Silent Guardian Or Topic Of Conversation?

Greetings All:

Looking back over the past year in the suggestions forum, I see soooooooooooo many touching on the AntiPoints System. In the end, most of the suggestions, and the responses to them, seemed to be made without much thought. Seeing as how the system has become perhaps one the most central technologies driving and motivating this community, I felt the need to start an intelligent dialogue on the subject. It is my hope that this can be the catalyst for a new system.

I really really hope that the moderators will keep this thread heavily moderated. Childish outlashings, off topic rants, or comments that were obviously not well thought out don't belong here. While I know that one of the goals of AntiOnline is to be self moderating (and I know that to be one of the goals, because that's how I originally designed this community way back when), this thread is much needed, and is much needed to be intelligent and well thought out.

In my last suggestion thread titled "Getting Back To The Going Back", one of my suggestions is that the AntiPoints System, at least how we know it know, needs to go away. The main reason, is that the system itself is obviously not achieving its designed purpose, and changes that have been made to it in the last year and a half take it even further away from that end.

So, in order to understand what a new system should look like, I think it might be helpful to explain what my intentions of the current system were when I designed it:

I got the inspiration for the AntiPoints System from a small little vbulletin hack called "Karma". The original idea of Karma, is that users could assign positive Karma or Negative Karma to one another and in return get fancy little icons. That's all it did, cute little icons. How...Cute.

But, I liked the idea of members of a community evaluating one another. And honestly, at the time, I was a very busy person, and knew that there was NO WAY that I could possible juggle all of my responsibilities, AND make sure that members of the discussion forum weren't acting like total jackasses to one another. To put all of this in perspective, while this was all going on I was working on a project for the Department of Defense to create an automated profiling system that would catalog hackers, their motivations, and their risk assessment based on dozens of "virtual fingerprints". In the end, what I had hoped to do one day, is to take that technology, and integrate it into AntiOnline, with some tweaking, to allow for the autonomous profiling of its members. Not to determine identity, or for law enforcement or any of that mess. Simply to determine if a member was contributing to the community in a positive or negative manner. Needless to say, the system never got anywhere NEAR that far.

Here were the original thoughts for the intermediary system, which didn't take long at all to come up with, that was to serve as a temporary solution until the automated profiling system was complete:

Ban Abusive New Users, Stop Flame Wars And Off Topic Posts, Identify Trusted Users, Reward Community Contributors

#1. Quickly allow for abusive new members to be exterminated. Abusive users would register accounts and spam the heck out of the forums left and right. I certainly couldn't be awake 24 hours a day to watch out for these new users. Often, I would find a ton of new threads had been created overnight by one of these abusive users. This was the one of the original ways I used the karma hack inspiration. If several users that have been a member for a long time, and who were respected by the community, were all saying at once THIS NEW USERS IS BAD NEWS, the system trusts these long time contributors, and bans the abusive user. BAM, abusive users were often banned within 5 minutes of starting their bullcrap. No more troubles.

#2. Quickly allow for the elimination of flame wars. If people were bitching back and forth, other members would scold them for doing so, and after a thread reached its boiling point it would close. BAM threads were committing suicide left and right. No more flame wars, no more off topic bull.

#3. Build a trust system, so that new users could weigh the validity of the advice that they were being given. Should I or should I not really download that program, should I or should I not really type that command? Certainly new users should have a way to quickly identify who is trusted and who is not yet trusted in a community. Thus the green dots were born.

#4. Provide a system of rewards for those users that were contributing for the community. This never got implemented at ALL. The idea was, users would be given access to more things, the more they contributed. People like to feel that their contributions are appreciated, and this was going to be AntiOnline's small way of doing it. Free shell accounts, e-mail accounts, T-shirts, etc. etc.

At first, the system as I implemented it worked very well. However, I knew that if left active for too long without change, the global pool of points for long time members would grow to a point that the system would collapse and become counter-productive. This, IMHO, is EXACTLY what has happened.

Now, let's evaluate what the current system is actually doing.

#1. Ban Abusive Users: I believe, for the most part, the system as it exists DOES allow for the quick extermination of newly registered users whose sole intention is abuse. However, at the same time, it now causes MORE problems by opening up hidden abuses. AntiPoint Alliances, multiple accounts for cross assignment, and the list goes on and on.

#2. Eliminate Flame Wars: How well do you all feel this is currently working? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

#3. Build A Trust System: No. Definitely not happening. I see many a dumbass on here with more green dots than you could shake a flaming stick at, and believe me I know a thing or two about flaming sticks. They got their dots for telling funny jokes or kissing ass. NOT the intention of the original system, and seeing a ton of greenies next to these people is not at all helpful to anyone.

#4. Provide Rewards: Unfortunately this isn't happening at all.

In response to the obvious failings of the system, users have made suggestions, and JupM has implemented many of them, that are just making things WAY worse.

The BIGGEST of these stupid user suggestions was doing away with the Anonymous AntiPoint Systems. This decision, in and of itself, totally erased the potential of this system being useful to stop flame wars. JohnDoe just Neg'd me, screw JohnDoe! Hostility is the NATURAL reaction for most users. Granted the level of hostility varies from users to user. How? New users that don't have many AntiPoints to begin with get REALLY pissed, while old users that have a billion of them couldn't give a crap less if they just lost 10 or 20. The current system has people bitching left and right with one another about assignments, and retribution is being taken out left and right as well.

This suggestion was not thought out, and the decision to implement them was not thought out. Newbs were BEGGING me from the beginning to get rid of the Anonymous assignments, and if you look back, time and time and time again, I shot down this request. FOR GOOD REASON! I don't care how many of you say "oh i like it this way" or "oh this is good", you can NOT defeat flame wars without allowing members to squash them without the fear of retribution. That was the purpose, to have an anonymous way for people to say to one another STFU already! Again, long time users with huge AntiPoint piggy banks (many of which were earned by telling jokes) couldn't care less. New users face all the wrath of this decision.

CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE

Changes will HAVE to be made. The AntiPoints System is causing the site to spiral downward at ever increasing rates, and that will just continue until the whole thing crashes down in on itself. Now, without implementing DOD backed research into this site, and coming up with a major programming project, here the changes that I feel, as the original designer of this system, need to be made to fix it:

#1. There needs to be an earn-out cap. After a user achieves a certain number of AntiPoints, they can neither gain or lose them. Not being able to lose them isn't a big deal. How the hell would the community be able to ban someone with like, 100,000 AntiPoints anyway? The original intention of being able to auto-ban abusive users is no longer necessary or even possible for users that have achieved a high AntiPoint Status. However, these users accumulating HUGE banks of AntiPoints that they can unleash like nuclear weapons against one another IS problematic.

So, implement what I had started way back when, The Gold Dot. After a user has been a member for X period of time, and has attained X number of AntiPoints, they become a Gold Dot trusted member.

#2. Bring back the Anonymous AntiPoints Assignments. Yes, users will bitch, but they have no idea what the consequences of this really is to the system as a whole. Start Neg'ing all the bitchers until they either leave the site, or shut the hell up about it, which ever comes first. Better to lose a couple of lame members that throw a fit over anonymous AntiPoint Assignments, than to lose people in droves because the site is nothing but one big flame war.

#3. Get rid of the off-topic forums like I mentioned in my last suggestion, so users no longer leap ahead by telling a funny joke or two. Or, if this isn't going to happen, get rid of the AntiPoint Assignments in all forums that are off-topic. This is a security site, and you should gain trust and respect ONLY by participating in security discussions.

#4. Provide rewards. Tshirts are cheap, but people appreciate the token of being appreciated. Or, if Tshirts aren't cheap enough, add some fun new features for these great contributors to AntiOnline! If you really want to make things work, give them a Tshirt AND fun new features both! W00t!

These quick easy changes could be made in less than a day, but would go a long way towards helping to keep the system afloat until a more drastic redesign can be accomplished (and believe me, it NEEDS to be accomplished).

I have many ideas of what a new system should look like. I hope to share them in the future if there proves interest, and I hope that others share their well thought out ideas also. An automated moderation system can NOT be an amalgam of haphazard user suggestions, it must be planned out and designed in advance as an integrated unit with each component serving a purpose and working in unison with the others.

A huge percentage of the discussions on this site revolve around its moderation system, which would be a silent guardian of conversation, not the primary topic of it.

JP:

Quote:

---

#1. There needs to be an earn-out cap. After a user achieves a certain number of AntiPoints, they can neither gain or lose them.

---

But doesn't a Gold dot also preclude you from giving points too. That would work against the premise of self moderation since the people most likely to be able to kill a thread or ban a (l)user by virtue of their mountain of AP's won't be able to.

Quote:

---

Better to lose a couple of lame members that throw a fit over anonymous AntiPoint Assignments, than to lose people in droves because the site is nothing but one big flame war.

---

Absolutely.

Quote:

---

#3. Get rid of the off-topic forums like I mentioned in my last suggestion, so users no longer leap ahead by telling a funny joke or two.

---

Perfect. I've been whining about getting a private area for the purpose of quality security related conversations for ages. Mainly because I thought there was no chance of removing the existing forums without a bitchfest. Removing the non-security related forums will also go a long way to determining which users are here for serious content and which are here for green dots.

Quote:

---

Provide rewards.

---

Unnecessary.... Furthermore they will lead to the same problems you have with green dots right now. People will come with the intent of getting their shirt rather than learning or teaching.

This place has gone downhill and JP is right about the AP system being the topic of the site rather than a tool within it being one of the major causes. I would add that those people who come here and whine consistently about AP's are the ones without the knowledge to be of use to the site, (hence their negative assignments), and without the maturity to be participating in what should be intelligent discussion about serious matters in the first place.

I'm with JP here... I'd love to see the site regain some focus. Focus that has steadily been eroded of late.

Greetings:

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Tiger Shark
JP:

But doesn't a Gold dot also preclude you from giving points too. That would work against the premise of self moderation since the people most likely to be able to kill a thread or ban a (l)user by virtue of their mountain of AP's won't be able to.

---

Absolutely not. The Gold Dot user would be able to make assignments, but the "punch" of that assignment would always be limited to whatever the appropriate cap is deemed to be.

Perfect..... when can we get this done..... ;)

Over all I can agree with most all of this.

The one major point of contention would be the "Anonymous AntiPoint Systems". By showing the posters name, the assignment of negs with the use of some one elses name attached was defeted. This practice by some members, was causing flame wars and alot of bad feelings and relataliations among members.

Perhaps some comprimise where the assigner is anonymous to the users but visible to the mods and admins could be used to stop this behavior from starting again.

Greetings:

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by moxnix
Over all I can agree with most all of this.

The one major point of contention would be the "Anonymous AntiPoint Systems". By showing the posters name, the assignment of negs with the use of some one elses name attached was defeted.

---

The solution to this, is to remove the comment field all together. It's unnecessary. 99.99999% of the time when someone makes a post that's getting Neg'd a lot, they know damn well why, and that it deserved to be.

One reason NOT to go back to anonymous APs: abuse. The point of making that information available is to keep users accountable. AP alliances are much easier to pull off with anonymous assignments.

- h

Thanks for the suggestions JP.

The earn-out cap sounds like a good idea, and I also agree that we should probably get rid of the AntiPoint Assignments in all forums that are off-topic. I'll discuss it with the other mods and admins see what we can do.

Thanks,
intmon

I think removing the AP assignment in off topic forums may cause us some problems. We, the community, would no longer be able to deal with the trolls, spammers and general idiots. Maybe as a compromise, we remove the ability to assign 'personal' AP's but still be allowed to assign 'thread' AP's. That way the community could still help manage crappy threads/posts and the Mod's could then manage the person(s) that post the crap.

Cheers:

Greetings:

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by DjM
Maybe as a compromise, we remove the ability to assign 'personal' AP's but still be allowed to assign 'thread' AP's. That way the community could still help manage crappy threads/posts and the Mod's could then manage the person(s) that post the crap.

Cheers:

---

I agree with this idea. I really liked the seperation of thread ratings vs. individual ratings, although I'd like to see the site FAQs updated to help explain things to new users, as it does add a layer of complexity that wasn't there before.

Being able to still close threads in off-topic forums is certainly necessary, and removing just the individual ratings is a great solution.

Overal very good suggestions, JP. I would like to emphasize some issues already brought up, though:

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Tiger Shark
Unnecessary.... Furthermore they will lead to the same problems you have with green dots right now. People will come with the intent of getting their shirt rather than learning or teaching.

---

I agree. Rewards of any kind, other than the fact of contributing, are wrong motivators.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by mnstrgrl
One reason NOT to go back to anonymous APs: abuse. The point of making that information available is to keep users accountable. AP alliances are much easier to pull off with anonymous assignments.

---

Indeed.

Something else:
I do not agree with the "thread" APs for off-topic forums. They should be banned altogether for those forums. APs should only be used for threads/posts intented to contribute to the collective knowledge base. If they remain in place, people will assign points because a joke is funny/not funny, a political/religious oppinion is not to their liking, or when they do not agree on what OS is better. You could advocate that people will only use them to filter out crappy threads, trolls or spammers, but we all know that this isn't a very realistic prediction, especially when the AP system becomes an anonymous one.

[edit]
Other points; when a "gold point" is implemented, it shouldn't be applied to those who currently have a high AP amount. The amount should be reset, and APs should be re-assigned using the new system to avoid results based on old corrupted data (ie, high AP status because of jokes). I also think the titles (Jr. Member, Sr. Member, etc) should be based on this new AP status, and NOT on post count.
[/edit]

If I could change a few things about this site one of the first things I'd change is all this blue coloring which is counter-acting agianst AO's good ol` play-doh'-container look. Thread AP is lame... and once agian it seems that it is just another large object that no one knew where to place onto the site... so they just tossed it up into the top/center area of the site... much like AO's ads.

The whole "thread AP" thing should be tossed. People are already talking about how useless it is most don't even use it... but then the folks at JupM had to go and annoy people with it by making it stick out like a sore thumb just as a joke or something. And really, thats what alot of added things are now. Think about it, how many of you guys even use half the features here?

LOL, can we finally get rid of post count?

I think that would help with Addicts access.

Many have proven before time and time again that all it takes is a couple hundred posts over 3 days, and you're in. I got bitched out and applauded when I closed a couple post whoring threads in GCC by setting the Nego Blaster 5000 so high Bush would have loved to have found it in Iraq.


There will be whining if post count is done away with, but I think it would be a great idea. Make Addicts only for invited people, which Terr can choose and invite people, and then we can watch as every Gmail thread comes back with "can I have an Addicts invite!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!" But at least you can say no to post whores.

Or, if possible, make it so Security dicussions are the only ones that count towards your post count.

For APs... Heh, when do I get my Gold dot? I know damn well a lot of mine were from being a smart ass, but I do actually contribute too.

I'm very willing to sacrifice my post count for my above ideas, and as for the Gold Dot, hey, cool. I mean I think it's pretty safe to say I'm not going anywhere, and from my calculations, I'm about 2,000 points ahead of TheHorse, who is right under me now.

TheHorse should have a Gold Dot, I mean come on, the guy adds more here than some have in two years. Myself included.

I think Negative And MsMittens should be given Gold Dots like, very soon. Mods shouldn't be allowed to be banned from APs, which is theoretically possible if enough people spanked them red over a period of like, say, 8 months.

Hmm, instead of Gold, can my dot be blue? Or maybe a SUSE or Slackware logo? You might say no right now, but I got told I couldn't have a custom title of BOFH a long while back, and now everyone can have one when they meet certain criteria. So I'll at least try, heh.


And, for the AO store, I may finally be able to order something now. I have more money coming in, and I got access to a Credit Card. Which is how I made my purchase from Slackware. So expect my order for a Tshirt and a Coffee Cup. Which I want VERY badly.

I'm also doing what I can do advertise AO. I can say I have gotten a few people to join from school, and I use it in class a lot. I did a few presentations where I loaded AO and showed the class how to find information here too.

Ohhh, one thing, maybe AO could strike a deal with Jolt Cola???? Dude, Intmon!!! Buy Jolt cola with APs!!! That would rock. I think I have enough for stock in the company lol.

Hmm, what else..... Ahh, tutorials. Members reading this:

Get off your asses and write more tutorials! They are very useful, and hardly anyone writes them lately. I've been working on a new one, which is the second chapter to my SUSE tutorial, which I just started, so hopefully I can get that going soon.

Now, I do kind of like the idea of getting things for contributions, but that does arise with a problem as Tiger pointed out, but it still is a good idea.

Maybe setting something up like "if you can have a custom title" or something like that, THEN you qualify for a Tshirt. that could maybe be something.

And how about an AO party? That would be fun.

How can we make AO generate more funds for Jupiter so that they can afford some things to spend on us? Good content comes to mind, which goes back to contributing members getting something. One idea could be like, contributing members can get software, or maybe something like that. Just throwing ideas around right now.

Oh, we could hold a contest too! Have free hardware as a prize, or something like that. Jup offered a cash reward for whoever won the re-design contest, how about more things like that? Make it exciting.

Besides the fact that mods/admins should have gold dots by definition, I don't think anyone should recieve gold dots based on their current AP count. No matter how much someone contributed in the past, the AP system is too corrupted compared to the sytem proposed. And if you give a gold dot to one person, you'd have everybody asking for someone to check their past posts and confirm they deserve a gold dot.

On the issue of post count, I don't see why the actual reference to it should be altered or removed. I think people are intelligent enough to see someone's a post-whore if he posted 4000 posts but has a every low AP status (considering only on-topic discussions will be included in the AP system). I'm only saying that nothing "special" (forum/feature access) should be based on such an insignificant and unreliable thing as post count.

[edit]let's try staying on-topic :)[/edit]

Hmm, I only looked at it in my head, but does the Binary in your avatar say trust your technolust? I may have screwed up and lost place, but I'm not sure.

Hey Hey,

Good lord.. I've suggested getting rid of stuff in the past.. but this is getting ridiculous... Everyone needs to step back.... We've seen the suggestion to remove user APs from non-security threads.... that prevents us from self-moderation... the solution posted was to leave thread APs.. sure we can close threads.. but we wouldn't be able to ban people who spam and so on... sometimes someone needs to be banned and it's nothing a place where the mods can legitimately ban them... they're just a nuisance and it's the user base that wants them gone... I've posted the idea of allowing users to opt out of the AP system... but removing them completley for senior members also isn't a good idea... There are many seniors here who help out a lot and have said several times a good chunk of the reason they come is for the APs.... Get rid of them and we stand to lose some useful people..

The fact of the matter is that there is currently a working system in place... and regardless of what anyone says... for the most part it works... We as users have control over who posts and what they post... but not complete control, we have rewards (regardless of what they mean a lot of people enjoy those rewards.... they like that green dot that tells them they helped someone... hell some people like the red dot that tells them they're a pain in the ass)... We have management that is actually listening to our requests and contemplating them.. and working to make this site better.

Maybe I'm the only one who's seeing this... but JP seems to always come back with these ideas that cause descension in the ranks... We all know JP knows what he's talking about both with computer security and with running a successfuly website, however we also know that he's not exactly best friends with JupM... and I think he get's great joy out of disrupting us with the posts every so often... APs are not the problem with AO.... it's the lack of security oriented discussion.... I've commented on this several times.. and everytime I do hordes of people rush forward to say this is a community and to defend the non-sec forums.. Now JP comes along and posts it and everyone is too afraid to oppose him.... as if he's some sort of God.. I've come to accept what others have argued... That AO is a community and as a community requires those non-sec forums... everyone one of us that opposes them has posted there at one point or another... Another problem is posts related to APs.. including this one.. JP had his whole write-up about not wanting bitching and rants... but don't we all know that if you don't want something to come up the easiest way to make it come up is to mention it... Maybe that's what JP was intending... to get a bunch of people in here bitching about APs.... no one can say for sure.. His posts tend to cause a lot of controversy..

What we need is Tiger Shark's invite only forum.... Give it to him... I think most of us trust him to invite the right people in..... Let him moderate it... If he needs help, I'm sure he'd ask.... it can't hurt to try it out... Those who cry it's elitist... APs are elitist, so are post counts (in a way)... so are titles... so is everything on this site... I think that's the easiest solution to our current problems....

Anyways... This is another example of a thread that needs to be closed.... It's AP bitching in another way....


BTW Sick Dwarf... mods should have purple w/ pink polka dot dots.... :)

Peace,
HT

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by HTRegz
There are many seniors here who help out a lot and have said several times a good chunk of the reason they come is for the APs.... Get rid of them and we stand to lose some useful people..

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by HTRegz
... they like that green dot that tells them they helped someone... hell some people like the red dot that tells them they're a pain in the ass)...

---

Because they helped someone? Those dots serve a more selfish ego-related purpose. I'm not sure it's healthy when people share knowledge and participate in communities because of their valued "social" status and forum moderation power given to them by a modified vBulletin hack. If most of the members who contribute to the collective knowledge base do so because of APs, AO will degenerate even further no matter what is or isn't done.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by HTRegz
APs are not the problem with AO.... it's the lack of security oriented discussion.... I've commented on this several times.. and everytime I do hordes of people rush forward to say this is a community and to defend the non-sec forums..

---

I think one of the reasons we're having so little security-oriented discussions is the AP system. People are posting for the wrong reasons. The only reason why this site, with it's current AP system, is still active as it is today is because of its off-topic and "general" forums. If you leave the AP system as it is, AND remove the off-topic forums, the site will die.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by HTRegz
Now JP comes along and posts it and everyone is too afraid to oppose him.... as if he's some sort of God..

---

Assuming your little generalization includes me, I take that as a personal insult. Where in any of my posts did you get the feeling I'm to "afraid" to oppose him? How the **** did you get the idea that JP is as a "god" to me? Do you know what the word "god" means? Besides that, only Tiger Shark completely agrees with JP. Everybody else is discussing something else or doesn't agree with one or more points in his post.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by HTRegz
Another problem is posts related to APs.. including this one.. JP had his whole write-up about not wanting bitching and rants... but don't we all know that if you don't want something to come up the easiest way to make it come up is to mention it... Maybe that's what JP was intending... to get a bunch of people in here bitching about APs.... no one can say for sure.. His posts tend to cause a lot of controversy..

---

Although I agree with you that JP's recent posts seem to have something behind them, I do not wish to generalize and be prejudiced on everything he has to say. In THIS post, he also says that he hopes the discussion will be moderated heavily, thereby promoting a serious discussion instead of simply ranting and rambling.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by HTRegz
What we need is Tiger Shark's invite only forum.... Give it to him... I think most of us trust him to invite the right people in..... Let him moderate it... If he needs help, I'm sure he'd ask.... it can't hurt to try it out... Those who cry it's elitist... APs are elitist, so are post counts (in a way)... so are titles... so is everything on this site... I think that's the easiest solution to our current problems....

---

Yeah, although it's also nothing more then a temporary solution.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by HTRegz
Anyways... This is another example of a thread that needs to be closed.... It's AP bitching in another way....

---

Your way of thinking would ban any future discussion about the system, no matter what it's issues are, or no matter what it does to the site, and its content, as a whole.

I think it's time for me to take a step back and watch AO from a distance for another year. I don't want to contribute knowledge to something that's degenerating and dying anyway. I'd be better off sharing knowledge with certain AOers on an individual basis.

I'm very curious how the community handles, or even discusses this. Later all.

I find it funny that its really only people who have access to addicts that do the most bitching about AP then the word elitist gets tossed around? We've all got rows of green and yet your all the first here to talk about what problems it brings. Pfffft... Hah!

Once agian... keep the recent changes with AP (execpt for this thread AP thing). Maybe get rid of a few unused and non-needed site features. Then do something with the look of the site. Agian, yeah, content is always a great thing... but nothing excuses how recent changes have downgraded the look of the site even further.

I agree with TheSpecialist.. there are a lot of useless features like the my journal and music crap down the side that noone ever uses (or at least not me :) ). I see no problem with the AP system ... no matter what system is used it will always be improvable or not good enough for someone.

[tasteless joke]

Or a better solution to all the problems would be to ban JP. =P

[/tasteless joke]

Intmon, any update on the status of this?

I agree wholeheartedly with JP and most of the other posters here. Let me add another thought --

I suspect perhaps things are a bit overcomplicated in that we have two levels of ranking and rewards. Each poster has two unrelated ranks: 1) AP level, and 2) post count. I believe someone here suggested removing the post count, and that's what got me thinking about this. Why don't we do that? If we had no post count taking place, then there would be little point in post whoring, and then all rewards could be strictly AP-based (such as accessing Addicts once you reach a certain AP level).

I also agree that anonymous APs are a good idea. Mnstrgirl -- granted, there is accountability and a discouragement against alliances, but there is still nonetheless abuse, just in another form now. Now that you can sign your name to a neg, some users abuse the system by using negs for personal vendettas and NOT forum moderation. Case in point, I get many "you're stupid" negs from PM in his countless incarnations, just because I cheesed him off a while back. This form of "AP trolling" seems just as much an abuse as the alliances. However, I presume the alliances could be snuffed by the moderators, could they not?

I think I see the point JP is trying to make with his various suggestions as of late. We need to change our management mindset from pleasing users to simply streamlining and improving the effectiveness of the site and its content.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by AngelicKnight

I also agree that anonymous APs are a good idea. Mnstrgirl -- granted, there is accountability and a discouragement against alliances, but there is still nonetheless abuse, just in another form now. Now that you can sign your name to a neg, some users abuse the system by using negs for personal vendettas and NOT forum moderation. Case in point, I get many "you're stupid" negs from PM in his countless incarnations, just because I cheesed him off a while back. This form of "AP trolling" seems just as much an abuse as the alliances. However, I presume the alliances could be snuffed by the moderators, could they not?

---

This is a problem...

How does knowing from where came the AP stop alliances from happening? Nobody know that I got AP from ***** for a post except me.

I think it's about time to realize that the site isn't going back to where it was and that it isn't going to be changed much.

For the last month or so I turned on almost all forums in my "frontpage view"..... About a week ago I turned off Cosmos and Addicts..... I kept OS and a couple of other _computer related_ forums to see the difference.... Sadly I have to report that without Cosmos and Addicts the traffic has dropped to BS levels..... even with OS etc.... Many of those questions that come in _security_ related forums are more suited to computer support type questions.....

It's not a security site any more folks..... Not even close.....

AO died when JP left and sent it to the tender loving care of a corporate entity who didn't understand it properly when they bought it....... and still don't.....

It's a cute little chat room that, from time to time, someone actually brings up a security issue...

As a user who has returned after initially registering (as Riotgirl) then spent several months away from the board **, I am not conversant with the issues that AO has experienced - however, I have many, many years experience of using web-based forums (much like this one) and the issues being discussed are not uncommon.

1. Personal vendetta's:
Deal with it. People have ego's, more often than not, these are puffed out and inflated more than the indivduals sense of self-worth (compensation, if you like). No matter what system you install, there will always be flames, bitching and disagreements.

Deal with it.

2. Karma system:
The system isn't perfect but I think it's a decent solution precisely because it's open and non-anonymous. Having an anonymous system provides no accountability and absolutely no consequence for one's actions. If someone has a grudge against another user and is constantly negging them, then it's blatantly obvious that they're abusing the system. Either desist or face a ban -- irrespective of how many greenies you have. Simple.

See point 1. No karma system will completely eradicate vendetta's but it keeps people honest. Also, it's so easy to spot post whores (providing they post on-topic, I don't see it as a problem), trolls, lamers amidst the users who post golden nuggets. It's not the post count that matters but the quality and content of the posts -- one or two cursory glances at what users have written tends to either disqualify or justify their greenie/post count rating pretty quickly. Give users some credit and intellect to be able to distinguish between post quality.

3. Lack of content:
If you are referring to a lack of users posting real challenges, or questions/discussions that haven't been asked before then you have to accept that over a period of time, all systems return to mean. Dip in an out of threads, skim read, learn a language or learn to play an instrument, develop a hobby -- in other words, live your life and soon enough there will be a topic that will interest you.

Remember, that the users who know their shitniz and provide answers are probably a minority compared to the one shot posters looking for an easy solution to their problem. As the site grows, and the community grows, for sure the security focus may be a tad diluted but the principle reason for this community is for discussion and knowledge of security issues, as well as sharing that knowledge in an educational and constructive manner.

This forum has been such an excellent resource and my knowledge and desire to learn (pity about my current lack of desire to learn my accountancy topics, eh :P) has increased in such a short amount of time. Two threads by way of example, both challenging orthodoxy and containing educational (if advanced) information:

Firewalls
OS Security


That's my 0.02c and some chump change -- which, by today's exchange rate is pretty damn cheap for me ;)

Regards,
Riotgirl

[edited] P.s. Having mulled this thread over whilst making a cup of tea (how very English and very quaint of me), to emphasize the focus on security (back to the original principles of the site) as someone else has suggested, remove all AP assignments - both personal and thread - for all non-security forums. Besides, users should be able to discuss and debate issues in General Chat without fear of having their opinion shot down in flames just because someone else disagrees and lacks the ability to engage in a constructive debate. The site AUP (as well as mods) will keep users honest.

I'm a big fan in allowing the community to moderate itself.

[edited] ** Paragraph amended for the sake of precision and clarity - oh, and also because I've just read "How To Ask Smart Questions".