Deadlocks in Debates

[Valka D'Ur]

I suppose the scoring and the level could be private. In any case I see no reason why we shouldn't try it out and see if it improves things. If it makes things worse then we can change it back.

Can the mods at least have this as an option?

We've already had this argumentdiscussion. If people could be counted on to use it responsibly, it would be an interesting tool to try out. But I've seen it used in ways that were beyond reprehensible. And I fail to see how a reputation system would cure the "debate deadlock" syndrome anyway. I can, however, see it leading to a "negative rep war".

Been there, done that, still harbor anger toward the people who abused it.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Gamedev system seems better

(can only rate a user once - not once per thread - once ever, weighted by your own personal rating).

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

On another board I'm on that uses reputation system on posts it turns into a nasty popularity contest. One time I somehow managed to drop 30 reputation points in a week ... despite not posting a thing.

 

[Hygro]

We've already had this argumentdiscussion. If people could be counted on to use it responsibly, it would be an interesting tool to try out. But I've seen it used in ways that were beyond reprehensible. And I fail to see how a reputation system would cure the "debate deadlock" syndrome anyway. I can, however, see it leading to a "negative rep war".

Been there, done that, still harbor anger toward the people who abused it.

I've never seen a negative rep war happen. I post on a forum where reputation is a bigger factor than what Mise and I are suggesting. Sometimes people do neg-backs but that's about it. The degree of moderating required in that forum is less than this one and that one is full of people who belong to a hobby/profession of dicks.

 

[Cutlass]

As I've mentioned in the past, I once broke a karma system by, just as a joke, giving a guy 1000 negative. The whole system crashed.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

I've never seen a negative rep war happen. I post on a forum where reputation is a bigger factor than what Mise and I are suggesting. Sometimes people do neg-backs but that's about it. The degree of moderating required in that forum is less than this one and that one is full of people who belong to a hobby/profession of dicks.

Well I have. See post above yours.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Gamedev has a good system though - check it out before going for +/- post reps.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Gamedev has a good system though - check it out before going for +/- post reps.

What if you change your mind though?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I've never seen a negative rep war happen. I post on a forum where reputation is a bigger factor than what Mise and I are suggesting. Sometimes people do neg-backs but that's about it. The degree of moderating required in that forum is less than this one and that one is full of people who belong to a hobby/profession of dicks.

I take you are referring to a forum where all the members happen to be named "Richard", right?

What happened at the forum I am referring to is still reaping consequences of the "reputation war"... several years later. I don't want to see that happen here.

 

[JollyRoger]

I like the current system where rep is built on yellow and red cards and where the people giving you rep are listed towards the upper righthand of the page.

 

[Hygro]

Yes the theme of the forum was for people named Richard. Sorry I wasn't clear.

 

[Perfection]

Sorry I wasn't clear.

No you aren't. You purposefully did that to make a joke.

 

[azzaman333]

We've already had this argumentdiscussion. If people could be counted on to use it responsibly, it would be an interesting tool to try out. But I've seen it used in ways that were beyond reprehensible. And I fail to see how a reputation system would cure the "debate deadlock" syndrome anyway. I can, however, see it leading to a "negative rep war".

Been there, done that, still harbor anger toward the people who abused it.

If you don't give the forum a chance to use it responsibly, it's kinda hard for people to use it responsibly.

 

[Padma]

When we see that 'the forum' doesn't behave responsibly with what little we give them, why should we expect them to behave more responsibly if we give them even more opportunity to be irresponsible?

 

[Souron]

The forum isn't about expertise anyway. In sites like Gamedev it makes sence to have a rep system because it identifies people who provide good help. Civ fanatics isn't that kind of site. It would not benefit from a rep system.

 

[Abaddon]

I like the current system where rep is built on yellow and red cards and where the people giving you rep are listed towards the upper righthand of the page.

I love JollyRoger

 

[Virote_Considon]

The forum isn't about expertise anyway. In sites like Gamedev it makes sence to have a rep system because it identifies people who provide good help. Civ fanatics isn't that kind of site. It would not benefit from a rep system.

CivFanatics is a forum dedicated to a video game serieass, and an important aspect of this site is discussing improving players' gameplay skills. Ergo, a rep system which identifies people who provide good help could certainly be of use. Remember, this is CivFanatics, not Off-TopicFanatics.

 

[Mise]

When we see that 'the forum' doesn't behave responsibly with what little we give them, why should we expect them to behave more responsibly if we give them even more opportunity to be irresponsible?

If you treat people like children, why should you expect them not to behave like children?

@Valka: for every example of a forum where it screwed things up, there's another example of a forum where it makes things much, much better.

And I explained how it would solve deadlock in debates earlier, you must have missed it It seems that there is a widespread hatred of deadlocked debates; anyone engaging in the incessant tit-for-tat quote-wars will surely get mass downvoted. That will discourage people from doing it in the future.

 

[Abaddon]

Even better, would be like some forum.. enough downvotes, and the post would be spoilered

 

[MobBoss]

And I explained how it would solve deadlock in debates earlier, you must have missed it It seems that there is a widespread hatred of deadlocked debates; anyone engaging in the incessant tit-for-tat quote-wars will surely get mass downvoted. That will discourage people from doing it in the future.

Here is a novel idea. If you dont like that, or cant handle that, then why dont you ignore it?

Doesnt that solve the issue from your perspective?