September 13th, 2002, 04:14 PM
Another AntiPoint Suggestion :\
Ok i know everyone is sick of hearing about the antipoint deal, and ive mentioned this suggestion a few times before but never really got feedback, now its time to make it its own thread.
Recently a few members have been banned for AP Abuse, now i know JP is a very busy man and cant monitor APs all day long, so i suggest that he put together a team of moderators that will take care of antipoint abuse, members that think that they are being abused will have a little button that sais "Report AP Abuse" and it will then send some sort of message to the moderators that will help them choose if this is abuse and how sevire it is... if it is just minor abuse the abusing member will get neggs added to his accound and the harmless member will regain his lost APs... while if this is extreme abuse the abusing member will be banned... also members who tend to hit the abuse button too many times for no reason will also suffer negs.
The AP System is not perfect and it will never be, but as long as little things are put up it will improve greatly just as it has in the recent months.
Well give me some feedback on what you guys think.... JP make some nice comments on this as well please.
September 13th, 2002, 07:15 PM
I agree again and again with this. The APs system need moderator(s).
I suggest that APs moderators haven't got the public title of moderators to not be exposed to pressures.
Life is boring. Play NetHack... --more--
September 13th, 2002, 07:39 PM
Moderators for about 116700 members! LOL
People should themselves know the culture of using it...
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."
- Albert Einstein
September 13th, 2002, 08:06 PM
Just get rid of the damn things,
by the way where's my AO lunchbox?
Just ignore Antipoints, they are little dots on a screen. Just dont be stupid and you wont be banned.
September 13th, 2002, 08:13 PM
For what it's worth, I think that the current system should remain. I am a newbie and negs hurt me a lot more than they hurt more senior members in terms of being banned. But I think that JP would have to really trust the people that he chose as moderators when it comes to banning members.
What I first think of when considering this is the most recent incident where some really senior members, the one's that are implicity trustworthy and reliable, were banned for antipoint abuse. The people that do the moderating would have to be carefully screened to make sure that they could be impartial all the time and could be trusted to deal with their friends accordingly if the situation were to ever arise.
Please don't get me wrong...I am not saying that the more senior members aren't trustworthy. I am merely making the point that everyone at one time or another can suffer from bad judgement.
I think the anonymity of the system as it stands is best. Today if I try to give one user multiple positives in different posts it tells me that I have to spread my points around so that I can't give a lot of positives or negatives to any one member. The only true solution to a problem would be to remove the system entirely, but that leaves trouble makers in the mix.
For the most part I think that we all need to focus less on greenies and more on the content that we post.
Time is a created thing -- to say \"I don\'t have time\" is like saying \"I don\'t want to.\"
September 13th, 2002, 08:30 PM
hmmmm...maybe a group of seniors/moderators who review reported abuse and determine whether evidence indicates further investigation is warranted? JP is waaaay to busy to have to deal with this crap, but recent events have highlighted the fact that abuse DOES occur. It's a shame that the actions of a few threaten to degrade the experience for us all.
It isn't paranoia when you KNOW they're out to get you...
September 13th, 2002, 09:55 PM
allenb, thats basically what im saying.... it should be a system where somehow (havent thought this all the way through) you can anilize the antipoints someone got and why without knowing the nick of the person who assigned them... as far as banning members go maybe the abuse PM should be sent to a group of moderators and if they all vote lets say on a scale of 1-10(10 being the most sevire) and the average is 9 then the member is banned.... do you get my drift? that way the say so wont be with only 1 person, it will be with a groupe or commity...
And AntiPoints REALLY dont matter to me... i get negs and posatives ALL the time.... but the fact is that senior members abuse this as we have seen, and newbies do get banned that shouldnt be banned... also i think it will keep AP Wars to a minimum and will make people think twice before giving a stupid AP.... i got a neg yesterday for cursing saying that i should of specified it hidden, and i totaly AGREE with it... i take that neg with no problem... its an example of what the AP system SHOULD be... but then u get some that either dont give a comment (wich i think they must) or say something like "screw you" wich i also recieived......
This hurts the newbies ALOT more then the senior members and i think that they should have a sort of way to apeal it.
September 13th, 2002, 10:41 PM
maybe suspend the account, pending banning until the matter can be looked into by aforementioned appointed personnel? therefore someone who made a stupid comment doesnt get bounced out in a record time, just put on hold for review? or maybe this would create too much work...
The ark was built by amatures...
The Titanic was built by professionals.
September 13th, 2002, 11:41 PM
The AP's shouldn't matter in a perfect world. But this isn't a perfect world, and there are people who abuse the system. JP doesn't want to, nor does he have time to, deal with this 'kiddie' **** as he so aptly labelled it. Frankly, I don't blame him one bit, either. He's already the 'Mayor' of the community, the head of the "AO Chamber of Commerce"....the last thing he needs is to have to be the "AP cop" too. With the volume of complaints he must surely face there are just not enough hours in his day to address them all. As I said before, it's a shame that the actions of a few threaten to degade the experience for all of us.
It isn't paranoia when you KNOW they're out to get you...
September 15th, 2002, 02:36 AM
To cut down on possible abusers, why not put this as an option after a user has contacted the member regarding the antipoint assignment on their post and received no satisfaction? Better still, require all members to leave some type of comment/reason when assigning antipoints and in those instances where the assignment is unjustified (as shown by the original comment or from user contact, etc.) - have an option to "Request Reversal" or something along those lines. The user would then pick from a list of reasons (2-4) for their request and the 'requests' could be forwarded to an arbitrating committee for review. If the user abuses the system or their reason for the request is unproven, they would themselves be subject to negs or . . . whatever as suggested earlier. If a user has to actually put a little thought into these requests, it may help cut down on over-use. I would also like to suggest that when/if a committee is chosen, that at least one member from each group (newbie, addict, senior, etc.) be appointed so that there is more of a feeling of equality and fair play. If AO members actually followed the guidelines JP set for the antipoint system, none of this would be necessary, but as pointed out, this isn't happening. I feel it would be a shame to lose the system as the concept behind it as well as the work that went into it, were for the betterment of the site and its members. It's easy to see from everyone's posts though why so many members think some type of regimen is needed and why JP feels this is so much "kiddie crap".
All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them. What lies behind us and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.