The AntiPoint Vendetta

I'm going to do this in reverse by stating my line of thinking and then my suggestion, so please bear with me.

I have seen some members here loose AP's in a very rapid fashion, and I mean un-naturally rapid. I have also been told through pm's both here and on irc of members 'ganging up' on individual members that they have decided that they do not like and hammering them with negative AP's in an attempt to get said member banned. Looking at these two factors together, one lends credence to the other, IMHO.

JP put a lot of time and effort into the AP system to make it fair for all, and serupticiously cicumventing those controls to harm another member just because you do not like or agree with him or her is quite frankly dishonest and cowardly. Ganging up in this fashion is not only bullying, but it is also bigotry. Bigotry, no matter what your justification, is wrong. Racism, religious predjudice and gay-bashing are all forms of bigotry just as bullying is, and cannot be tolerated. As a proud member of this community, I object to one small group deciding that they have the right to dictate who stays and who goes in OUR community. JP, as the founder, is the ONLY person who should have that right.

So here is my question, and hence my suggestion...can the AP system be set up to recognize such patterns ( members a, b, c, d, and e have all assigned negative AP's to member z x number of times) and take corrective action ( a suggestion: reverse the AP's that z got when the pattern is recognized, then assign the same number of TOTAL negs to a-e as punishment for their misdeeds OR a message appears that states no more AP's may be assigned to this member for x amount of time)? It's just a thought, and I hope I'm not stepping on TOO many toes with this one, but it certainly seems like it would make an effective deterrent. JMHO

Here's another idea... Have the system recognize events when a bunch of accounts assign points to the same user at about the same time. I think this is another time to plug my probably-not-gonna-happen Gold Dot idea.

But then it would be hard to say for certain that it was organised bullying!
I completely agree with what you are saying and it is a cowardly act but what is to say that a b c d e have not always found the peron in questions posts to be against the code of conduct of AO?
Take for instance some previous members of AO like GbinaryR - his posts where nothing short of stupid and am sure alot of the same people hit him with negs alot of the time for his posts which were little more than a waste of server space....now if your system was working then the people who had given him negs for (a) bad post(s) would find themselves being negged oO

It would be too hard to get a system that could distinguish between
coencidence - & bullying
deserved negs & bullying

its a good idea but I fear not feasable :(

v_Ln

yup...you're right Terr....to be fair, the system has to work BOTH ways.

i would be more concerned 4 new members who get hammered once by a senior member (with 100's of antipoints), pretty much ensuring the inevitable demise of their account. its a deep hole to crawl out of.
example:
allenb1963 :it would prob take 100's of antipoints to get you in the grey.
you hit me once and my green turns to grey.

I see your point valhallen, and upon reflection I fear I was remiss in divulging all my thoughts. Part of the abuse pattern appears to be assignments to old threads which could be figured in when the system is scanning for a pattern of abuse.



SynapticFailure: I've had some thoughts on that subject also, and you can view them here.

I agree with your point about old threads - if a thread has not recieved antipoints when it has been new then people should not be able to dump on it later on

perhaps a system could be added so that once a thread is past a certain age - say when the <blink> tag comes into the date then that thread cannot recieve any more antipoints?

I know this will not help with the issue you are addressing but it would go some way to combating people hunting out old threads and using them to balance their points when perhaps the person who wrote in that thread has since became a more decent member of AO

v_Ln

I agree with valhallen's last post in saying that old threads should not be able to get antipoints based on the fact that people use it to balance out points or simply to give neggs. However, if someone saw say on of... Ennis's tutorials because they either just came back or are new and want to give it greenies, then that can't happen. I still agree with valhallen however.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by valhallen
I agree with your point about old threads - if a thread has not recieved antipoints when it has been new then people should not be able to dump on it later on
perhaps a system could be added so that once a thread is past a certain age - say when the <blink> tag comes into the date then that thread cannot recieve any more antipoints?

---

Suggestion Made Here

what about monitoring how many AP's a person gives out and if most are negative and are dated pretty close together send them a warning

The worst thing here are the witch hunts that appear occasionally. Someone asks something, or makes another contribution to the board, which is either misinterpeted by someone else, or someone else makes unfunded accusations, and the whole damn world follows the latter, dumping shitloads of neg's on the victim.

People in here should start thinking and checking facts for themselves before spending antipoints. I don't think that the antipoint system is to blame here, some people are just ignorant.

I agree Guus, and thats the whole point of this thread. It's not the AP system that is at fault at all, it's a few of the people using it to abuse others for stupid reasons. I know I've hit a nerve with some people here, I've seen the red evidence in my own AP center and I'm glad I can see it. It means I'm right....it means there are people here who don't want the system to punish them for acting like schoolyard bullies with a fifth grade mentality. Every neg that moons me calls me a b*tch, a jack*ss or tells me that the giver 'rules' validates my point and puts a smile on my face. As I said in an earlier post, it reveals them as the true cowards that they are, afraid to state their opinions in a public forum where they have to attach their name to their words and reveal their true faces for all to see.

Actually, I wasn't talking of abuse. I was talking about the 'follow the leader' mentality that rules some people - it's not on perpose, it's acting without thinking.

has anyone ever thrown the idea around of taking the anonymity factor out of it.
this might curb some of the abuse. i saw a thread float around recently about how antipoints should be used as "constructive criticism", i agree absolutely. but people who can just assign with the comment 'dumbass' or something to that effect dont have to account for their actions and that certainly isnt constructive.
im sure everyone here has gotten some rude vulgar message to that effect in their experience here, am i right??

The no-more-anonymity one has been bandied about quite a bit, and shot down numerous times. (Is it three digits, now?)... So, I feel it safe to say that the AP assignments are NEVER going to be forced out of anonymity.

If it's just plain laziness in reading, you can't do much. What I worry about more is when people check the dot status of the user and that subconsciously influences how they read the post.

What if the dots under the name were removed? You could still see them in the profile page...

Thats actually a really great idea. How often have newbies had their posts go suicidal for a post a vet would get positives for? Its annoying to see them go suicidal before you can help that person out with an answer. I hope that one sticks terr. And I like that pattern recognizing idea, I was thinking maybe when that happens, the users could be flagged and an admin could check out their AP assignments to see whats going on and to see if they were abusing the system.

i dont mean to get away from the main subject here but how come i got negs for my last post here? was just a suggestion dats all
and yeah i agree with kahkisrule about flagging the main neg abusers

hmmmm....how about a "top ten negative AP assigners" and a "top ten positive AP assigners" list on the main page? That would shed some light on the subject! LOL

I was going to post this last night...I woke up at 2 am with my face in the keyboard.

Quote:

---

how about a "top ten negative AP assigners" and a "top ten positive AP assigners" list on the main page?

---

Good idea allenb1963, and dump the lists that seem to stay the same all the time, or maybe add a page like a top 10 or top 20 page that shows these. that might even allow for cleaning up the clutter on the main page. :cool: ( I think this has been discussed before although I am too lazy to look it up right now )

I like the basic idea of the original post, especially terr's idea. Instead of giving someone negative points for their actions though, I think they should get a Mr Miagi style warning saying that they are being watched for antipoint abuse. If they continue, then instead of just giving them negative points...ban the account. That way they all have to start over from zero.

By giving them the warning, it will give them a chance (if it is coincidence). It's kinda like making a thread go suicide before someone gets banned from one post. During the warning period, it could/should be set where that person can not give/recieve antipoints either. They still make the assignments as normal (to get rid of the warning), but the assigment are always 0 points. The only problem I see with that is that someone could start giving lots of green points to someone they normally give red's to (and vice versa) just to get rid of the warning.

I am seeing way to many people get lots of antipoints that don't deserver them, and way to many people getting negative points that don't deserve them also.

the newbie that said something about 1 negative assignment would take him back to grey> The most any 1 person gives out right now is approximately 70 points. With 2 green dots, you need 200 negative points to go to grey.

top10 assigners> well, if you are relativly balanced, the people are going to be the same on both lists. The people that are abusing the system are giving eachother positive points, so they are staying balanced. I wouldn't be surprised if I show up on both lists, simply because I give out over 50 points per assignment, so the total points given out adds up really quickly.

IMHO as I'm still new here, but I have noticed that some perfectly good(good as in neither deserving positive/negative) get hit for no reason. One thread like that came up today, it's here.
And then I've actually seen good and factual posts get negged (who knows why), but totally undeserving. Not just 2 or 3 or 4 negs, I'm talking very negative and extremely negative.
The AP system seems to be doing it's job, but I think,(again MHO :)), the easiest way to limit abuse would be to have "AP Moderator" for lack of a better word. Yes some people will always come whining saying how they got negged for no reason etc, but one could put a limit on how many grievances you could bring, in say a month. Those who keep coming back when it appears that they dont have a case or whatever, the moderator could give them a warning.
As for people using their points unfairly, if a valid complaint is found, the abuser could be warned, and if it happens again, he/she starts losing one green per new abuse...

To the mouthbreathers that slammed me into negativity for my comments earlier in this thread: you only served to prove me right, faceless little bitc***. you are living proof of what is wrong with the system.

WOW first Allen think it is an excellent idea, second am amazed at the usless threats people make out here. Common thing being a security site not a damn ego race, at least NetSyn says he is a student and one I for that matter respect very much even though I got kids his age. That being said the tweak would be good I see just what you are speaking about I see greenies go away from people that in what they have given but in an off the wall comment. I've never gotten a PM about such things but yes I do see people attempting to mess with the point system. Humm Senior members will give their points and again as I see it here you cannot buy their points and they are given at their choosing. Patterns are easy to spot hard part is what is ligit or what is a complete BS point assigment.