Originally Posted by BrandonC Why can't we do a system that gives more voting power to people who have a higher reputation. Reputation could be judged by time here, and valid content submitted. (If your content such as games, articles, and so on... receive good feedback, your reputation goes up.)
"Reputation could be judged by time here, and valid content submitted"
Yeah, brilliant Idea. Someone can still be here from the beginning and be a complete douche, Brandon. Time has nothing to do with reputation.
Someone said this once before in another thread I believe, but I have a twist to it:
The first part is as it always was, allow people to give thumbs up or thumbs down to a rating.
This part, I'm not sure was in the original. When a rating is voted down, its effect on the overall rating of the game is lessened, and when voted up, it gains effectiveness. You can only upgrade one rating equal to or above yours(so that games don't suddenly shoot up in rating, for nega-trolls (those who overrate instead of underrate) and if you change your mind it is reflected in upgrading a higher score) and you can only downgrade ratings below yours, and only one of each rating. When you downgrade a rating, any posts by you (or the first post by you) will tell everyone what you upgraded or downgraded (I figure that showing who's you up and downgraded would be too memory-hogging)
E.g.: Someone votes a 4 on a game.
They may downgrade ratings of 3, 2, or 1.
They may only downgrade one 3 rating, one 2 rating, and one 1 rating.
They may upgrade one 4 or one 5 rating.
They may only upgrade one 4 or one 5.
If you drop a 2 and a 1, and raise a 4, any post you make will show in the corner a thumbs up and thumbs down with a 2 and 1 next to the thumbs down and a 4 next to the thumbs up.
If someone hates this idea, likes this idea, or wants to change it, or ignore it, go ahead.
Originally Posted by BrandonC Why can't we do a system that gives more voting power to people who have a higher reputation. Reputation could be judged by time here, and valid content submitted. (If your content such as games, articles, and so on... receive good feedback, your reputation goes up.)
"Reputation could be judged by time here, and valid content submitted"
Yeah, brilliant Idea. Someone can still be here from the beginning and be a complete douche, Brandon. Time has nothing to do with reputation.
Which is why you've been here for 3 years and you're still a no it all "douche". You're absolutely right. That's why I said reputation would be more bias towards your content and how it fairs based upon other peoples ratings.
Originally Posted by Jon Lambert Someone said this once before in another thread I believe, but I have a twist to it:
The first part is as it always was, allow people to give thumbs up or thumbs down to a rating.
This part, I'm not sure was in the original. When a rating is voted down, its effect on the overall rating of the game is lessened, and when voted up, it gains effectiveness. You can only upgrade one rating equal to or above yours(so that games don't suddenly shoot up in rating, for nega-trolls (those who overrate instead of underrate) and if you change your mind it is reflected in upgrading a higher score) and you can only downgrade ratings below yours, and only one of each rating. When you downgrade a rating, any posts by you (or the first post by you) will tell everyone what you upgraded or downgraded (I figure that showing who's you up and downgraded would be too memory-hogging)
E.g.: Someone votes a 4 on a game.
They may downgrade ratings of 3, 2, or 1.
They may only downgrade one 3 rating, one 2 rating, and one 1 rating.
They may upgrade one 4 or one 5 rating.
They may only upgrade one 4 or one 5.
If you drop a 2 and a 1, and raise a 4, any post you make will show in the corner a thumbs up and thumbs down with a 2 and 1 next to the thumbs down and a 4 next to the thumbs up.
If someone hates this idea, likes this idea, or wants to change it, or ignore it, go ahead.
Y-O-U-R H-E-A-D A S-P-L-O-D-E
And changing the rating system into one that values members differently depending on who they are seems like, well, medievil-ish.
Originally Posted by -Adam- But who says being on the site a long time, and having good ratings certifies them as being the ideal person to rate?
The idea isn't to judge them ideal for rating, the idea is to merely take abused power away from troll accounts. If we were truly looking for the most accurate and ideal people to rate, we'd hire a crack team of critiques.
Trolls enjoy finding a way to overcome whatever methods have been used to stop them. They're usually the stupid kids or script kiddies who go, "If you yell at me to do my homework, I'm not going to do it!" Just ignore them. They give the TDC admins something to shoot at
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
Peblo Custom ratings must be 50 characters or less
Registered 05/07/2002
Points 185
1st October, 2008 at 08:49:59 -
Please don't be condescending to said members.
"Isn't it always amazing how we characterize a person's intelligence by how closely their thinking matches ours?"
~Belgarath
Advertisement
Post Reply
He will get a good spanking for his rude behavior
Edited by the Author.
