because other people are not enjoying it?

Possibly/probably. It would depend on who I thought was making the changes and why.

I would certainly respond more favourably to a few dozen anonymous 'dislikes' (provided that any one member could only click once and only members could express an opinion - i.e. the dislikes have to be representative of the community here) than I would to a yellow card bestowed by a moderator who's responding to an individual who objected to what I had to say.

Indeed, I can say with confidence that members being given a holiday by the mayor for what one perceives as unfair or unreasonable grounds is exactly what would be likely to drive me away (even if it was not me that was put on vacation). I know that's not what the ehMax is proposing, but I think it's worth emphasizing that turning the mods into thread cops who ban posters in order to "teach them a lesson" is a bad idea(TM).

Is not part of the problem, that we failed to use the tools we had at hand. Most of us have admitted not using the report button for anything other than SPAM! Now this is going to change to let mods know to flag someone or give them bad points? This will lead to a lot of extra work for the mods and if it does not happen quick enough will we complain that it takes to long and the offense is over?

Just for the heck of it, I went through the thread and counted individual member's posts where they expressed an opinion of a new system. I realize that only a small percentage of members have weighed in at this point but here is what I determined by rating members who made their opinions known: For a new system 6. Against any change 18. Neutral 3. That translates into two thirds of the board who have expressed an opinion, feel no changes are necessary. Interesting.

That noted, it is not a real perception of the board's overall opinion on the issue and perhaps one way to see what all members think would be to run an anonymous poll with a range of options to get a feel for those who do not wish to publicly reveal their preference.

Something like this, but I will leave any poll up to the mayor who is the one who should properly author the poll:

1. I am in favour of a new Reputation system of moderation.
2. I think the current system of moderation works well enough, but could use some changes.
3. I would not want a system that 'labels' me by the content of my posts.
4. If it isn't broke, why fix it? It works fine the way it is.

At any rate, however a poll would be worded, it would allow lurkers and shy posters the opportunity to express their opinion. At the end of the day, isn't it those people who some here think are the ones who want such change?

Sinc: a poll is brilliant idea.

And in the spirit of moving on (feeling that I've made my own views clear by now), no more posts will I make on this subject - at least, not in this seemingly interminable thread.

Perhaps a better understanding of the system may assuage some of the fears.

Reputation/Karma systems are used on thousands of forums. To date, I don't recall hearing of one member either dying from shame or being ostracized into oblivion by the madding crowd over his/her rep level. Many forum sites find the system quite useful. It allows (especially) new members to identify those members who have proven themselves to be the most helpful and friendly. It makes them more approachable for new members.

Most systems assign an icon (dot, etc) in response to an internal numeric value. Messages are often attached to the number of dots, such as "Username is on a distinguished road" To those who may have earned a low reputation by their behaviour are assigned such condemnations as "Username can only hope to improve" It isn't a system to denigrate or punish anyone. Rather, it is a visual system to identify the best of the members (in conduct and character) as a reward for their behaviour. And yes, you can tie the system to other benefits, like admission to an exclusive forum area. (Strange how the take on a reputation system turned around when people started seeing potential for personal gain)

I've belonged to hundreds of forums since the dial-up bbs days and I've never seen any group on any forum get so bent out of shape over what is generally perceived as something of a game. Speaking as a forum admin myself, I can say this isn't something that will be overly difficult to administer. The alternative would be to use the internal infraction system, under which offending members would receive official reprimands, warnings, loss of privilege and ultimately be banned from the site.

Place is turning into a kindergarden. LOL

Place is turning into a kindergarden. LOL

Nice to see you back! :)

Nice to see you back! :)

Never left Don, just stopped posting, too much other stuff on the go right now.

Thanks everyone who provided feedback on the possibility of a reputation / points / karma system.

Based on feedback, both on the boards and in private, at this time we're not going to go with this kind of system.

For now, I am going to look at having a separate "Politics, Religion, Social Issues" section. I'm going to slightly re-arrange forums so that it isn't a sub-forum, "ghetto" forum, but part of a slightly expanded Everything Else forum.

Same board rules will still apply to the Politics etc.. forum, but those who want to avoid the topic may do so more easily.

As for mod-style, I will continue to occasionally post public general reminders when needed, and also send out private messages. To this point, almost none did not contain any wording about possibility of being put on vacation, but they will most likely include this possibility.

I'll also post more clear forum "debating" rules, as well as the registration rules.

At some point, we will also have a better "+1" type button (That is well implemented) to allow membership to give positive votes for posts.

One other thing, I read a ton of posts in various forums, and the decorum has been quite good lately in everything else. That's really fantastic and greatly appreciated.

Maybe it's this thread... maybe it's someone leaving... maybe both... maybe it's the weather.. maybe it's the shoes... either way, it's great, and that's my only goal in all of this.

With that too.. I'm going to close this thread. Feel free to PM me if you wanted to get anything other feedback in.