Subject:
|
Re: A modest proposal from a modest person
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 24 Oct 2001 20:58:31 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
967 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > Fair enough. In fact why don't we take turns. Each time someone else slips
> > up it's the other one's turn not to get replied to by the group.
>
> In fact, the more I think about this, the more I like it. It gives a very
> strong incentive NOT to post irrelevant things, and instead to post things
> that are so compelling that people want to reply to them.
>
> As long as I'm the one "in the penalty box" any dross I post will be easy to
> ignore for everyone else (ditto for Scott if he's in) BUT posting something
> really engaging gets me out and puts Scott in. Now HIS dross gets ignored
> but if he can come up with something great, back in I go.
It's really a rather good idea actually... A good bend on the original
proposal, though as usual it's the implimentation that's difficult.
As more of an aside, anyone familiar with perlmonks? They've developed quite
a good system for behavior that's rather similar. Each member gets to vote
on posts (nodes) in terms of how good/bad they are. Rather similar to what
we tried here with the rating system. Differences being that:
1. Each user only has a certain number of votes per day, so you can't go
downvote *everything* by another user.
2. Getting downvoted will occasionally affect the *person's* ranking--
random chance. Also, voting may positively affect a person's ranking (random
chance-- 1 in 4 chance I think?)
3. The higher the *person's* rank, the more votes they get per day.
4. If a post gets downvoted enough, it gets reaped. I'm still not entirely
clear on how that part works, but it's to that effect.
Of course it'd be difficult to impliment such a system on Lugnet, and one
might expect seperate ratings per sub-group (I.E. Larry's Train rating would
be 500, while his o-t-debate might be 7.) Interesting speculation, and less
in need of administration, as the democracy takes care of itself, but
entirely difficult to deal with on Lugnet considering the present setup.
> It just needs a scorekeeper. I nominate a Dave (to be rotated).
Dave!, DaveL, DaveE, or Dave Johann, depending on the week? (1 out of 4
Dave's has a spiffy little sig!) What does the job pay? How many grey tiles
would I get?
DaveE
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: A modest proposal from a modest person
|
| (...) The person who posted or the person who is ranking? (...) How does this differ from Slashdot ratings (which I admit I have not closely perused the mechanics of)??? It sounds kind of similar. (...) Unless you can find some other Dave, yes. (...) (23 years ago, 24-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: A modest proposal from a modest person
|
| (...) In fact, the more I think about this, the more I like it. It gives a very strong incentive NOT to post irrelevant things, and instead to post things that are so compelling that people want to reply to them. As long as I'm the one "in the (...) (23 years ago, 24-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
118 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
