rep thread (dont kill me)

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by CvilleFencer

I have suggested/whined a few times now that you should not be able to gain rep points in any section other than the Armoury or Fencing sections of the board. Newer fencers coming into the forum and asking purposeful questions may look at the rep system when trying to judge the quality or accuracy of the response. If the questions was "how can I keep my epee tip contact spring in place" and one of the "water cooler brats" happened to be cruising through looking for some fun they might reply something like "Fill the point of your epee with super glue and let it dry overnight". Their post would sound and look to the uninformed as if it were coming from a more accurate/qualified person than DHC, PurpleFencer or even me! That’s just not right, and I think it is a bit of an abuse of the system.

That's why there's the "armorer" and "fencing expert" statuses (stai?) under peoples' names if they're knowlegable. Also, this board is visited enough that bad advice, if ever given, is corrected within a few minutes by someone who knows what they're talking about.

[Gav]

I'd just like to point out that I noticed that some user's rep' suddenly jumped. It was almost as though there was some rep' farming going on. Anyone want to admit to that?

I know rep' is supposed to be fun, but if it is there why not at least let it have some credibility? I was thinking on the way to work that you could have two rep ratings: Social (earned in the Water Cooler) and Fencing (earned in Fencing Discussion and Armoury). Each would have a different meaning and give you an indicator of the person. I suppose you could have an nth degree of rep with a rating for every board, but let's face it, that would be complex and a little daft.

[Zelda]

thats why we dont rep in Fantasy Land (IIRC). I like the idea of a 2 set system.....

[Insipiens]

But threads go off-topic so quickly (even in the fencing discussion and armoury sections) that you could easily get rep points for randomness even if you excluded the water cooler. In fact it might encourage some to post more off-topic comments in those sections.

[Louweasel]

Originally Posted by Insipiens

surely it is because you "have a spectacular aura about you" ?

That too!

Seriously, I am rather ashamed to say it, but I like rep points because (*blistering honesty*) I am vain and I like it when people say nice things about me. This may betray an underlying insecurity and make me a shallow weasel, but I feel you all deserve the truth!

[Maeve_Mari]

Originally Posted by Gav

I'd just like to point out that I noticed that some user's rep' suddenly jumped. It was almost as though there was some rep' farming going on. Anyone want to admit to that?

I know rep' is supposed to be fun, but if it is there why not at least let it have some credibility? I was thinking on the way to work that you could have two rep ratings: Social (earned in the Water Cooler) and Fencing (earned in Fencing Discussion and Armoury). Each would have a different meaning and give you an indicator of the person. I suppose you could have an nth degree of rep with a rating for every board, but let's face it, that would be complex and a little daft.

I'm not admitting to anything, but... I would like to point out that as people's time on board and reputation rises, so has the point value of their reputation points. I remember watching a slow increase when we were in the early reputation days quickly progress much faster as only a few high posters could boost your numbers into the next category. I'm not always sure how much I had or have at what point, (seems points come in multi-packs, probably associated with a particular topic) but at I think I have seen some reputation points as high as 14 given to me by a single poster. Get a few of them on one or two topic posts and your rep rises very fast!

I'd agree that the point system as it is now, does not indicate how useful in terms of answering fencing questions one's responses have been. But, the way the point system is set up on this forum, it never would. The removal of negative points and the limitations on the number of points awarded to the same person prevents the system from identifying who are the more proficient fencing respondants. And here's two more examples of why I don't think limiting the point awards to just Fencing Discussion and Armory would produce any better results.

Let's say in saber that Oiuyt is tops in providing answers to your questions. Consistently, when you ask a question or engage in a conversation you find that his posts are always "on the money." You award him a rep point for coming through with a comment that helped you out. Then what? The next time he prepares a significantly helpful post, since you already gave him a point for his last good post, you are now unable to award points again, until you award points to 15 (or so?) more people who also have significant posts, before you can award Oiuyt another point. If consistently the only person you find able to answer your saber questions is Oiuyt, then you are just unable to give him his due.

Another example would be with regard to the tortuous "fencing" discussions on the fencing discussions board. Look at the disparity, yet passion, in the responses on ROW, Timing, Flicks, and Marching! Would you expect that the, most significant point awards should go to the the fevered posters rallying behind whoever's disagreeing with DanInMi, though he is often correct, or should Dan get the points for actually having found the exact citation he's arguing. Or on the issue of New Timing should Alan get the point awards because his rantings over the timing changed are the loudest, or do we award our points to the chap who told him to sit down and be quiet? And on a weapons superiority question, do can we only consider awarding points to Inq because he is truly passionate in his belief that there isn't any worthy weapon class outside of saber, or do more point awards go to Jeff for his very reasonable and diplomatic exploration into the benefits for having a discussion for each weapon? Even if you limited point awards to only Fencing Discussion and Armory, you still would have a skewed distribution for points distributed.

One of the things I do for a living, and yes, I do actually work!, is I recommend/sell/implement these community of practice forums to unsuspecting fools, I mean, focused project teams in large organizations intent on having this resource to assist with identifying their community experts and centralizing the vast resources they produce and share. And in working with these teams, the very best of them are the ones that let the community system work unencombered by excessive restrictions and instruction. In a community, the natural actions and activities of the community members make the process work the way it is supposed to. Over regulation and instruction, in any aspect of our lives (as we have certainly discussed here a few times), only stifles the progress of free thought and action.

[Soldier]

Originally Posted by Zelda

thats why we dont rep in Fantasy Land (IIRC). I like the idea of a 2 set system.....

We do get rep in Fantasy Land.

[Gav]

Originally Posted by Maeve_Mari

... really long post ...

I seem to have touched a nerve there.

Maeve:

It's not very controversial idea, some people have complained that Rep' as a concept to them doesn't work; in response I suggested a different accounting method; that is all.

[JackSparrow]

I thought it was a good idea. It would let you know whether someone is a fencing expert or just a generally lovely person. Its good to have a mixture of both here but I could see a situation where a novice takes a high rep pointed members advice on tactics/ technique as gospel when they themselves are still learning as a fencer. Like Gav says, you could go over the top with the idea but two ratings would do just fine.

[Insipiens]

maybe we should allow those so foolish as to be guided by an opinion poll (of sorts) to suffer in their folly.

Do many people presume they know what the rep points are given for without searching for an explanation on the board?

[esskreemr]

Originally Posted by Gav

I'd just like to point out that I noticed that some user's rep' suddenly jumped. It was almost as though there was some rep' farming going on. Anyone want to admit to that?

Nothing to admit. You'll probably also notice that the users whose rep points jumped also have a large number of posts. There is probably a "community" of 20 or 30 (more?) forum members who give rep points out frequently and as a result recieve them as well.

Part of the problem as M_M touched upon, is that if I think a post is worth repping, I can't meter my reps, it's all or none, as a result somebody might get 6+ rep points for something I would normally only give a couple for.

Instead of kaboshing the whole system, can you make it so we can choose the number of rep points (out of our maximum) that we can dispense per post? Another option would then be to limit the total number of rep points you can dispense for the day.

I understand there are limitations to the software that may not permit this. These are merely suggestions.

[VorpalCat]

Originally Posted by Gav

I was thinking on the way to work that you could have two rep ratings: Social (earned in the Water Cooler) and Fencing (earned in Fencing Discussion and Armoury).

Same general thought, different direction: instead of the location of the post determining the type of rep, what about two rep buttons on all posts, one button for fencing rep and one for social/everything else? (What's that? Did I hear Craig scream? )

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by esskreemr

Part of the problem as M_M touched upon, is that if I think a post is worth repping, I can't meter my reps, it's all or none, as a result somebody might get 6+ rep points for something I would normally only give a couple for.

Instead of kaboshing the whole system, can you make it so we can choose the number of rep points (out of our maximum) that we can dispense per post? Another option would then be to limit the total number of rep points you can dispense for the day.

I really like this suggestion. I'm going to go cross-post it into the suggestions part of the forum.

Incidently, this is my most recent comment that gained rep:

About 6-7 months after I started until my first competition I think. Wasn't allowed to bout at until almost then (~5 months).

-B :)

WTF? Why would THAT (in the thread about how long people had fenced prior to first competing) get rep? Okay, I was on topic and answered the question, but so did pretty much every post in that thread. No insight, nothing of particular value to the forum, other than a single data point that had been requested.

I'm really starting to believe that I might never understand how rep is awarded on the board.

-B :)

[Inquartata]

It was probably awarded for no better reason than because you fence epee, at least occasionally. Haven't you noticed the ongoing organized effort to game the system?

[Prometheus]

Life was so much easier when people were judged by the Galaga sprites next to their name.

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

It was probably awarded for no better reason than because you fence epee, at least occasionally. Haven't you noticed the ongoing organized effort to game the system?

I suppose that's one theory. I'm not sure if I've fenced epee since November. I fence foil more often than I fence epee (most recently in a competition yesterday). Of course my post doesn't mention what weapon I was fencing at the time.

-B :)

[The0ne]

my favorite comment i got with a rep point (strangely a positive one):

Send your Strong Bad worship to the crapper and grow up

that made me laugh indeed.

[Victor]

Originally Posted by achilleus

I'd be disappointed if rep points actually fulfilled a useful function ....

Yeah.

If someone's fretting about rep points and the purpose they serve and how horribly unfair this mean, mean world is ... chances are they've got other ego/self-esteem issues to deal with off this forum.

[Victor]

And has anyone mentioned yet how inherently shifty any such judgmental system is? For example, it might not matter how incredibly wise and brilliant your 8,000 messages have been -- if people don't like you for some vaguely petty reason, you don't get "rep."

It's not the rep points I distrust; it's the community's ability to award them justly.

So might as well have fun with 'm instead. (shrug)

[swordwench]

Originally Po