Jump to content


Photo

Ideas For Ridding The Site Of N00bs

A first thought

33 replies to this topic

#26 cxwq

cxwq

    Member

  • Founders
  • 3,634 posts

Posted 30 March 2004 - 05:17 PM

Every post has a moderation ranking between -1 and 5.

Posts start with a score that depends on the poster's Karma:

Low Karma: 0
Average Karma: 1
High Karma: 2

Everyone starts out with average Karma so to get low Karma you have to work at it.

Users will be able to customize their forum view to see only posts above a specified score. High scoring posts might get linked in a sort of "interesting posts" box on the main portal.

Someone with moderation points to spend can bump a post up or down one point, and they have to select a reason from a fairly short drop down list. Examples would be: troll, informative, humorous, off-topic, etc.

If a post gets to -1, it's because two moderators have seperately decided to downgrade it. It becomes invisible to everyone except moderators - moderators can't take advantage of the view filters because they need to see all posts as part of their job function.
  • 0
<meta name="cxwq" content="mostly water">

#27 Guest_LonE_FoX_*

Guest_LonE_FoX_*
  • Guests

Posted 30 March 2004 - 06:28 PM

when does this karma go into effect
  • 0

#28 cxwq

cxwq

    Member

  • Founders
  • 3,634 posts

Posted 30 March 2004 - 07:00 PM

Fuck you.
  • 0
<meta name="cxwq" content="mostly water">

#29 Blaster

Blaster

    Member

  • Members
  • 256 posts

Posted 30 March 2004 - 08:22 PM

when does this karma go into effect

maybe if you

enlightened yourself to the


friggin search engine, you wouldn't have this problem. You can clearly see in this thread
http://nerfhaven.com...ic=190&hl=karma
That there isn't really a definite date set.
  • 0
"The voice of the American people has been heard; and, I won't imitate it, out of respect for the retarded."
Lewis Black (concerning the 04 election results)
www.lewisblack.net

#30 IronRhino

IronRhino

    Member

  • Members
  • 363 posts

Posted 30 March 2004 - 09:42 PM

Fuck you.

So basically assuming I have some of these points to spare, I could say about the quoted post:

Give it a 4, because it's humorus.

Is that the basics of it?
  • 0
She never told me she was a mime

Check out Foam Fortress

#31 cxwq

cxwq

    Member

  • Founders
  • 3,634 posts

Posted 31 March 2004 - 12:11 AM

Fuck you.

So basically assuming I have some of these points to spare, I could say about the quoted post:

Give it a 4, because it's humorus.

Is that the basics of it?

Only if it was already at a 3.

As a moderator, you'd have a set number of points to spend within a relatively short time frame. After which you'd have no mod points until your number comes up again in the crap shoot of moderation.

You can only use one mod point per post.

If you had mod points, you'd see a drop down box at the top of each post except your own. You'd click on the one above my post and select "humorous: +1", scroll down to the bottom of the page and click the "moderate!" button. The score of my post would go up by one, provided it wasn't already at 5. My Karma would simultaneously go up by one, provided it wasn't already at 1000. You would have one less mod point.
  • 0
<meta name="cxwq" content="mostly water">

#32 Langley

Langley

    LGLF - Since 2002

  • Administrators
  • 2,995 posts

Posted 31 March 2004 - 12:18 AM

Is there anything to keep moderators from retroactively moderating? i.e. if I wanted to temp-ban 1/2 I could just go back and blow all my points on his first few posts, even though he's not really bothering anyone now. Likewise, I could find every one of ATB's helpfull and informative posts and give them a point each, giving him above average carma even though less than 50% of his posts have any merit.
  • 0

You can poop in my toilet anytime champ.

2016 Nerf War Schedule
Bless you, my son. Now recite 3 New Members Guides and 5 Code of Conducts for your sins.


#33 Famine

Famine

    Member

  • Members
  • 545 posts

Posted 31 March 2004 - 12:19 AM

All of this shit must be giving you programmers and Comp Sci majors giant hard-ons. I'll understand it all once I see it in action, until then it's just a fancy box of theory wrapped in glossy speculation. I prefer to deal with gifts of guile and subterfuge myself. Maybe some GHB for da' ladys.
  • 0
~Famine
of Mag-7
East Coast Nerf 2005: Step It Up.
East Coast Nerf 2006: That's more like it.
East Coast Nerf 2007: I'm not driving to Massachusetts again.
East Coast Nerf 2008: Day of Regret.
East Coast Nerf 2009: Quid pro quo, douchebags!

#34 cxwq

cxwq

    Member

  • Founders
  • 3,634 posts

Posted 31 March 2004 - 03:28 PM

I could just go back and blow all my points

Nobody will have very many at any given time. I'm still working on the distribution algorithm but you're very likely to sign in and discover that you have between one and three mod points. They'll disappear at the end of the day and a few days later you'll discover you have 1-3 more. Temp banning someone would require four mod points be spent on two posts created in the last 24 hours so it would require a consensus of at minimum two moderators. Retroactive moderation won't be possible as there will be a time limit for how old a post can be and still be moderated. The forum doesn't gain when a month old post is moderated because most people have already read it.

Further, there will be very specific moderation guidelines which will prohibit vindictive or chummy moderation. If someone spends all their mod points on the same user, for good or ill, they will lose moderation privs. If someone moderates the post of a user they are engaged in an argument with, that would be similarly bad. The admins (and possibly eventually the users) will have a way to easily review moderation logs and rate them for fairness. If we spot trends that show a user is not following the spirit or the letter of the rules, they won't be moderating again. I suspect that within a few months of Karma being implemented about 10-15% of the users will be blacklisted for moderation. I think the rest of you are responsible enough to handle it.
  • 0
<meta name="cxwq" content="mostly water">


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users