Reputation

Reputation (Full Version)

All Forums >> [AE Forum Resources] >> Forum Support and Suggestions

Message

UltraGuy -> Reputation (5/16/2011 9:01:20)
I think there should be reputation here in the Forums. Why: To know if the person is trustworthy or not.

Stray Cat -> RE: Reputation (5/16/2011 10:12:00)
Before proceeding, could I ask you to define what you mean by "reputation"? I have an idea of what you're suggesting, but I'd like for you to explain your proposed system a little more in-depth.

tflo -> RE: Reputation (5/16/2011 11:14:08)
He means voting people "up" or "down" based on how they answer questions or participate in discussions Stray Cat. This has been brought up a number of times. It's been decided that something like this won't be added to the forums. A reputation system can't always be trusted. The people on these forums can be trusted 99% of the time because if someone gives you a wrong answer to a question, someone else will point that out.

UltraGuy -> RE: Reputation (5/16/2011 23:38:06)
It is very self explanatory. There really is no need for me to explain it further.

Vivi -> RE: Reputation (5/17/2011 0:13:07)
I would disagree ULTRAGUY, and I must also ask that you not disregard requests for clarification in such a manner. Please consider that if we ask you to explain or expand upon a previous post, we do so for a well-established reason. It's difficult for users to discuss your suggestion in detail if they don't have a solid understanding of what it is you're suggesting. Suggestions like this one have been made numerous times in the past and turned down. One reason that those suggestions have been rejected is that a user-voted reputation system is not merit-based and therefore does not tell you anything about the trustworthiness of a user or their posting quality. Since there's no restriction on how votes are given out and generally there are only minor restrictions on how often votes can be made, such systems tend to turn into popularity contests rather than being a gauge of a user's helpfulness or trustworthiness as intended. Stray Cat asked you to expand upon your idea because without additional details we cannot determine how your idea is different from those previous suggestions if it does have some difference.

seventy two -> RE: Reputation (5/17/2011 1:29:42)
I don't want to be rude in saying this, but in a way there is already a bit of a reputation system in place with constructive/helpful title members(AKs probably fit in under this as well). I think it is a good system as it is now, because it is left to forum administration to determine whether or not someone is worthy of the additional influence that comes with it. Could it be expanded? Probably. Is it worth expanding? Not really since as others have pointed out, the community here is very trustworthy to begin with.

Seahawk -> RE: Reputation (5/17/2011 21:57:19)
We had a system once upon a time that involved a post rating system that let forum members give stars to posts that were voted as good (or bad...) and also gave the poster a "score" based on those ratings. Needless to say, it turned into a pretty much unmitigated disaster and was removed (though you can still see traces of it if you find an old enough post. And even that system wouldn't have helped you determine someone's "reputation" per se... it basically ended up being much more a test of popularity and was used for bragging rights. Hence one of the reasons it no longer exists... [;)]

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition

0.078125