You mean an indicator that one has made some bad posts? You know what if nor for money we could all do posts good but because bounty managers requires more or less 15 posts per week and the hectic schedule with work then it will just be possible to spam more or less 15 posts just in one day. This is the actual scenario I always encounter. Besides, the forum is not suitable for large number of users and you could expect a load of posts in just one day.
Bad posts or good posts you could not expect to read it all with tons of it everyday.
Yet, you have also a good point OP but it would be embarassing on our part labeled as shitposter..LOL
Topic: Why don't we have a point system for bad posts? (Read 468 times)
I would rather have a convertible activity points to merits if possible than point systems of bad posts. Maybe we could convert 20 activity to 1 or a half merit.
Quote
Sometimes you just come across posts that are bad enough, that you just wish you could do something.
This is what the report to moderator button is for. 
Instead of demerit for a bad post, a 'karma' tag should do to indicate the post is worthless.
Quote
Sometimes you just come across posts that are bad enough, that you just wish you could do something.
This is what the report to moderator button is for.
It is because looking for a valuable thing in a place full of garbage is much harder. If you are going to look around and all you see is garbage you'll just be ignoring that one.
If we are going to use a "demerit" system then for sure there is no enough sendable demerit for all the trash we have here hmm.
If we are going to use a "demerit" system then for sure there is no enough sendable demerit for all the trash we have here hmm.
I say use the same system. I have 10 sMerits and I can either use them do downgrade someone's merit or I can use them to increase someone's merit. Will there be rampant abuse? Probably. That doesn't make the idea any less solid.
I see we still do not need what you propose, it can still be represented by the existence of a trust system, where if we do not trust a member or make some bad posts then we can give feedback to the member by giving red trust because in this system we also give reasons for giving feedback.
Neutral - perhaps. Red - no.
I see we still do not need what you propose, it can still be represented by the existence of a trust system, where if we do not trust a member or make some bad posts then we can give feedback to the member by giving red trust because in this system we also give reasons for giving feedback.
What we could do is create a token on the HowieCoin blockchain. People may purchase tokens, and if they want to demerit someone, they can burn a token or two or a million and the smart contract will automatically demerit someone. Bitcointalk will be the 1st to give HowieCoins a use case. I think implementing Demeritokens will help the marketcap of HowieCoins soar to the moon and beyond. I will go to shutterstock to assemble a team to get to work on it ASAP. Anyone know of a some good white papers that I can "reference?"
The demerit-idea would be used to get rid of undeserved Merits.
....
OK, but how can we prevent deserved merits, not to be demerited because of revenge, hate, different point of views, etc?....
If there will be some groups, who will start to demerit the other groups' members, the hard earned merits could vanish in a very little time...
.
Ideally, all posts should be good. I'm still considering creating a thread in which I delete all posts that don't earn Merit, but it doesn't really fit any board.
All posts start out as not having merit and some posts don’t earn merit for some time after they are written. Also, it would be difficult to have a conversation if some posts are getting deleted because no one gave it merit. Ideally, all posts should be good. I'm still considering creating a thread in which I delete all posts that don't earn Merit, but it doesn't really fit any board.
The merit system is not for posts you agree with. It is for posts that are objectively high quality, or to otherwise draw attention to the post because it deserves reading.
Well, you're right. And people should definitely use merits in that way. But it isn't really farfetched to think that people are using it as a sort of "like" or "upvote" system. I mean, I've seen a decent number of sort of "meme" replies that has been given merits. But yea, this is the reason why I think a de-merit system wouldn't work and could potentially be abused.
I really don't think it would work well either. In addition to the point I've made, there aren't clear rules on merits in the first place. I think having a sort of de-merit system is just going to make things worse. People de-meriting posts that they simply disagree on, but not necessarily useless.
Anyway, I think I'm fine with how the forum merit and trust system works for now. Let's just see what more features the new EpochTalk forum will bring.
Why a separate system instead of a deMerit system?
Because then it becomes much more visible to see which users often make bad posts. With a deMerit system, the merit points would just disappear without anyone noticing right away.
Just some food for thought, let me know if there's something wrong with this proposal.
Because then it becomes much more visible to see which users often make bad posts. With a deMerit system, the merit points would just disappear without anyone noticing right away.
Just some food for thought, let me know if there's something wrong with this proposal.
This will wreak total chaos
We already have the trust system which is monumentally misused and abused, now you are going to add (more) insult to injury. I have already explained why any system based on negative feedback does more hurt than good in the long term overall but it seems to be worth repeating here. It is implicitly assumed that people are responsible in their actions and reactions but it is never the case in real life, so they will downvote posts just because they can, end of story
The demerit-idea would be used to get rid of undeserved Merits. Giving evil points for bad posts won't do much good, it's better to report them and have them deleted.
Ideally, all posts should be good. I'm still considering creating a thread in which I delete all posts that don't earn Merit, but it doesn't really fit any board.
Ideally, all posts should be good. I'm still considering creating a thread in which I delete all posts that don't earn Merit, but it doesn't really fit any board.
The merit system is not for posts you agree with. It is for posts that are objectively high quality, or to otherwise draw attention to the post because it deserves reading.
Well, you're right. And people should definitely use merits in that way. But it isn't really farfetched to think that people are using it as a sort of "like" or "upvote" system. I mean, I've seen a decent number of sort of "meme" replies that has been given merits. But yea, this is the reason why I think a de-merit system wouldn't work and could potentially be abused.
In a way, I understand that point of view where it can be an indication that this certain member is a shit poster or something like that. But one problem that I could think about is abusing the power of that deMerit style. Maybe a lot of people can gang you up or something like that.
In my opinion, the best feature that could lead to great improvement with recognition is the Badge thing with the reports and stuff.
In my opinion, the best feature that could lead to great improvement with recognition is the Badge thing with the reports and stuff.
I guess someone will surely misuse this and will cause quite a stir in the Meta boards on top of the Merit system. I'm thinking that this will similarly be the upvote/downvote system already in place in Reddit, and knowing how propaganda and general shade of disgust, hate and disagreement rules some of the topics of this forum, that will not end well. I guess reports can't handle such posts with little to no thought whatsoever, but I know that users will be smart enough to distinguish what a good post is from a bad post.
It's an excellent idea to weed bad and misinformed posts but then, you know how things work in this forum.
It's an excellent idea to weed bad and misinformed posts but then, you know how things work in this forum.
The merit system is not for posts you agree with. It is for posts that are objectively high quality, or to otherwise draw attention to the post because it deserves reading.
Well, you're right. And people should definitely use merits in that way. But it isn't really farfetched to think that people are using it as a sort of "like" or "upvote" system. I mean, I've seen a decent number of sort of "meme" replies that has been given merits. But yea, this is the reason why I think a de-merit system wouldn't work and could potentially be abused.
Is it really need to implement? I don't think so. Since here is merit system so I am not agree with your proposal. Yes I know your proposal isn't related with merit system but you can't separate it from merit system. Because merit is for good post, and no merit for bad post. So whoever had not earned merit that means he/she isn't good poster. Is it not simple to understand who is bad poster? I can easily understand who is bad poster, so your proposal is just a propose of another abuse.
Jump to: