Reputation amendment

[Ragabash]

Proposer: Ragabash
Supporters:

This amendment is created to give reputation back its actual meaning and purpose once again.

Version 1.0

Reputation amendment

Citizens and above are allowed to give reputation according to rules that are in charge in the current time, this excludes the staff that has right to give reputation regadless of their Curial ranks, or lack of them.

Plebians, non citizens are allowed to use reputation as a feedback system but reputation given by these members does not increase the overall score.

Reputation will be changed retroactive if this bill is to pass the vote.

[Tom Paine]

Hm... I'm not sure this is technically possible, and I don't see how this improves the system one little bit, since neg-rep is the abusable one and that has since gone...

[makanyane]

Would people also please remember that this would make it even more unlikely for modders to get rep for their work, either in releasing hosted mods, or in helping in workshops, as more of the people viewing there tend to be newcomers to the forums.

It's already been mentioned that you tend to get disproportionate amount of rep for posting in curia / CC and this would only make it worse IMHO.

[Tom Paine]

Actually, most of my rep recently has come from content work, which applies to both sides really...
But while I don't feel rep matters much, I do think we need to be giving modders all the encouragement we can to mod here not elsewhere (I almost said something horribly patronising there, which I didn't mean at all...) and so anything which harms them getting rep is really, really bad.

[the Black Prince]

i don't think reputation is something that can should or needs to be codified in the constitution. this is more in the nature of a Decision.

that aside, my thoughts on rep are

Citizens alone can give rep. Every member can give equal rep, so rep from staff is not worth more. No neg rep

OR
All members can give rep.
rep from normal members is worth 1 point, rep from citizens is worth 2 points.
only citizens can give neg rep at -1 point.

[Tom Paine]

No one but staff should give neg-rep; that's just been made by Curial decision, and its one I agree with fully. The 1-rep two-rep idea creates a problem as envisaged by mak, though I suppose it does deal with modders not getting rep.

[The Walrus]

I don't agree at all. Check Mak's post for some of the reasons why. Also, I don't see the need to make this a 'perk' of being a citizen. I thought rep was more about popularity, not necessarily great posts. Since it is about popularity, why only have a small section be able to give it? Also, I wouldn't want to strive to be a citizen just to have my rep count. That really isn't an award for being one at all.

EDIT: Just to prove the thing about modders. I've gotten 12 rep points from posting in the CC/curia/Q&S. I've gotten 5 for ES work AND modding combined. Two points are MIA but chances are they were not from modding. I have one negative rep point. Most of the rep I got in the modding section was neutral

[Ragabash]

First, we need to have a serious discussion what do we want reputation to represent in general.

Then, we need to decide do we want to hold much needed changes just so modders are able get one or two more reputation. This is a bad idea overall, while modders need all the attention and encouragement they can get, this is a wrong approach to handle this matter, what ever your other opinions might be regarding this issue.

[The Walrus]

First, we need to have a serious discussion what do we want reputation to represent in general.

Then, we need to decide do we want to hold much needed changes just for modders to get more reputation. This is a bad idea overall, while modders need all the attention and encouragement they can get, this is a wrong approach to handle this matter, what ever your other opinions might be regarding this issue.

Actually, your amendment is the wrong approach to having modders get more rep. A lot of non-badged modders should have a ton of rep, the catch, most of their rep is 'neutral' from before the rep changes. So 'TWC' loved their mod, but the members with a lot of reputation didn't see their mod. So this mod is actually quite popular. Now with everyone being able to give positive reputation, hopefully this will start to change.

[Tom Paine]

Rag, its not the only form of encouragement, but its a bad idea to take away anything that does encourage it.

[makanyane]

First, we need to have a serious discussion what do we want reputation to represent in general.

Good point, could you start by explaining what you want it to mean?

If it's meant to indicate meaningful contributions to the forums, surely modders work / posts should be equally likely to be rep'd. If it's just meant to be some gauge of perceived intellectualism, fine... maybe more of us will just turn it off.

Then, we need to decide do we want to hold much needed changes just for modders to get more reputation.

What are the much needed changes? beyond perhaps removing neg rep, which I think is being dealt with..

Do you think non-citizens are more likely to rep on basis of popularity / friendships? On personal experience I'd disagree, the rep's (valid rep or comment only) that I've acquired, purely on basis of content of post, have tended to come from non-citizens...

[Ragabash]

Good point, could you start by explaining what you want it to mean?

Just like you said, it should represent members contributions for the site, either that is a good posting, articles, site content, Curial activity or moddding, but not being a meter for simple popularity.

[makanyane]

Good point, could you start by explaining what you want it to mean?

Just like you said, it should represent members contributions for the site, either that is a good posting, articles, site content, Curial activity or moddding, but not being a meter for simple popularity.

So, just assuming I'm thick - which is not particularly difficult...
...why does restricting rep to citizens necessarily help towards that?

More of the citizens 'know' each other, so isn't popularity more likely to be an issue amongst them?

[Spiff]

Since this does not really determine the functioning of the Curia, it should be a decision rather than an amendment to the Syntagma.

Anyway i would like to see this presented as clearly as possible to avoid confusion. For example: (change as desired)

The Reputation System

The reputation system shall be configured so as to allow the following user groups to award reputation points as detailed below:

• Peregrinus:
  May give neutral reputation only. A member holding the rank of Peregrinus shall not have the power to affect the overall score of another members reputation points.

• Citizens:
  May give Positive and Negative reputation. Any member holding the rank of Citizen shall have the power to affect the overall score of another members reputation points.

• Staff Members:
  May give Positive and Negative reputation. Any member holding a Staff rank shall have the power to affect the overall score of another members reputation points.

[Ragabash]

Reputation should not be tied to the modders, especially when it does not work as intented.

[Tom Paine]

I think mak has it at the heart, in the end.

Rag, we aren't tying it to modders, we're making the point that the proposal removes it from the modders to a horrifying degree.

[Ragabash]

makanyane.

For the same reason we trust the CdeC, or Citizens to vote for various matters, and not give this right to all site members(Plebians).

[Muizer]

[

Reputation amendment

Citizens and above are allowed to give reputation according to rules that are in charge in the current time, this excludes the staff that has right to give reputation regadless of their Curial ranks, or lack of them.

Plebians, non citizens are allowed to use reputation as a feedback system but reputation given by these members does not increase the overall score.

Reputation will be changed retroactive if this bill is to pass the vote.

I know that if I were a non-citizen I would be mightily annoyed about the removal of this one egalitarian feature on TWC. It implies rather unsubtly that plebeians cannot be trusted with rep while Citizens can It is misplaced arrogance if you ask me. So no, I wouldn't support anything along these lines. I think the system is fine as it is, with negative rep and all. If you can't stand the heat..........

[Tom Paine]

But in this instance there is another matter at stake, that of its popularity amongst the general membership, which is rather important.

And I, for once and shockingly, agree totally and entirely with Muiz.

[Simetrical]

Unless someone would like to do the work for me and figure out how to institute it, retroactive changes are not feasible (because there's no record of what rank anyone was when they gave the rep) and neither is adjusting rep power based on rank.

Possible factors to adjust rep power: number of days registered, number of posts made, number of rep points (I strongly recommend against that). All three of those are zero now, so everyone gives one point. Other things that can be fidgeted with: minimum post count for rep to count (50), minimum rep for rep to count (-1000000), max reps per day (7), minimum reps before you can give to the same person again (5).

On the basis of usergroup, you can decide: can see who left rep for them, can use rep, can turn off rep, can use negative rep.