Reputation score and ideas

[Boobinator]

Hi, this will probably come off as a pretty nerdy and pointless number-crunching idea, but that's me

Reputation, by nature, is bound to increase with time. Mostly because sooner or later you receive some reputation no matter how little you post. This is all fun of course, but it also means that reputation becomes more of an activity or "time since account creation" number than the poster's value.

Seeing as it takes 100 posts to achieve reputation to begin with, my idea is simply this:
Add a stat next to the reputation meter that counts the reputation per post quote. You could of course argue that I could do this calculation manually, but hey, I'm not Rain man :tongue:

So for example, someone with 10 000 reputation and 5000 posts would have a rep/post value of 2. And someone with 200 posts and 1000 reputation would have a rep/post value of 5. That number therefore indicates that the 200-posts guy in general writes more appreciated posts than the 5000-posts guy.

Like I said, perhaps it's stupid, but I think it fills a function and also, it's a little fun


Another thing, which I might as well post in this thread, is regarding the "I'd give rep points to the guy above because..."-thread in the Games and Stuff section of the board. Perhaps I'll get flamed for this, but I think it should be removed. It's just reputation giving for the heck of it, and totally screws up the whole idea of reputation as a measure of contribution to the forum. I see many people who are active in threads posting links and valuable information with way less reputation than those in the above mentioned thread. And I admit I've posted in it as well, but that doesn't prevent me from thinking the thought that it's kind of a weird thread.

Again, not the end of the world, but I thought I'd just share my thoughts here with you (FO crew) and see what you think about all of this.
Any feedback appreciated :hatsoff:

And thanks for providing a super-awesome website and keeping the close contact with people on this board! It's much appreciated and this is in my eyes the best community on the internet.
Don't ever sell out or change any of all this (except for the better) :thumbsup:

 

[Artimus]

An interesting idea that I wouldn't mind seeing in place.

Banning the "I'd give rep..." thread won't stop people from giving rep willy-nilly, but for the life of me, I've never seen what value that thread brings to the board.

 

[Shindekudasai]

I definitely agree with Boobinator, especially on the second half of his (her?) posting. I mean, one person comes to mind (I guess some probably know who I'm talking about) that solely goes to this thread to spread and receive enough rep so he can give negative rep more often. That kinda screws up the whole purpose of the reputation system. Especially if noone does anything about it and the rules aren't applied properly. And I'm not afraid to say it, even if probably half of this boards administration hates me now.

 

[Vanilla Bear]

Maybe Im too tired right now, but this doesnt make sense to me.

Because you dont get the same amount of points every time you get repped.

So lets say you have 100 posts and you got repped 2 times by members with 1,000 rep each.
Then you have 20 rep points. So your rep/post value was 0.2 right?

But if you have 100 posts and get repped by 2 members with 10,000 points each then you get 200 points.
And your rep/post value was now 2.

You get what I want to say?

 

[Shindekudasai]

Maybe Im too tired right now, but this doesnt make sense to me.

Because you dont get the same amount of points every time you get repped.

So lets say you have 100 posts and you got repped 2 times by members with 1,000 rep each.
Then you have 20 rep points. So your rep/post value was 0.2 right?

But if you have 100 posts and get repped by 2 members with 10,000 points each then you get 200 points.
And your rep/post value was now 2.

You get what I want to say?

Sure. I get it. Part of what I was saying makes even more sense if you take that into consideration.
Let's say, you have someone, who doesn't contribute anything of value to the board, but is posting non-stop in the "I'd give rep to..." thread. His rep points will climb up from the sheer amount of reps he'll get, no matter who reps him. There will be people with little and people with a lot of reputation.
Now, this person has perhaps a reputation of 9,000 or 10,000 without having really "earned" it by posting quality work or contributing interesting or funny things within the community. This already distorts the meaning behind the rep points. And even further, if'd negative rep someone just for his own entertainment, his voice would weigh much more than that of someone who has (let's say) 2,000 hard earned rep points and neg reps someone for a good reason.
Know where I'm getting at?

 

[Boobinator]

Maybe Im too tired right now, but this doesnt make sense to me.

Because you dont get the same amount of points every time you get repped.

So lets say you have 100 posts and you got repped 2 times by members with 1,000 rep each.
Then you have 20 rep points. So your rep/post value was 0.2 right?

But if you have 100 posts and get repped by 2 members with 10,000 points each then you get 200 points.
And your rep/post value was now 2.

You get what I want to say?

I'm not sure what you want to say, but I'll try my best to reply

The idea isn't that a rep/post value of 1 or more is ideal or anything - it's all dependent on the poster.

Reputation, like I said, is bound to increase with time. And rightfully so, because you do indeed get a higher reputation with time; more people recognize you etc.
But it doesn't fill the purpose for which it's also meant - to display a poster's value or contribution to the board. Because a guy who joined April 2009 will always have a lower reputation score than someone who joined April 2006, regardless of whether if he has written more valuable posts or not. So someone who is a newcomer, but very active and posts tons of links and information in threads will still have a lower rep score than someone who hasn't done more than casually post for 3 years.

The rep/post ratio will change that, as it scales with the amount of posts. So if said newcomer has done 100 excellent, appreciated posts and received 1000 rep - his average reputation per post is 10. While said casual guy has been around for 3 years and made 5000 posts, but in that time only received 1000 rep too. His average reputation per post is then 0.2, significantly lower than the newbie, meaning he doesn't contribute as often.

It's kinda hard to explain it any better than this, and English isn't my ****** tongue - but you probably get where I'm going
And like I said it's number-crunching, and not really essential. But then again I like numbers

Cheers

 

[strummls]

Wouldn't a rep/post ratio deter people from posting in case they ruined their ratio?

 

[Boobinator]

Wouldn't a rep/post ratio deter people from posting in case they ruined their ratio?

It's not like either reputation or a rep/post ratio is crucial, and it has no real consequences whether you've got high rep or not. So I don't think people will care too much about it, it'll just be there.

Also, if someone does care about it, it won't deter them from posting, but rather encourage making good posts instead of bad ones. Speaking from personal experience, I **** it when I press my profile button, see one of my subscribed threads updated, only to find someone has posted "nice tits" or "does she do hardcore?" So if someone cares about their ratio, they will instead go and find some new galleries and share them, or make the effort of actually reading earlier posts

 

[tunsty]

An interesting idea that I wouldn't mind seeing in place.

Banning the "I'd give rep..." thread won't stop people from giving rep willy-nilly, but for the life of me, I've never seen what value that thread brings to the board.

But, I much prefer a bit of 'Willy-Nilly'..

these days I'm lucky just to get any of that.

 

[bodie54]

Another thing, which I might as well post in this thread, is regarding the "I'd give rep points to the guy above because..."-thread in the Games and Stuff section of the board. Perhaps I'll get flamed for this, but I think it should be removed. It's just reputation giving for the heck of it, and totally screws up the whole idea of reputation as a measure of contribution to the forum. I see many people who are active in threads posting links and valuable information with way less reputation than those in the above mentioned thread.

I agree. It's a bullshit thread that should be eliminated.

 

[BlueBalls]

I dont know, I always find it quite funny that someone with 480 posts can have 17,000 rep points. It shows they have a lot of commitment to the "I'd give rep ..." thread. That deserves some respect.

:hatsoff:

I cant complain, when I was a n00b I used to frequent that thread because I felt having more rep than others mattered :1orglaugh. Then I had this strange idea that rep should be "earned".

Now, I really couldnt give a **** :dunno:.

 

[tunsty]

I dont know, I always find it quite funny that someone with 480 posts can have 17,000 rep points. It shows they have a lot of commitment to the "I'd give rep ..." thread. That deserves some respect.

:hatsoff:

I cant complain, when I was a n00b I used to frequent that thread because I felt having more rep than others mattered :1orglaugh. Then I had this strange idea that rep should be "earned".

Now, I really couldnt give a **** :dunno:.

Yeah.. we noticed.

 

[BlueBalls]

Yeah.. we noticed.

But I'm still in love with you tunsty, so dont you fret :lovecoupl

 

[Hypergalaxy]

Even Though I Post in it from time to time I have to agree with the Rep Thread.. I mean if rep is supposed to mean something then why have a Thread where a person with 120 posts can have 10k rep power and contribute nothing to the site

 

[Aces&Jacks]

Even Though I Post in it from time to time I have to agree with the Rep Thread.. I mean if rep is supposed to mean something then why have a Thread where a person with 120 posts can have 10k rep power and contribute nothing to the site

...because it doesn't mean anything.

 

[Hypergalaxy]

...because it doesn't mean anything.

It is supposed to represent how good your posts generally are and it gives you Points to get free products from the site

 

[Aces&Jacks]

It is supposed to represent how good your posts generally are and it gives you Points to get free products from the site

It's a pointless exercise that you are fortunate to get Myfreeones points for. Thank Petra for the additional Myfreeones points.

 

[gunslingingbird]

It's a pointless exercise that you are fortunate to get Myfreeones points for. Thank Petra for the additional Myfreeones points.

I'm not complaining about the free points, but sometimes I feel like I'm wasting my time putting effort into my posts when someone who started 3 weeks ago has more rep than I do. I really don't give a rat's ass about who has more or less rep than me, but if it's supposed to be a system where members reward each other for being good posters, then the thread defeats the purpose of the system. Anyone, regardless of contribution to the board, relevance of posts, or popularity, can go on the aforementioned thread and get shitloads of rep. Well, whatever happened to it being a measure of how good of a poster someone is? That thread isn't for good posters, it's for good posers. :2 cents:

 

[tunsty]

I don't need rep to know who the good posters are...


I'll name names if I have to..

 

[Sicario]

I totally agree with many issues in this thread. There are members that are taking advantage [IE. *******] the system to their advantage. I saw members with 300 posts and 12000 rep? Rep both good or bad is something that you earn people.

:2 cents: