A "Free" Forum

[antihaxor]

The death penality thread caused me to consider a couple of things last night. A couple of poeple there got -points just because they expressed thier point of view ( I then went and hit them with green to balance it..even with some I disagreed with) The point system that we have is a somewhat accurate way of determining validity of a poster. The most noteworthy flaw is that poeple don't use -points in the way they were meant. I give -points to rude and obnoxous posts,not to those I disagree with. I propose a "free" forum where points cannot be assigned. I realise the chaos this could create if not moderated properly...therefor I propose that it be moderated. Poeple would then be able to express thier ideas in a polite and considerate way without fear of unjust reprisal. This forum would best be restricted to "cosmos" like issues. Perhaps Negative would volunteer his forum? We could then get a "pure" picture of poeple's positions without them posting just to get +points.
I haven't spoken with Negative about this and I hope I am not speaking out of turn.
JP what is your point of view on this?

[D.J.]

i agree with you. that's the way things should be. this forum should support other
people's views, creating diversity. negative antipoints should not be given to ppl
just b/c you disagree with them. if that were true, none of us might have any
positive antipoints! i support diversity and everyone's opinion is welcome to me.
only if a person is rude, should you give negative antipoints. i'm glad to post to a
forum with people like you.

[uraloony]

Great idea! I think a forum where people can speak their minds without having to be worried about getting negative antipoints would really have people give honest opinions.

[MrLinus]

I have to agree as well. I'm quite dismayed that people would give out negative antipoints just because someone has a different point of view on it. That's the one thing about freedom of speech: the ability to disagree. That said, that doesn't mean you should go a post something inane and useless.

I don't know about Negative but if it were me, I'd ask for the ability to have the AP system not apply there or something like that.

[Negative]

Of course I'd volunteer *cough* my *cough* forum... The original idea for the private forums was an 'invitation only'-forum, where antipoints wouldn't count, if I remember well... Don't know about the 'invitation only'-system, but cancelling the antipoints-system for those forums sounds like a good idea...

I only see one problem: if I really want to give someone antipoints - but am not allowed to do so on the private forums - I'd just go to the 'public forums' and assign my antipoints there...

[Terr]

The problem is that the real jerks would just look for a totally unrelated post of yours in a normal forum and then sock it to you. <shrug> Nice idea in theory, but the execution isn't really practical.

[Remote_Access_]

"A couple of poeple there got -points just because they expressed thier point of view"
- That's stupid. They shouldn't have recived negative points for posting their opinions after I asked them to.. I also added positive points to most of the people that replied with their own opinions even if i didn't agree with them.

"this forum should support other people's views, creating diversity."
- I couldn't have said it better my self.

"I have to agree as well. I'm quite dismayed that people would give out negative antipoints just because someone has a different point of view on it."
- So am I, especially after I specificaly asked people to post their point of view.

"The problem is that the real jerks would just look for a totally unrelated post of yours in a normal forum and then sock it to you. "
- *sigh* Yup, that's the problem..

Perhaps there should be a forum for special members, like the moderators, ppl with good post, and high level of antipoints.. then may be have ppl restricted by 250 post by viewind the thread and then the usr must send in a request to the moderator for the ability to post in that forum. Just a suggestion.

Remote_Access_

[Conf1rm3d_K1ll]

Originally posted by uraloony
Great idea! I think a forum where people can speak their minds without having to be worried about getting negative antipoints would really have people give honest opinions.

It would be nice to write freely without fear of being judged by your peers.


Speaking of which, I had just finished writing a huge thread titled "The (alleged) Hypocrisy of the US Government" for the cosmos thread but alas, fear of overly supportive US citizens with their hoards of neg points scared me from clicking the "send" button....

[antihaxor]

Originally posted by Terr
The problem is that the real jerks would just look for a totally unrelated post of yours in a normal forum and then sock it to you. <shrug> Nice idea in theory, but the execution isn't really practical.

You are probally right Terr...I just got an example of that in my post here:

http://www.antionline.com/showthread...hreadid=155344

Somebody hit me with 6 -points for my post to the Preacher's thread. Could I have offended someone without knowing it? Well ...anyway they might single out members who they feel don't deserve the points they have .but they would at least leave new members alone. It wouldn't be worth thier while to track down another post by someone like that. I'm sure that even with all the points you have you still get stupid -points assigned without just cause(you just never mention it .right?) We do not want to discourage new members with unjust persecution.

[Terr]

Hm. It certainly wouldn't be workable to make the antipoints incomplete until passed by a moderator. Playing favorites and the sheer volume of antipoints would bring it down... I guess the best thing we can all do is look at posts which are "off" and do our best to correct them... the problem is overcompensating. I can't make a tiny-bit-negative post an even post, it tends to go overboard...

WHOAH! BRAIN FART! Here's an idea!
New antipoint-assignment option for advanced users (maybe requires an extra click or two)... the option: "assign toward even". This means that if the post was negative or positive, you could choose "assign toward even" rather than just "agree" or "disagree".

If a user chose that, then the system would record them as having assigned just enough antipoints to bring the post to an 'even' level, up to their max antipoint-whumph...

What I mean is.. example: If a post in 2 points under (-2 points), and I want to add 2 points(+2), I can't, because it probably does some ungodly number instead(+7?), and pushes it over to positive (which I might disagree with)..

So "assign towards even" could use your antipoints in a smaller increment, so I could choose that, and it would stop my input from swinging the balance over 0...

I'm having a hard time explaining this in my own head The basic idea would be that you could assign less than your usual potency in order to bring it to even, instead of using full potency and overcompensating...