Introducing the Rep System

[Sumiki]

The red stands out about as much as the green does, to be honest.

[LQ1998]

 

I'm skeptical about this. I'll wait a little while before passing judgement on it, though. Hard to tell how something like this will turn out

 

The green is pretty grating, though. Any way we could change it out for something that fits the blue?

 

This reply is a tad off-topic to the current discussion; however, the dark red used for multiple buttons on the forums would fit better than the green or a blue.

 

Only problem I could see with that is that red it default for the dislike or down-rep button on Ip board forums that have it.

[believe victims]

We have updated the system so members cannot like their own posts. Thanks for the feedback!

 

tbh i didn't see the harm in keeping it enabled, since you didn't have the total enabled. At worst, someone likes every post they make to give themselves an ego boost.

[Reznas]

 

We have updated the system so members cannot like their own posts. Thanks for the feedback!

 

tbh i didn't see the harm in keeping it enabled, since you didn't have the total enabled. At worst, someone likes every post they make to give themselves an ego boost.

 

 

But considering this a reputation system, liking your owns posts is essentially giving yourself reputation, which is unmerited and kind of annoying to be quite honest.

 

-Rez

 

EDIT: Also, is it just me, or are the staff the only ones abusing the system. (Kakaru and HH...)

Edited February 12, 2014 by Reznas

[believe victims]

 

 

We have updated the system so members cannot like their own posts. Thanks for the feedback!

 

tbh i didn't see the harm in keeping it enabled, since you didn't have the total enabled. At worst, someone likes every post they make to give themselves an ego boost.

 

 

But considering this a reputation system, liking your owns posts is essentially giving yourself reputation, which is unmerited and kind of annoying to be quite honest.

 

-Rez

 

EDIT: Also, is it just me, or are the staff the only ones abusing the system. (Kakaru and HH...)

 

 

So I'm not allowed to enjoy my own posts?

[fishers64]

EDIT: Also, is it just me, or are the staff the only ones abusing the system. (Kakaru and HH...)

 

I think Kakaru and HH are the only ones brave enough to announce their abuse to the forums. And I think HH was just giving too many likes to other people's posts, not ego-boosting herself.

 

On an unrelated note, self-liking actually hurts you in some respects, due to the tab on your profile that tells you what people like. If you self-like everything, everything will be on there, including stuff nobody else likes, defeating the idea that you can tell at-a-glance what people like. I'm already using that feature of the system to my advantage.

[Kayru]

I think it's a good, smart addition. Not sure I like the terms 'reputation' OR 'like' (I'm personally a fan of 'kudos'), but I'm guessing there isn't a straightforward way to change that... not that it's a priority either.

And to those mentioning that the green 'stands out', well good! Forums can be such a ridiculous amalgam of info that it's hard to see at a glance what your interactive items are. I like the green, and it makes sense too.

 

[Toa Of Anarchy]

So when to like a post? Only if it is incredible, or just makes sense, or like every post you see?

[CroMagnonMan]

Pardon me, I completely forgot that I posted here.

 

I don't really have much to say here, you literally are arguing with yourself.

Don't see how, but okay.

 

If people will always exist who desire to create content for others to appreciate, how is giving people a method to show their appreciation not going to encourage those people.

I never said it wouldn't, since I wasn't attempting to present a definite view of what the rep system will acomplish, and it is indeed plausible that the rep system will be beneficial in that respect. I was addressing the hypothetical scenario, presented in your post, of people "competing" for likes. I was trying to suggest that someone who wants to create something that can be appreciated is different from someone who wants to be appreciated -- and especially to be appreciated more than others -- and creates something as a means to that end. The latter type is what I picture when I hear the word "competition" and it is not something I personally consider desirable as a matter of principle.

 

How is content that appeals to the widest assortment of people going to expend the least amount of creative ingenuity? Have you ever tried making things that people will like? It's REALLY hard! And it takes a ton of creativity!

My point was that the attempt to appeal to the most people, if done solely for that reason, will be undergone with the least amount of effort thought necessary to accomplish that goal and to minimize risk -- operating under the assumption that the things that "most people" like already exist in forms they are familiar with, therefore attempting to appeal to "most people" means identifying and mimicking these preexisting forms. Thus less creative effort and less experimentation.

 

To be clear, I'm not saying that widely appealing things in general are low effort. I am speaking strictly of what kind of content such an agenda might potentially produce.

 

And that last sentence...if an incentive doesn't encourage an activity, by definition it's not an incentive?

What I meant was that giving people motive to create "good" content will not necessarily increase the number of people actually capable of it or with the drive for it (the most important part, in my opinion).

 

(Also, I looked and apparently the word "incentivize" doesn't exist as far as the dictionary is concerned. Woops. Pardon my lack of clarity.)

 

I don't know for sure the rep system will do anything, but my gut says it will because people love internet points, and will do whatever they can to get it. Which is a good thing, since creativity activity on this site is exactly what we need right now?

But even just the way you put it there -- "will do whatever they can to get it" -- makes me cringe because I picture people who are ruthless or voracious in obtaining popularity. And furthermore "internet points" sounds like the basest goal anyone could have. "Come get your internet points! You know you want 'em!" Do I want such people to compose the creative stock of this forum? Not really, no -- bearing in mind that this is just what your words conjure up for me, not that I am suggesting this is your meaning. But perhaps you can understand where I'm coming from (and hopefully I am not arguing with myself this time).