19 replies to this topic

[brokenportal]

Do you think there is a way you can encourage the most poignant of dialogue to come out here by offering some kind of simple awards system? I cant imagine how it might work at this point but Ide guess it would be something like whoever posts the most positive and on topic replies to a topic in a week goes on a list on the front page that shows how many contributive posts theyve made. Youde have to have each forum moderator go through them all I suppose.

Edited by brokenportal, 30 July 2007 - 10:30 PM.

[JohnDoe1234]

I saw on a forum not too long ago (forgot where), they had a "Thank you system" where each post would have a "Thank You" button, and anyone could click it and their name would be added to the "Thanked by these people:" list for that post....

Also, under each avatar it would have a "This person has been thanked X times in Y posts" which gives a good representation of their contributions.

However, the people with 1,2,3+ thousand posts would be at a severe disadvantage for nominations unless you went by how fast they accumunlated a certain number of "Thank You" points.

[Live Forever]

Lots of forums use karma (a positive or negative thing you can click on) to rate up or down a person. If someone had +50/-400 you would know they weren't that great, or vice versa, something like +500/-100 you would know they were pretty good. Of course, there is always potential for abuse (as in any system), but it is one I have seen on other boards quite a bit.

[Normal Dan]

Although a system such as this may be open to abuse and other problems, I think it can really help this board. Aside from adding to the quality of posts, it may help increase the number of participants on this board.

Everyone likes acknowledgment for the clever things they say. People, often newcomers, get excited when someone responds to their posts. (Something we should do more often) When they see people are actually paying attention to what they are saying, it makes them want to post more and stick around longer. Unfortunately, sometimes there is just nothing substantial you can reply with, even on the most clever of posts. A sort of reward system will help people feel appreciated when they submit quality posts.

A forum you may want to check out is christian forums
In my opinion they are a bit too cluttered with extra bells and whistles, but they also have several times the user base we do. It may be a good place to get some ideas for imminst.

Slashdot may also be a good place to check out.

Edited by normaldan, 31 July 2007 - 08:52 PM.

[modelcadet]

Actually, I think the quality of the posts on this forum is quite good. This is the best community with which I've been involved.

Edited by modelcadet, 31 July 2007 - 10:04 PM.

[JohnDoe1234]

normaldan, Dang! that Christian forum was packed, there is definitely a lot going on there!

modelcadet, Agreed.

LF, I think that if we did implement something like this, the Karma system would be better suited, it's just quicker and people can vote either way... and I think whatever is done, the votes that people make should be kept as a public record...

I think it is a great idea, it will definitely give some people something to look forward to.

Also, if we wanted to go deeply into it, a way to prevent abuse from one user to another would be to slowly decrease the effect a person's vote towards another has if history has shown that the person voting has a record of disagreeing with everything the other person has to say.

Maybe we could also put together some sort of ideological compass that could be displayed under a person's avatar (similar to the Political Compass) ?

[Brainbox]

Sometimes somethings need to be expressed that are not mainstream positive. Furthermore, a voting system could be abused indeed, to silence certain out-of-the-box and uncommon views. The type of views we need most to come forward. Voting systems tend to increase and approve nice and commonly expected in stead of brave and bold contributions.

At least IMHO. Did you like this, please? yes? )

[Zarrka]

i agree brainbox. voting tends to become popularist rather quickly. You always hope that people will vote on the quality of the post and not the content, but its rarely ever so. Even in a sophisticated forum like this one.

[Shepard]

Yeah, I don't think that this is a good idea. Things like this seem to cheapen a community and a newcomer could take whatever a person with a high ranking posted as gospel instead of weighing the post against all others.

[JohnDoe1234]

brainbox, catichka, and shepard... I totally agree that something like this could become corrupt. So, if it were implemented, there would have to be restrictions which is why I proposed the frequency-handicapping idea... It would prevent someone from regularly voting someone down, eventually enough negative votes from someone and the system would become numb to their votes to that particular person...

Also, it should probably be used on the basis of how informative, well thought out, and coherent a post was, not necessarily how much you agree with it (which relies completely on the policy of honesty)

I'm afraid my original post also kind of derailed the thread a bit, because we shouldn't be limited to just a post-rating system... like brokenportal initially suggested we could do something on a weekly basis (I think monthly would work better), where people would be temporarily voted up to a higher, recognized position... I think it would be easier to implement, and less work to keep track of, and it might build a little more community...

So for instance, each month (or week, or whatever), you would cast your vote for the person you thought has been the most charismatic, understanding, and has maybe contributed a little more than the average member. That is something I would really like to see here, if anything.

[brokenportal]

A thank you system I suppose might work. What does everybody else think? Kind of like the kudos system in myspace blogs. I think this site already has excellent contributions too. Its just that with life extension the more it can possibly be expedited in a positive way the better. Ide be comfortable with a effort that moved say, around the speed of light.

Joseph, an ideological compass, that is something Ive never heard of, its a great idea. How do you go about making that for a site? Im assuming you mean something like a pie chart that shows peoples bents toward certain angles.

Even though I know I am, I feel like Im not being paid attention to here. I dont feel like my ideas are really landing. Does anybody else tend to feel this way? I dont think its because people arent paying attention. I feel its partially the way I perceive it, and partially because this site could probably use an awards system or a ideas pie chart or something like that.

As for a voting system suppressing out of the box ideas, I think that the kind of people this site attracts are out of the box thinkers, I dont think that would be a problem, but I guess it could be. If the system tended to make one persons words be taken as gospel more than others then Ide say maybe we need to come up with something similar to this, but that would get around that problem. Maybe like a... To brainstorm, off the top of my head... Maybe... have two or three different kinds of kudos or thank you systems. One by general members, one by full members, and one by honorary members. Even if honorary members only bothered to give a kudo or a thank you 3% of the time, it would still give onlookers something to compare to.

[Liquidus]

Personally, I would rather frequent a forum comprised of mature individuals who are beyond judging other posters, or having to resort to a rank system. As soon as you put a system up like that, people become jealous of their 'inferiority', which just creates problems.

I would rather have people who are respected for their maturity, and unique ideas, rather than who's deemed more popular.

As an alternative to this goal, I would however suggest that say Bruce lists 'top 5 topics of the week' on the front page of imminst.org. These top 5 could consist of the most interesting and relevant topics on the forums which would then potentially attract people to join in on the discussion. I'm a fan of everyone having their own, equal voice, as long as they're not talking about logical absurdity or hateful stuff.

[brokenportal]

Thats the thing, you worded it well. Its not really about judging other members. Its more about trying to push ideas to the next level, challenge people, get them to compete with each other to come up with the best ideas. My topic is less of a suggestion as it is more of a topic to hopefully evolve through brainstorming.

I think the top 5 topics of the week is a great idea. Ide suggest like 10.

Your last sentence, "Im a fan of everyone having their own, equal voice, as long as theyre not talking about logical absurdity or hateful stuff.", makes me think that you think I mean single out and exclude people with bad posts. I dont think it would do that, but I guess a case could be made for that.

Im talking about though, that good ideas are met with umm, I cant think of the word, so that when there is a good idea, and people like it, it stays at the top, rather than sinking into obscurity. Because really, who cruises the forums very often? I go to "active topics", or "my last ten". Maybe Im one of the few, I dont know.

[Liquidus]

Your last sentence, "Im a fan of everyone having their own, equal voice, as long as theyre not talking about logical absurdity or hateful stuff.", makes me think that you think I mean single out and exclude people with bad posts. I dont think it would do that, but I guess a case could be made for that.

Well in one sense, the navigators should clean up anything that's deemed inappropriate for this forum. But for example, Elijah has a very different opinion than most of the people on this forum. Although what most people here believe go against what Elijah believe, and vice-versa, you don't see hateful spew being said against each side, I mean, of course you can expect the tension of a good debate, but although I (for example) strongly disagree with what a lot Elijah says, even if I think he's blatantly wrong (just as he may believe I'm blatantly wrong, and is entitled to hold that), I still respect his opinion, and him as a person since he can hold a civil discussion.

I just find with some rating systems that are used to attract people, some people take advantage of it. I genuinely believe that 4/5th's of people in general are just too malfunctioning to hold a civil debate regarding very sensitive and important issues, most people are ignorant, rude, or just blatantly make themselves look like complete hypocrites and whiny kids. I guess that's what I'm suggesting we avoid (since there have been none that I have seen on this forum yet) since it really detracts from the intellectual value of a good debate, or a discussion of an interesting topic.

Just my two cents though, and everyone else is entitled to their own opinion.

[brokenportal]

Active topics, and topics that excel...

You seem to think this whole incentives idea is perhaps aimed at generating more traffic for the imminst forums. I guess that may happen, why do you think it may encourage tons of off the streets random ad hominem people coming in?

I was thinking more along the lines that some sort of "incentives" thing would encourage members that are already here to try harder, if even just by a little bit. I would expect the most informed to try a little harder, and the least informed to try a lot harder. A winning situation however much boost you get for either side.

Im not sure really what to say about Elijah. I tend to think of him as a welcome inbalance to the system, to keep things spiced up. But that too many Elijahs is definently not a good thing. And as far as being naive goes, It seems to me that Elijah does a pretty good job of keeping the blatant unapologetic type of fallacy out of it. (Even though there is plenty of fallacy on his plate to go around) You know what I mean.

Anyways, my ultimate counter point to your counter point is that, You seem to be saying that an incentives program attracts ad hominem no so great types of contributors. I dont know why you think it would bring in more people like that, and think instead that it would only encourage the members that are already established here to compete against each other. And like you said, to paraphrase, the members here seem to be pretty good the way it is. Lets encourage us all to excel. What thinks you?

[Zarrka]

having an aknowledgment of good debate is never a bad thing.

we can even have a section for "worst spellers of the week due to uni inflicted caffeen highs and sleep depravation" (id win that one for sure!)

[Liquidus]

Anyways, my ultimate counter point to your counter point is that, You seem to be saying that an incentives program attracts ad hominem no so great types of contributors. I dont know why you think it would bring in more people like that, and think instead that it would only encourage the members that are already established here to compete against each other. And like you said, to paraphrase, the members here seem to be pretty good the way it is. Lets encourage us all to excel. What thinks you?

Perhaps my lack of experience with these causes is very evident. Like I said, this whole cause is the first thing that I've ever really felt an overwhelming, 110%, drive for. That being said, I'm used to being at places online that are invested with immaturity and arrogance. Maybe I'm just trying to keep this place from ever becoming like that, but logically speaking, it would never get that bad before something was done to fix the problem.

How you put it, I agree. From a personal standpoint, I just love discussing issues and expressing opinions and ideas, so naturally, I would post in every thread if I could. I'm going to change my stance based on what you've suggested, maybe I overlooked the reward system, it could be a very beneficial thing after all.

[brokenportal]

Maybe, Thanks for your positive feel toward this. I beleive they would fix any problems arrising also. I also feel the same about having a drive for this like Ive never felt before. It seems natural. Like not having enough water and working to get the village to get together and dig a well or something. In this case we are talking the world though of course. Much more tricky and monumental, but none the less definently doable. Ingenuity, the impossible is usually accomplished by those that were to ignorant to realize that it was impossible. I know some people have that as their signature, and just looked and saw that it is actually a version of your signature. You definently have the mind that people around here need around. What do you mean by changing your stance? I definently know what you mean by groups that are over run by immaturity and arrogance. I run a site at groups.msn.com/debatecriticalthinkingandphilosophy that I can not for the life of me get to stop being over run by that. I developed it to try to coax out the best minds and get them to all collaborate for big ideas, mainly life extension, but the fruits never came. Partially because of most of the member base that is attracted, and partially I suppose because of my lack of imagination in solving the problem. Though Ive tried. Beleive me, oh Ive tried.

[brokenportal]

Why is it that sometimes I think I sound really clever, and sometimes I think I make little sense. Like that last post. Do you guys get that with yourselves too? Anyways, what do you think about doing something with some sort of ratings system or something to shake up imminst? Good idea? Bad idea? To scared to think about shaking things up? Or just, actually a bad idea?

[JohnDoe1234]

For the record, if someone was willing to put time in to implement it, I would be ok with having it around for a while to try it out. I think it is an interesting idea.