Is it possible to have a reputation system

[MatthewScars]

Like if the mods actually got in the middle of bad transactions and were able to take a spiteful negative away by judging the situation. Ahh I guess only in a perfect world.

Hm, that seems like a lot of work for mods. I barely see threads being moved to their proper forum as it is. So I think this would be too taxing for everyone involved. Plus ChiefCheif is right, people just give negative ratings for fun. It's a meaningless system.

 

[James]

there should be some badge or something for trusted reefers given out to a select few people who have solid reputations in the hobby and have a history of giving good advice (i would suggest leaving it up to josh to decide how to give the initial badges out). perhaps people who won totm here or on other reputable sites and people who are published in the hobby, sanjay, rich, randy to start. then after they give out some initial badges, those people get limited badges to give. this should not be something that people get all pissed at because they didnt get one, just something that helps everyone know who among us have tanks that back up the advice we give. popularity should have nothing to do with it, it should be about helping people shift through the advice that is given daily here. if you get a reply fro someone with a badge, you know that at least that advice is solid, the people i mentioned are smart enough to never say something along the lines of "my way is the only one that works" but they give advice based on their experience and that is priceless.

 

[TRIGGERMAN]

there should be some badge or something for trusted reefers given out to a select few people who have solid reputations in the hobby and have a history of giving good advice (i would suggest leaving it up to josh to decide how to give the initial badges out). perhaps people who won totm here or on other reputable sites and people who are published in the hobby, sanjay, rich, randy to start. then after they give out some initial badges, those people get limited badges to give. this should not be something that people get all pissed at because they didnt get one, just something that helps everyone know who among us have tanks that back up the advice we give. popularity should have nothing to do with it, it should be about helping people shift through the advice that is given daily here. if you get a reply fro someone with a badge, you know that at least that advice is solid, the people i mentioned are smart enough to never say something along the lines of "my way is the only one that works" but they give advice based on their experience and that is priceless.

I totally agree,when I wrote to Josh I said not to be cliche' but maybe a gold star next to the person's name. I know it's kinda cheesy but just some kind of simple way to identify the person is not a complete moron.

 

[rkaragozler]

I have to agree with James, too.

 

[KathyC]

...and what happens when a person who expects a gold star next to their name doesn't have/get one?

 

[richardhmc]

...and what happens when a person who expects a gold star next to their name doesn't have/get one?

nothing... It shouldn't be something that people try to aim for. It's just given when deserved.

 

[rkaragozler]

I have been a member since 6/10, but was lurking here and other sites since 08, I have done a ton of research before jumping into the hobby. I have read many articles that were published by famous authors here in the US and abroad., and I personally can say if some one suggest something if it will work or not.

 

[TRIGGERMAN]

...and what happens when a person who expects a gold star next to their name doesn't have/get one?

Are you shooting missiles at me Kat? LOL

 

[R27]

there should be some badge or something for trusted reefers given out to a select few people who have solid reputations in the hobby and have a history of giving good advice (i would suggest leaving it up to josh to decide how to give the initial badges out). perhaps people who won totm here or on other reputable sites and people who are published in the hobby, sanjay, rich, randy to start. then after they give out some initial badges, those people get limited badges to give. this should not be something that people get all pissed at because they didnt get one, just something that helps everyone know who among us have tanks that back up the advice we give. popularity should have nothing to do with it, it should be about helping people shift through the advice that is given daily here. if you get a reply fro someone with a badge, you know that at least that advice is solid, the people i mentioned are smart enough to never say something along the lines of "my way is the only one that works" but they give advice based on their experience and that is priceless.

Totally agree with you James. As a newbie in SW, I always research the info given by members.

 

[James]

...and what happens when a person who expects a gold star next to their name doesn't have/get one?

what could possibly happen? this isn't kindergarten. why would it matter if some people can't handle not getting a star, clearly the people who have the "gold stars" to give didn't feel they deserved one. im thinking it would be a rare thing, not something everyone gets at all. certainly some people will think they deserve one but that is not the objective of the whole system in the first place. the purpose would be to help members differentiate advice given from known reliable sources vs advice from people who seem like they know what they are doing due to their constant posting or whatever. the vast majority of the site would not have this designation and that doesn't mean they are garbage reefers, it just means they are not well known in the hobby or in this community.

 

[NL146]

My rant

I say no to badges, and no to stars. Yes to reefer responsibility. Despite the presence of "experts", MR is a community of hobbyists as I understand it and any advice given must be tested. Do additional research! Get second opinions! If you don't then obviously you are ok with the level of risk. The nature of MR is that anybody can give his/her input and that's the way we like it. Spend long enough on the board and you'll figure out whose judgement/advice you can generally trust (like rkagozler with sumps or nyreefnoob with skimmers). Things fall into place.

Such a rating system would create prejudice. Why would I listen to anybody who is not a 5 star general? Plus, unless I am mistaken, some of these ideas sound like censorship. The only exceptions should be "expert" forums with established authority (such as the chemistry forum with Boomer). I get the frustration but I don't think this is a good idea, or rather there is no good way to implement this.

 

[LatinP]

Rep system would have it's ups and downs, but why does it have to be a rep system? Why not just add a "thanks" button and maybe a small counter under your username that says thanked xxx times?

 

[James]

I say no to badges, and no to stars. Yes to reefer responsibility. Despite the presence of "experts", MR is a community of hobbyists as I understand it and any advice given must be tested. Do additional research! Get second opinions! If you don't then obviously you are ok with the level of risk. The nature of MR is that anybody can give his/her input and that's the way we like it. Spend long enough on the board and you'll figure out whose judgement/advice you can generally trust (like rkagozler with sumps or nyreefnoob with skimmers). Things fall into place.

Such a rating system would create prejudice. Why would I listen to anybody who is not a 5 star general? Plus, unless I am mistaken, some of these ideas sound like censorship. The only exceptions should be "expert" forums with established authority (such as the chemistry forum with Boomer). I get the frustration but I don't think this is a good idea, or rather there is no good way to implement this.

Nigel, I don't think we disagree as much as it seems. One this i dont get in your post is the censorship part and prejudice part.
how is this censorship or prejudiced?

do you guys listen only to people in the expert forums? are people offended and complaining they were not given an expert forum to run? if no, why would they complain about this. expert forums with "established authority" is similar to what i am proposing, simply instead of it just affecting expert forums, it will be viewable to a lot of people who could use it, IE, the new members using the general discussion and beginner forums and people who don;t spend a ton of time here or have time to figure out on their own who to trust. I really don't understand the push-back and offense people seem to be taking with this idea.

 

[Chiefmcfuz]

A thanks option can be ok but it is easy to manipulate too.

 

[NL146]

James, if ratings are assigned then it would appear to reflect the knowledge/expertise of those who have (or don't have) these ratings. If I'm reading through a thread I would then tend to ignore the posts of persons with lower (or no) ratings in favor of those who had higher. I am suggesting that this would effectively remove the voice of those who for one reason or other haven't been awarded or rewarded with ratings. Censorship is an exageration and may have been inappropriately used, but the point is that this could create prejudice against the opinions of those who have lower ratings. Perhaps our apparent disagreement is just a matter of perspective.

My major point is that I don't think there's a good or easy way to do this. The op suggested that those who receive help could in some way acknowledge the help given (similar to seller rating). On one hand this could reflect how active a member is on the board, how involved they are in discussions, and how well their suggestions worked. The problems I see include (1) Do I give a positive rating to everybody who makes the same suggestion or agree to the one that worked, or only to the first one. (2) What if there was an alternative suggestion to the one I choose that could work? (3) What's to stop me from giving a positive rating to a friend? (4) Will I be able to give negative ratings for bad advice, and if so what's to stop me from giving a negative rating to someone I don't like? (5) If negative ratings are allowed, should I give a negative rating to everyone who in a thread gave bad advice, or advice I didn't agree with?

While it would be a nice to have I just think it creates unnecessary complication and distraction.

 

[marrone]

I think people just don't see how much of a problem something like this causes. I've seen many boards that have it, and it causes nothing but problems and headaches, a lot less than it takes to correct someone giving bad information. If anything, someone that does give bad info can be corrected by members on the board, which in a lot of cases is a good thing. It brings out discusses in why the person is wrong and what works and what doesn't work.

 

[albano]

If anything, someone that does give bad info can be corrected by members on the board, which in a lot of cases is a good thing. It brings out discussions in why the person is wrong and what works and what doesn't work.

+1...those 'what's wrong with that idea' discussions, can be even more valuable and informative, than the 'right' solution discussion!


.

 

[James]

i dont' really care too much, my main point was the jr and sr member autostatus thing is , as has been repeated by many, silly at best, dangerous at worse. as for the gold star crap, i wasn't suggesting it as a rating system, i do feel something that identifies the few very qualified people on this site in their posts would be helpful for a lot of people who don't know better. but apparently a lot of the mods (who I guess would deal with the apparently huge backlash) disagree.

 

[TRIGGERMAN]

I completely agree. MAke more mods then if they can't handle it. I don't see what the big deal is. The whole point of the site is to be helpful now it seems that the people "in charge" won't be helpful.