Reputation System

[valpo04]

I have installed a new reputation system that allows you to give rep to a poster based on their posts.

When you click the heart icon under their name, you will have the option to agree/disagree with the post and leave a comment.  This will add/subtract from the users reputation level.  

How you accumulate rep points:

• Someone likes one of your posts
• You write a new post (1 point)
• You create a new thread (3 points)

Every 10 points you receive increases your "Reputation Power"  (under your username) by one and every 100 points adds another bar image.

If you want to see your current number of points, go to your profile and it displays there.

To see who has given you rep, click on "View Reputation" while viewing your profile.


There are some rules to giving rep...

You can only give out reputation 10 times a day and you must give it to 3 different people before you can rep the same person twice.

Enjoy!

[valpo04]

I have updated everyone to count all posts and topics created before today so everyone's reputation is up to date!

[covufan]

When logged in, will we be able to sort members by reputation?

[valpo04]

When logged in, will we be able to sort members by reputation?

If you scroll down to Forum Stats on the main page and then click "More Stats" you can scroll down to a listing of Best and Worst reputations.

[agibson]

Is "Worst" for negative reps?

Do you know the calculus for how points and topics are counted?

Looks... possibly unbalanced.  Like just posting a lot (I'm not looking at anyone in particular here!) would matter more for your rep than what actual users had to say.  And, we already have the separate post count.  (Though, I guess the old post-count-only labels are gone?)

Anyhow, seems like a fun enough game.  Might even be helpful for newcomers, to help sort out who's who.

[valpo04]

Is "Worst" for negative reps?

Do you know the calculus for how points and topics are counted?

Yes and no I do not.  There is an algorithm that determines how much your rep is worth.  For example, if you have a high rep and you rep someone else, that counts for more than someone who doesn't have as high of rep.

Looks... possibly unbalanced.  Like just posting a lot (I'm not looking at anyone in particular here!) would matter more for your rep than what actual users had to say.  And, we already have the separate post count.  (Though, I guess the old post-count-only labels are gone?)

Thats kinda the point.  The more threads you make and posts you make the more reputation you gain.  Now if your posts are bad or people don't like them, you run the risk of losing reputation... and again, if someone with a lot of rep downvotes one of your post, that can more than wipe out the positive points you received for posting.

Anyhow, seems like a fun enough game.  Might even be helpful for newcomers, to help sort out who's who.

Yep... just a way to show who our most valued members are as well as a way to give kudos for good posts.

[valporun]

The reputation system can also be a way to silence some of the harshest critics, though we know not all of them will keep quiet, with football season ending soon, and basketball season getting underway.

[agibson]

There is an algorithm that determines how much your rep is worth.  For example, if you have a high rep and you rep someone else, that counts for more than someone who doesn't have as high of rep.

Interesting!  It looks like you get ~1 point per post, maybe a bit more for starting topics.  And that the "Reputation Power" by posts is "Reputation Power mod 10" (divided by 10, rounded down).  I was worried that this would swap whatever you'd get from people actually clicking "Add Reputation", but I'm not really sure what that's worth.

But, I do see that we now have a "worst" at -30.  So, maybe even one ding can be significant.

*shrug* 

[agibson]

The reputation system can also be a way to silence some of the harshest critics, though we know not all of them will keep quiet, with football season ending soon, and basketball season getting underway.

I suppose one could probably add a system to _really_ silence them.

Maybe something like reputation slowly returning to 0 over time, and that below a certain threshold you'd not be allowed to post.

Or, perhaps, with a user-defined threshold, and you'd only see posts from people with reps above that threshold.

*shrug*  Probably too complicated - the mods here have managed to keep things civil with conventional tactics.

But, what community's not made better by ranking the members?

[agibson]

But, I do see that we now have a "worst" at -30.  So, maybe even one ding can be significant.

Looks like it can, indeed, be significant.  At least on the positive side, one test added a lot - maybe 10% of my own reputation?

So, maybe the balance is OK. 

Where was that, oh, right,
*shrug*

[valporun]

I don't know. I feel like the "reputation system" is just too much. I mean we're here to add our perspectives/opinions based on what topics and issues for Valpo we're wanting to add our 2 cents too. The "reputation" interest could already be seen based on what people had to say. We don't need to be like newspaper websites or Facebook where we can like or dislike what someone has to say by clicking a 'good' or 'weak' opinion button.

[setshot]

Censorship is  . 

[valpo04]

I don't know. I feel like the "reputation system" is just too much. I mean we're here to add our perspectives/opinions based on what topics and issues for Valpo we're wanting to add our 2 cents too. The "reputation" interest could already be seen based on what people had to say. We don't need to be like newspaper websites or Facebook where we can like or dislike what someone has to say by clicking a 'good' or 'weak' opinion button.

I like it... there have been many times where I've agreed with someone or wanted to say "good post" but don't have anything else to add, so I don't post it.  This way, people can see when someone likes their post (or dislikes it) and can get proper credit.

[covufan]

I don't know. I feel like the "reputation system" is just too much. I mean we're here to add our perspectives/opinions based on what topics and issues for Valpo we're wanting to add our 2 cents too. The "reputation" interest could already be seen based on what people had to say. We don't need to be like newspaper websites or Facebook where we can like or dislike what someone has to say by clicking a 'good' or 'weak' opinion button.

I like it... there have been many times where I've agreed with someone or wanted to say "good post" but don't have anything else to add, so I don't post it.  This way, people can see when someone likes their post (or dislikes it) and can get proper credit.

I like as well.  Also, it appears that many did not like "rink's" post, as his rating went way down.

[valpo04]

I am still working on an issue of only one bar showing up for reputation power.  The more rep you have, the more little green bars you should have. 

[setshot]

I started off as a 9,now a 3. How do I get to zero?

[vuweathernerd]

I started off as a 9,now a 3. How do I get to zero?

is that your new goal, since you can't seem to persuade the university to drop football?

[covufan]

I started off as a 9,now a 3. How do I get to zero?

Keep on posting about nepotism and dropping football and you'll be in the red soon enough. 

[agibson]

I am still working on an issue of only one bar showing up for reputation power.  The more rep you have, the more little green bars you should have. 

Ah - I figured it just required some big chunk of "reputation" to get that second bar.

Random issue with the upgrade.  With the reputation system, in the old software, there was a screen (from your profile some place) where you could see people who had +'d or -'d you.  Is that now gone?  Necessary,  I guess, for the kind of direct feedback that you mentioned.

I do sympathize with valporun.  There's a certain risk of group think, and it probably does act as a form of censorship.  "Reputation" is already built into social structures, do we need an additional external validation of it?  But, it's also sort of a cute toy, "Ooh - look - shiny lights!".

[valpo04]

I am still working on an issue of only one bar showing up for reputation power.  The more rep you have, the more little green bars you should have. 

Ah - I figured it just required some big chunk of "reputation" to get that second bar.

Random issue with the upgrade.  With the reputation system, in the old software, there was a screen (from your profile some place) where you could see people who had +'d or -'d you.  Is that now gone?  Necessary,  I guess, for the kind of direct feedback that you mentioned.

I do sympathize with valporun.  There's a certain risk of group think, and it probably does act as a form of censorship.  "Reputation" is already built into social structures, do we need an additional external validation of it?  But, it's also sort of a cute toy, "Ooh - look - shiny lights!".

With the upgrade, it is now in the drop down menu when you hover over "Profile Info" inside the Profile screen.

[agibson]

Gotcha - thanks.

[valpo04]

The Reputation System has been uninstalled.  It may be replaced with a "upvote/downvote" feature that will list the top topics in the info center.

[agibson]

Ah!  What prompted the switch?  There are pros and cons, certainly - we debated some of them around here someplace.

[VUfan]

A poster RPI System?

[agibson]

Based on "wins" and "losses" in forum arguments, and the win-loss records of your opponents?  Nice!