New Features For 06/09/2002

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by ZeroOne
I think JP is basically saying that 1/5 deserve negative ap's and only 1/4 of the rest 4/5 (that's 1/5 of the posts also) deserve positive ap's. 3/4 of the posts wouldn't get antipoints at all.

---

Then you're still saying that there are as many posts that deserve positive points as there are that deserve negative posts ( one-fifth compares to one-fifth as fifty percent compares to fifty percent). I simply do not think that's true. 75/25 (or, 1/5 - 1/15) is more realistic.

Also, keep in mind the consequenses: if you keep the balancepoint at 50/50, there will be as many members banned as there will be members reaching (approximately) 3 greenies. (I'm assuming here that antipoints within 3 greenies plus and 3 reds are distributed evenly. JP might have taken this in consideration in his implemention of the system, in which case this alinea was a total waste of time ;) ).

At first I was against the idea of "balancing", but after JP posted his clarification, I really see no problem with it -- now that we know the "balance" isn't 50-50. I think most of us would agree if you go back over some of the more recent posts we've had by our infestation of s'kiddies, we could easily hit a 70-30 split on APs.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by BlazeTech
... in my Opinion it is almost a form of censor ship.

---

And I don't see it as censorship, I see it as a way of JP putting responsible members in more of a position to make this community "self-policing". Assign -APs to the goofs and get rid of them. That way we keep those who are interested in contributing to the community and "kill off" the bad seeds.

IMHO

hehe..this whole thing reminds me of the uproar when they brought in a cat licensing bylaw here...people up in arms...on both sides...biggest response the city ever had to any bylaw...over something that was so irrelevant....just proof that ao is a true community....people here care about what happens here...

congrats jp...

Who gave zigar those AP's? Why? The post wasn't very helpful or anything... Isn't that what JP just suggested should be left off?

I think antipoints pull other antipoints near them by creating some strange magnetic field... In other words, if you already have many (positive or negative) ap's, people will give them to you even more... It's the same with single posts and individuals (users).

It's an overrated feature. I'm sure if some of the regular people here started losing 75% of their green lines, there would be a furious uproar. You can say whatever you want when you're at the top and posted on the main page as a top antipoint earner. Like I said previously, I'm not giving out reds. If that means my greens don't mean as much, the person will get my message saying that I enjoyed their post with my name attached, if greens don't really matter, then the effect of my positive points shouldn't matter either, since they're of lesser value if you don't balance out your assignments.

I'm not really worried about it. It's pointless anyway.

Quote:

---

The post wasn't very helpful or anything

---

Well I'll apologise now, because here's another post that isn't going to be very helpful either (unless there is a FAQ somewhere that says that I'm only allowed to post tutorials) :(.

/I/ gave them. And here's why (not that I feel the need to explain myself but I will anyway):

1. Timliness - Zigar's comments injected some much needed perspective into the thread at a point where opinion was polarising fast.
2. Good use of analogy - In this instance the analogy is used the reflect the relative insignificance of the argument by focusing on a nice little story about cat licences. This allows the reader to re-evaluate their own arguments objectively, without being drawn back into the argument.
3. Having used the stylistic device of analogy to get the reader to step back from their arguments zigar gets the reader take an objective look at the bigger picture, which is that all the people that have posted to this thread have done so because people really do care about what happens here.
4. zigar finished the piece with the upbeat comparison of the Anti-Online community and that of a small town Canadian community for whom their community ideal is worth enough to argue over. This made me smile.

As I said before - I don't hand out points needlessly. But a post doesn't have to be the length or 'War and Peace' to be relevant or of merit. Keep them coming Zigar (you write 'em - I'll do the literary criticism ;)).

Eh, ok, good enough explaination. :)

I'm starting to get bored to this subject already... :rolleyes:

You're not the only one, my friend. The thread subscribers are thinning out fast.

At the end of the day we've all had our say - as zigar said: it's only because we care. I feel safe in the knowlede that JP can weigh the merits of these arguments for himself, and, as I said previously, I have every faith that AO will be the better site for whatever course of action he decides to take. After all it /is/ his site.

Can we go back to discussing security again now?

Thread closed?

Greetings All:

Well, after 24 hours almost, it looks like this new part of the AntiPoint system is working perfectly. The algos. have already "realized" that the initial ratio that I assigned for "balance" wasn't appropriate, and has changed to between 60% negative and 80% positive.

Many of you had worries about users getting auto-banned that shouldn't be, and in the last 24 hours, only 2 users have been auto-banned, and if you check, they definately deserved it.

Keep the faith, heh.

I think you could call that a pretty strong vindication of my last post.

:thumbsup: JP - you the man.