Rep re-set?

[Ghost]

Again: why? There is much wisdom from the likes of DavidB, LillyB, Franck, Rachel, Gus, Lounge Lizard, ... and a host of others that deserve rep.

Theoretically if people gave rep for old posts, then newer members looking through the archives would re-rep the truly useful but possibly not re-rep the truly funny.

Rep is not a method of seeing who is most prolific: you have the number of posts for that. It's who's posts you are more likley to pay attention to and respect - what you have contributed to the forum.

This is what I thought rep meant when I first joined. It's become apparent that it no longer is. DavidJames said something like
"I get more rep from funny one liners than for serious posts I've sweated blood over". He has a post that consists of nothing more than a number and I'll lay good odds he got rep for it.

Re-setting is like saying "yea, you contributed in the past, but that's all meaningless now and has no relevance. I don't care how much you might have contributed to the forum." What does it matter if they are currently active or not?

I'm inclined to agree. I think the problem is that people have cottoned on the idea that rep is skewed from it's original concept. There's at least 2 options.
1) Just accept that rep is a measure of more than technical expertise. If someone excels at making the forum a brighter happier place, then
2) Make it clear that rep is only for technical points. PMs are to be used for "that was soooooo funny" etc. Neg rep people who don't obey!!!!

Interesting points - have I ever given you rep for something non-technical?
Christopher

[Gadget]

Interesting points - have I ever given you rep for something non-technical?

Na - I tend to steer clear of chit-chat... and I'm not that funny

[under par]

Na - I tend to steer clear of chit-chat... and I'm not that funny

ha ha ha.......Gadget you are a one ha ha ha!

[Ghost]

Na - I tend to steer clear of chit-chat... and I'm not that funny

Just tried to rep you for the dragon but the system won't let me

Oh well, you have the satisfaction of knowing your rep reflects your technical contributions

Take care,
Christopher

[Ghost]

Gadget... I'm arguing against reset here, but the thing that decay does is provide the balancing negative rep that is missing from our forum. There needs to be some force to equalise us.

At the moment it is the prolific that have the rep – more posts, more chances of being repped. This needs balanced.

Well the obvious answer is to find someone who excels at giving negative rep, and does it a lot - increase the amount they can give until the system is balanced

Take care,
Christopher

[Trousers]

I think the technical term is a small matter of programming. Very kind of you to volunteer, anyhow...

thank you for that link

I being a slopsucker will be off no to suck at my slop
I having not been to the high level side of the old programming divide for a while had forgotten about 'time t' as well, ah happy memories

diking it out raised an eyebrow


methinx i need to browse in there more lol

Sorry this is a bit geeky init

[bigdjiver]

The rep system is flawed in many respects, but still better than nothing. It might be nice if we could track which posts have received most rep - a months top 10 or top 20 perhaps. This would help us find valuable contributions and pinnacles of hilarity in threads we normally ignore.

[David Bailey]

Again: why? There is much wisdom from the likes of DavidB, LillyB, Franck, Rachel, Gus, Lounge Lizard, ... and a host of others that deserve rep.

I agree, and it's occasionally great to read the big debates of the past. But on the whole, few people read it - a combination of not enough time and, frankly, a less-than-superb archiving and searching mechanism.

Re-setting is like saying "yea, you contributed in the past, but that's all meaningless now and has no relevance. I don't care how much you might have contributed to the forum." What does it matter if they are currently active or not?

Unfortunately, it does matter. Like all discussion / usenet groups, the Forum is a transitory beast, and generally has a short collective memory. If you're not currently active, you're quickly forgotten.

Again, it's like the pub analogy; if you go to the pub several times a week, you don't generally remember conversation you had there two years ago. Sad but true.

A decay mechanism provides an inbuilt incentive to keep posting, and to keep active.

Don't you dare re-set the rep I've for whatever reason been doing alright and would feel cheated at a re-set.

Heh, that's why I like it, it'd shake people up a bit.

All powerfull ESG. Heavenly ESG I think I love you and your babies and all your women

Seek help.

[jivecat]

The rep system is flawed in many respects, but still better than nothing. It might be nice if we could track which posts have received most rep - a months top 10 or top 20 perhaps. This would help us find valuable contributions and pinnacles of hilarity in threads we normally ignore.

Nice idea. Then I could spend even more time viewing the forum than I do currently.

[El Salsero Gringo]

all your women

Is there something I should know?

(ps, UP? In case you hadn't noticed, DavidJames is the rep-daddy now, and we are all doomed.)

[David Bailey]

(ps, UP? In case you hadn't noticed, DavidJames is the rep-daddy now, and we are all doomed.)

What more proof could you need of the flaws in the system?

[David Franklin]

(ps, UP? In case you hadn't noticed, DavidJames is the rep-daddy now, and we are all doomed.)[/SIZE]

But once you implement the rep-decay system, I'm sure it won't be long before a "tragic rounding error" leaves DavidJames with his reputation destroyed, forcing him to beg shamelessly in the hope for rep.

(so no change there then!)

[David Bailey]

But once you implement the rep-decay system, I'm sure it won't be long before a "tragic rounding error" leaves DavidJames with his reputation destroyed, forcing him to beg shamelessly in the hope for rep.

(so no change there then!)

Eek, I think it's all ready happened.

What was that, all Hail ESG

[Gojive]

DavidJames
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sweeping up in North London
Posts: 3,745
Reputation: points: 73 / Rep Power: 2

[Lynn]

DavidJames ...
Reputation: points: 73 / Rep Power: 2

You happy now DJ?

[David Bailey]

You happy now DJ?

Not quite the sweeping systemic change I'd planned, I'll admit
Plus, my power's shrivelled, which I didn't anticipate. I feel all impotent now.

Anyway, where's this trivial coding job you promised, Mr ESG? I dunno, it's the same with all these Big Names, the hype never lives up to the reality...

EDIT: bloody hell, I'm Mr Zigzag today, couldn't even enjoy my impotence for 10 minutes...

[Lynn]

Not quite the sweeping systemic change I'd planned, I'll admit
Plus, my power's shrivelled, which I didn't anticipate. I feel all impotent now.

...

EDIT: bloody hell, I'm Mr Zigzag today, couldn't even enjoy my impotence for 10 minutes...

I think someone is having some fun!

[doc martin]

I'm not saying that the rep should be reset, but, if you were going to, the ideal time would be straight after the BFG. Then there could be a category in the awards for the most repped this year.

Imagine the competition and begging for rep that would generate in the lead up to the BFG! And the sneakiness as the leading contenders desperately give -ve rep to one another

[Lucy Locket]

OK, as instructed (well, bribed) by Dee

I've been informed that rep levels have been re-set before, back in the dim and distant past of, I dunno, last year sometime, because "people's reps were getting into the thousands" - dunno how much of that was hyperbole, but that's what I heard.

Now, despite my best tart-y efforts, I can't see "thousands" happening to anyone, any time soon

On the other hand, the system is clearly inflationary, in that power levels increase with more rep, and rep points given depend on the power levels of the giver. So at some point it'll clearly be at silly levels, we'll all have power 10, repping 100 points / day (or in MartinHarper's case, -ve repping 50 points / day), and the numbers will get to silly levels. So maybe we should take them down...

My preferred option (I believe ESG suggested it originally, but hell, I'll take the credit), is to have a "rep decay" rate of, say, 1% per week. But that's apparently seriously difficult to implement.

So I'm wondering whether it's a good idea to reset everyone's rep to 10 at the end of each year; presumably this is relatively easy, and means people can start the new year fresh - bit like the Premiership really...

Any thoughts?

Have you nothing else to do???

[David Bailey]

Have you nothing else to do???

Well, I could always do some work.

Come on, this isn't even close to the "most trivial topic ever debated", have you seen the "shoes" thread?