Your thoughts on forum reputation

[bastiat1]

They'll take forum rep away from me when they rip it from my cold dead hands.

[Hurin]

Plugins are going to be extremely rare additions going forward.

Amen. Nothing like a plugin abandoned by its author for causing havoc on a production website!

[Hurin]

They'll take forum rep away from me when they rip it from my cold dead hands.

That's strange. I just took a little bit away from you now.

(heh, not really)

[Sapience]

They'll take forum rep away from me when they rip it from my cold dead hands.

I can totally one-shot you ya know....

[DelgonTheWise]

That's strange. I just took a little bit away from you now.

(heh, not really)

I had the same temptation, just as a joke, but I resisted. With great power etc etc...

[Dawnsinger]

I could see a use for forum rep in an ideal world where it was always used as intended.
There are cases such as posters consistently and purposefully putting down suggestions due to not agreeing to the playstyle of the poster (seen a couple of names who consistently target and try to shoot down any suggestions made about particular parts of the game despite never having taken part of that area in game). Such cases would in my view border on deserving negative rep (particularly if the veteran posters shoot down new forum users as it really can damage the new ppl's view on the forums in general).
The posts of this kind can not really be reported as it's not the post itself that's the problem but the 100 posts or so that went before it and usually it is phrased in a way that each post would pass a control but only through seeing several posts would the issue be clear.

However, as negative rep would more likely be used against posters who disagree with your own opinions (let's face it, humans are never going to be perfect), it serves no purpose in its current state and until someone figures out how to rule out human flaws in the system, the forums might be better off without rep systems (if someone does figure a way to rule out the human element of a rep system, you've got the future of all forums ).

Edit: as a side note, never got neg rep, never gave neg rep. Given out positive rep on occation to whatever post I found useful or entertaining (yes, guilty of giving rep for fun posts)

[Daec]

You mean i will no longer be the bounder's-friend?

I am outraged!

[K'Arian]

....(particularly if the veteran posters shoot down new forum users as it really can damage the new ppl's view on the forums in general).....

yeah good one, I am sure there are many many people out there who are turned off from the forums by this kind of reaction from more seasoned posters

thanks for sharing

[K'Arian]

I have always felt the reputation system to be unreliable because of favoritism and abuse. I wouldn't be sorry to see the system removed altogether and see more encouragement from Turbine for people to read the content of the posts and reply to those rather than making it about the poster.

OOoohhhhh, nice comment....any ideas on how Turbine could encourage more? just curious to hear your views

[Whiteberry_Laurelin]

OOoohhhhh, nice comment....any ideas on how Turbine could encourage more? just curious to hear your views

The "Rate this Thread" function already in place is a good start. Enhancing it visually so that it is used more would help a lot, I think. The key here being that people are rating the thread and not the poster.

It is difficult to say how Turbine can encourage more without using more resources/moderation. The forum communities that I've seen over the years who have been successful in self-moderation (i.e. it is seen as/felt uncool by everyone to go off-topic/troll/launch personal attacks/etc.) are the communities who have nurtured this over time and who have one or more dedicated official moderators to step in early with a friendly reminder before certain discussions begin spinning out control. The key word being "before" having to close threads/hide posts/send warnings.

I am not talking about excessive moderation at all, but more about guiding/encouraging players to stick to the community guidelines. This is not fool-proof of course, but I think it would go a long way even in a diverse community like this.

[Annariel]

I am not talking about excessive moderation at all, but more about guiding/encouraging players to stick to the community guidelines. This is not fool-proof of course, but I think it would go a long way even in a diverse community like this.

So that's moderation in moderation, then?

I do think you're right, though, and it's not just online. Real-life meetings (the work-related kind) are generally supposed to have a chairperson, and even brainstorming sessions benefit from one. (Brainstorming is of course not supposed to be highly structured, but a 'controlled chaos' kind of thing does work nicely.) Of course, in those kinds of meetings, the chairperson's responsibility is more to keep things on topic than to prevent fighting, but I do think it shows that if you really want to have a discussion (as opposed to general chit-chat / (hopefully) amiable conversation), you might want to put someone in charge.

I think some of these forums fall in the 'just conversation' (and despite my phrasing, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that), but others are meant for constructive discussion, i.e., you're hoping for some kind of outcome other than 'that was fun'.

I think we (as a community, including Turbine as active listeners, even when they don't join in the discussion) could benefit from having at least a few threads where someone takes the responsibility to keep things on-topic (including encouraging people to take a side-topic to a new thread), maybe summarize every once in a while, perhaps even PM users who haven't participated in the discussion yet but might be interested (based on their previous posts). At least, it would be an interesting experiment. I have no idea how to select such a chairperson, though. It needn't be a moderator, but somehow, people need to agree that within this thread, this person is more-or-less 'in charge'.

[Rainothon]

I do think forum reputation serves one purpose: to stimulate people to make constructive, nice, appreciable posts, instead of posting .. well ... cr@p.

It should make moderator's lives easier when people think before they post. But most importantly, it makes everyone's life more pleasant if everyone just thought before they posted. Count to ten, let anger reside, and see the reason in someone else's view. Agree to disagree instead of outright forum PvP. We all know venting when we see it - it happens to all of us. But the ad hominim, the vicious, the trolling, we know that too when we see it and it should remind us of the Lidless Eye, right?

And then there are the (work)days when a good bit of forum catfight is sheer entertainment. When in doubt, visit the PvMP forum . By Eru I miss Purebloodnahk's newspaper for it's utter political incorrectness.

I guess the whole "organized movement against individual posters" is the bad that outweights the good, the good being the stimulus to post something others would appreciate. Classic case of bad apples spoiling it for the good in the basket.

So it boils down to a bit of a shame, actually. Forum reputation is a form of energy. Good or bad, it's still energy. A community needs energy.

The twist to the positive to end this post: are you thinking of anything to replace 'forum rep'?

[K'Arian]

So that's moderation in moderation, then?

I do think you're right, though, and it's not just online. Real-life meetings (the work-related kind) are generally supposed to have a chairperson, and even brainstorming sessions benefit from one. (Brainstorming is of course not supposed to be highly structured, but a 'controlled chaos' kind of thing does work nicely.) Of course, in those kinds of meetings, the chairperson's responsibility is more to keep things on topic than to prevent fighting, but I do think it shows that if you really want to have a discussion (as opposed to general chit-chat / (hopefully) amiable conversation), you might want to put someone in charge.

I think some of these forums fall in the 'just conversation' (and despite my phrasing, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that), but others are meant for constructive discussion, i.e., you're hoping for some kind of outcome other than 'that was fun'.

I think we (as a community, including Turbine as active listeners, even when they don't join in the discussion) could benefit from having at least a few threads where someone takes the responsibility to keep things on-topic (including encouraging people to take a side-topic to a new thread), maybe summarize every once in a while, perhaps even PM users who haven't participated in the discussion yet but might be interested (based on their previous posts). At least, it would be an interesting experiment. I have no idea how to select such a chairperson, though. It needn't be a moderator, but somehow, people need to agree that within this thread, this person is more-or-less 'in charge'.

I have noticed on certain sections of the forums a list of names at the bottom of the page who are highlighted as moderators. I have no idea who they are, but I guess part of the Turbine community team? Saying that, I dont know what their role is, although I assume that they move posts from place to place etc, although I have to say, any cautions seem to come from sapience mainly (as far as I have seen) so unless they report to him and he weilds the axe? *shrugs* dunno is the answer, but it appears someone is already moderating. But I like your thinking and how it relates to a real world meeting idea

[K'Arian]

The "Rate this Thread" function already in place is a good start. Enhancing it visually so that it is used more would help a lot, I think. The key here being that people are rating the thread and not the poster.

yes and yes...had not sapience highlighted this feature to me, I'm not sure I would have noticed it at all and I agree with your point about rating the thread and not the poster.

[Sapience]

I have noticed on certain sections of the forums a list of names at the bottom of the page who are highlighted as moderators. I have no idea who they are, but I guess part of the Turbine community team? Saying that, I dont know what their role is, although I assume that they move posts from place to place etc, although I have to say, any cautions seem to come from sapience mainly (as far as I have seen) so unless they report to him and he weilds the axe? *shrugs* dunno is the answer, but it appears someone is already moderating. But I like your thinking and how it relates to a real world meeting idea

You'd be amazed how often I'm 'credited' with things the moderators do. They actually do the bulk of the moderation, warning, and infracting.

[Crell_1]

You'd be amazed how often I'm 'credited' with things the moderators do. They actually do the bulk of the moderation, warning, and infracting.

You'd think the name attached to the notification message might leave people less confused about that wouldn't you? *boggle*

As for "Rate This Thread" It doesn't allow us to highlight specific posts in the thread. Often, there's only one or two gems in a thread, and it seems foolish to rate a thread based on one or two buried posts.

Rated threads, to me, seem more appropriate for reddit, than a traditional discussion forum.

[Mirnir]

As for "Rate This Thread" It doesn't allow us to highlight specific posts in the thread. Often, there's only one or two gems in a thread, and it seems foolish to rate a thread based on one or two buried posts.

Fairly certain that thread rating is a standard feature of vBulletin and the only option Turbine is likely to have is to disable it.
I've always seen that option as a 'This thread topic is quite interesting and others may like to read it' button, although I have never clicked on it before. :P

I think we're probably quite lucky there doesn't seem to be a post rating feature of vB - the potential for abuse seems quite high to me.

[Krysstofur]

[QUOTE=K'Arian;6781770]yeah good one, I am sure there are many many people out there who are turned off from the forums by this kind of reaction from more seasoned posters


I am one of these. I may reply to a thread now and again going forward, but seriously doubt I'll ever start a thread again. I was surprised buy the depth of unpleasant attitudes and a few posters seem go out their way to pick apart and belittle. Criticism is good, but fair part of what I saw was not constructive in any way. I'd have plenty to say in response to being called childish, but am certain anything added would only be fodder for the insult cannons. I have to assume pyre burning newbies is a way to maintain dominance, but whatever the reasons I think I'd just as soon not share any thoughts on much of anything. I am even dubious of the value of this post here of mine.

In short, yeah way turned off.

[K'Arian]

You'd be amazed how often I'm 'credited' with things the moderators do. They actually do the bulk of the moderation, warning, and infracting.

and this can only be a good thing really Are they more background staff? I mean to say, it is not often that they pop into a thread to say anything or do anything to keep things calm, anytime I have seen this happen, it usually has your name attached to it? Or is this a case of "I'm Spartacus"??

[K'Arian]

I am one of these. I may reply to a thread now and again going forward, but seriously doubt I'll ever start a thread again. I was surprised buy the depth of unpleasant attitudes and a few posters seem go out their way to pick apart and belittle. Criticism is good, but fair part of what I saw was not constructive in any way. I'd have plenty to say in response to being called childish, but am certain anything added would only be fodder for the insult cannons. I have to assume pyre burning newbies is a way to maintain dominance, but whatever the reasons I think I'd just as soon not share any thoughts on much of anything. I am even dubious of the value of this post here of mine.

In short, yeah way turned off.

Very sorry to hear about your experience Krysstofur, but don't let it put you off completely. Things change hopefully your next thread will be met with better company

[Lestache]

You'd be amazed how often I'm 'credited' with things the moderators do. They actually do the bulk of the moderation, warning, and infracting.

Respondeat superior.

(In a slightly less fancy iteration: you're responsible for what your employees do. While the above may be a legal doctrine, in your case think of it as the standard manager-managee relationship: those who work for you, whatever they do reflects on you.)

[Whiteberry_Laurelin]

I am one of these. I may reply to a thread now and again going forward, but seriously doubt I'll ever start a thread again. I was surprised buy the depth of unpleasant attitudes and a few posters seem go out their way to pick apart and belittle. Criticism is good, but fair part of what I saw was not constructive in any way. I'd have plenty to say in response to being called childish, but am certain anything added would only be fodder for the insult cannons. I have to assume pyre burning newbies is a way to maintain dominance, but whatever the reasons I think I'd just as soon not share any thoughts on much of anything. I am even dubious of the value of this post here of mine.

Well said and true unfortunately. There's often an extremely discouraging attitude towards people posting - whether they are new or old on the forums. I've been really taken aback of how hostile people are, especially since I consider in-game LOTRO so much more mature than most or all other MMOs that I know.

My reaction is much like yours; avoiding it by not posting again about topics that attract this behavior. It's too bad, since the threads lose input from a large portion of the community.

[K'Arian]

Well said and true unfortunately. There's often an extremely discouraging attitude towards people posting - whether they are new or old on the forums. I've been really taken aback of how hostile people are, especially since I consider in-game LOTRO so much more mature than most or all other MMOs that I know.

My reaction is much like yours; avoiding it by not posting again about topics that attract this behavior. It's too bad, since the threads lose input from a large portion of the community.

yeah there is a considerable difference in maturity between the in-game lotro and the forums. Whether that can be explained by those posting hurtfully are no longer active in game, or perhaps its more a case of here they are not so easily identifiable as they would be in game, I don't know. One thing I do know is that things on the forum have improved slightly, and although it won't change overnight, perhaps in time an environment will be in place were posters like krysstofur will feel more comfortable speaking their mind without fear of being trolled for it. But we can't do it alone, and more obvious help from moderators would be welcomed

[fallohide]

...Here, not so much. It is heavily abused, misused, and a popular griefing tool (rep up your friends so you get enough rep to neg rep peope who disagree or you don't like)....

Exactly as I and dozens of others predicted - good riddance... The forums will be far better without it. Why? Because, as it is, this post is likely to get me neg rep'd by someone who likes rep because they've done/do exactly what was described above. It doesn't have anything to do with the helpfulness of any post.

[Krysstofur]

My reaction is much like yours; avoiding it by not posting again about topics that attract this behavior. It's too bad, since the threads lose input from a large portion of the community.

Yeah, the ones that tend to be more reasoanble (are not so hostile) have a smaller "voice" overall as a result. Which relates to my comment about dominance.