December 11th, 2001, 06:00 PM
Abolish the antipoint system
I thought that the original purpose behind antipoints was to help weed out those who continually made bad posts, but instead people are using it to play stupid games concerning who they think is "stupid." This abuse of the system is wasteful. My suggestion is to abolish the system totally. Since negative antipoints dont prevent someone from posting, and positive antipoints have no real incentive, this would be an easy transition.
Wine maketh merry: but money answereth all things.
December 11th, 2001, 08:15 PM
December 11th, 2001, 08:38 PM
It's kind of a weird social pecking order thing here. I mean, the ones with quite a few Anit Points are senior memebers with a lot of posts, most of those are good too. Yet I could give anyone + or - ap's for any reason I choose. ThePreacher, I could decide to give you + or - right now for absolutely no reason, other than I want to click on the link and either talk **** or praise you for a job well done.
Your post could have said bL3Tch or fo0 or barF with no content and I can give you some + ap's. Conversely you could have written an `epitome of modern computer security' and I could give you - ap's with a comment like *UberC0der 0wn5 j00*, or ***** OFF for no apparent reason outside of immaturity.
In a perfect world with mature users (Which AO does not [always] have), the ap system would work well, other than the issues those with less ap's would have.
Know this..., you may not by thyself in pride claim the Mantle of Wizardry; that way lies only Bogosity without End.
Rather must you Become, and Become, and Become, until Hackers respect thy Power, and other Wizards hail thee as a Brother or Sister in Wisdom, and you wake up and realize that the Mantle hath lain unknown upon thy Shoulders since you knew not when.
December 11th, 2001, 09:40 PM
I was waiting for somebody to post this. I wanted to post it myself, but I figured I would just come off as a whiner. I agree completely. It has been nothing but a source of tension and fighting almost since the beginning. It has been the point of hehbris's membership. He loves to piss people off with AntiPoints. It also leaves a lot of people in fear of speaking their minds. They know if they do, they will be rained on by negative points. Maybe I'm wrong, but I have never heard of dissenting opinions deserving negative points. I say we should let people's posts determine a person's reputation, and stop AntiPoints from getting in the way.
You should post a poll on this. When people can post their opinion anonymously, you will probably get better feedback. I'll bet a lot of people will agree with you.
December 11th, 2001, 09:58 PM
...Or, we could set some standards for AntiPoints. I mean, this is the earliest stage of the system, of course there are going to be a few 'bugs' - in this case, being irrisponible and immiture users - but lets not trash the whole idea. Maybe if there was some regulation, or rules, maybe even standards that you must follow in order to give somebody a postive or negative AntiPoint. For instance: Maybe your name will always be givin...or you must always post a comment (for I have a few with no comment whatsoever). Who knows, maybe even throw in something together where Senior Members get 'special priveledges' with a certian amount of AntiPoints - this may or may not include only Senior Members of course.
But what you have to understand is that, yes, there are going to be computer illiterate little punks running around the place - for they are everywhere. And yes, there are going to be the few that post helpful, useful, benefitial comments and positive or negative AntiPoints where needed. Don't be disgraced so soon... lets just see what happens. Maybe JP is working on a "Versian 2.0" or something. Heh...funny to think of it like that...
...This Space For Rent.
December 11th, 2001, 10:14 PM
In theory, it's a good idea. In practice...well...two people were banned cause of it. People, including myself, have been bitching about it for awhile.
In theory, JP's measures should allow the good posters to get points. The bad posters wouldn't be allowed to affect anything.
In practice, the antipoints have proved themselves unworthy. They're a good idea, but there should be different, safer ways to earn them. And the negative antipoints should be reserved only for truly bad posts.
Maybe each post should get a voting box. If enough people dislike it then the poster gets negative antipoints. One person's opinion shouldn't be enough, I don't think.
Another think that'd be nice would be more classifications then Senior, Normal, and Junior members. Maybe the members with lots of posts and lots of points get Uber member or something else. And the people with lots of bad posts...well you can come up with your own ideas.
December 11th, 2001, 10:38 PM
well first of all, there is no point in bitching, cause jp isn't going to get rid of the system.
second, the point system in theory is a good idea. but like all good ideas, it needs some refining. for example, i think you should be able to take back antipoints if you make a mistake (within x number of days or hours or something)i think that the solution is a list where everyone votes on what changes they think should be made. the top x (x being a number that can be later determined.) and those should be implemented.
December 12th, 2001, 12:55 AM
(sung to theme of krusty krab pizza)
antipoints system, is not the system, for you and me, absolutively!
ahem! i couldn't agree more that antipoints system as it is now is completely useless.
December 12th, 2001, 01:11 AM
I, along with stflook (and many others, i'm sure), have been waiting for this very thread.
Plain and simple...if the AP system continues being used as it is currently being used, FLUSH IT!
The idea is sound, but like I have said in other posts relating to it, anything involving input(interactivity) of opinion, WILL be abused by those that: a) like to piss people off(as everyone DOES sigh when recieving negative points, like it is an assault on one's character, integrity, etc), or b) just like hitting random buttons.
Good ideas will always be subject to scrutiny and abuse...but then that good idea should be modified accordingly (Terr's idea that i originally opposed is a good example).
As I see it, there should be a good reason for recieving negAP, like: being a jerk, posting falsehoods or with less than honest motivations (the hotmail, etc, kiddies), lying to cover one's own ass, etc.
Likewise, recieving the posAP should be for: being respectful and decent, posting helpful and informative things, and asking relevant and worthwhile questions (NOT 'how do i hack (blank))...
Just my opinion, of course...
Either way, it's beyond anyone's control...anyone except for the creator of it...
"entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem"
"entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity."
December 12th, 2001, 02:49 AM
Having not been a member very long, and not really understanding the whole concept/idea behind the antipoints system (other than what I read), I can think of a rather fast workaround for making it a bit more serious to post positive/negative points towards someone's post.
These are all hypothetical and may be completely ignored but they're ideas nonetheless:
2: Allow everyone to see "what side of the scale" any member is for assignment, meaning if I have a total of 30 point assignments and 20 of them are negative while 10 are positive, I'll show as "negative assigner" or some shite...
3: combination of 1 & 2?
4: laugh me out of the forums?
We the willing, led by the unknowing, have been doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have done so much with so little for so long that we are now qualified to do just about anything with almost nothing.