Jump to content


Reputation system


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
64 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_Drew_*

Guest_Drew_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 July 2010 - 09:28 PM

What really is the purpose of this reputation system, and what productive outcome is projected by using it ???


I'm splitting this off since the other topic is going another direction.

Jim, it really is a work in progress. The software has had it for awhile but we never implemented it. The purpose is to recognize those that contribute beneficial content to the forum. It isn't our intent to create a "Like" system found on other sites. If it comes to that, we may have to readdress it.

If we find that it is being abused, we will address it. Based on your forum group, you are limited to how many posts you can vote up and down in a 24 hour period.

#2 Guest_Irate Mormon_*

Guest_Irate Mormon_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 July 2010 - 10:19 PM

I'm toast. It's been fun, guys!

#3 Guest_CATfishTONY_*

Guest_CATfishTONY_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 July 2010 - 10:43 PM

i notice some members have a + green tab and a - red tab with a counter is this the new area to vote for reputation?
will all member have this tab?

#4 Guest_Drew_*

Guest_Drew_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 July 2010 - 10:46 PM

Tony, you vote on a post by post basis but since you're limited per day, make sure it is worth voting on.

On every post in the lower right hand corner you will see a + or -. If it has been voted on, you will see a number. Once you vote on something, you can't vote again.

#5 Guest_Jim_*

Guest_Jim_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 July 2010 - 07:25 AM

I'm toast. It's been fun, guys!


I dont think so Martin :lol:, see, you already have one good vote. This is probably a pretty good toy of sorts, but with all the worthy posts made here, i gotta save the rest of my votes, Rule #1 (Dont waste your votes)

Thanks for explaining that Drew.

#6 Guest_mikez_*

Guest_mikez_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 July 2010 - 08:53 AM

We're to be judged on how well we're liked???? Joy.

C ya in homeroom.

#7 Guest_Kanus_*

Guest_Kanus_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 July 2010 - 09:14 AM

Considering the fact that we have always been able to report spam/offensive/irrelevant posts to the moderators via the "report" function, I really don't understand the reasoning behind this. Are we trying to give new members who don't know us a heads up as to who to listen to and who to ignore? I hope the utility of this feature becomes clearer as time goes on.

I'm not going to say I'm against it, I just don't understand why we would implement this other than to add more bells and whistles.

#8 Guest_Uland_*

Guest_Uland_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 July 2010 - 09:17 AM

We're to be judged on how well we're liked???? Joy.

C ya in homeroom.



I got a chuckle on that one Mike.
The system could turn into a popularity contest but I doubt the majority of the membership will turn it into that.
The system should serve as a tool for members to recognize what is expected of content on this forum. A thread asking "what do largemouth bass eat" will likely get poor marks since anyone who has read a few words on the subject knows they eat anything. Many longtime members have stopped using the forum due to clutter and it seems the forum no longer serves the membership. Something has to be done to to maintain content here.
We could do this with a heavy moderating hand but the complaints would be endless. This allows the participants here to moderate on their own. Once we see what irritates people, we can clean up the clutter and try to get this place back on track. If topics are terribly unpopular (and reasonably so) they will probably disappear. Topics with good marks can help guide users to bring the bar up.



#9 Guest_bumpylemon_*

Guest_bumpylemon_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 July 2010 - 10:49 AM

Im already seeing - on statements that are quality content...just because people dont agree they reflect it negatively. like in the forum change....i get marked negatively by a member that obv is above everyone else. its gonna be a popularity contest. there are old school members here that dont understand forums and realize it is a gathering of people discuss whatever the forum is about. i can say this now...i wont be apart of this if its gonna be like "scientific knowledge only" or topics about "why dark rocks make a certain snail produce more offspring". everything doesn't have to be so serious all the time...people need to chill out. look at martin. he has a sense of humor..makes joke posts....thats the way it should be. people need to get with the times...

#10 Guest_farmertodd_*

Guest_farmertodd_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 July 2010 - 11:37 AM

The issues are simply solved by honoring an individual's level of committment to NANFA in paying their membership (thus tying them to a code of ethics) and drastically reducing the number of places non-NANFA members can POST messages.

Although I don't know this particular database structure, any other that I've ever looked at, this is an hour of changes that are going to resolve A LOT of problems (including the ones about how we as a MEMBERSHIP appear to agencies!). Please consider this.

I also think "Member" should be renamed "Guest" and "Guest" renamed "Lurker", but don't let that distract from my primary message.

As far as I'm concerned, the only reputation I care about is whether or not an individual is a NANFA Member or not, and I post accordingly. Go figure that it works out that people who have "NANFA Member" next to their name that have posts I enjoy reading (this extends into newbie type questions btw), and consequently respond. If that's elitism, then I guess I'm elitist.

FWIW
Todd

#11 Guest_bumpylemon_*

Guest_bumpylemon_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 July 2010 - 11:41 AM

The issues are simply solved by honoring an individual's level of committment to NANFA in paying their membership (thus tying them to a code of ethics) and drastically reducing the number of places non-NANFA members can POST messages.

Although I don't know this particular database structure, any other that I've ever looked at, this is an hour of changes that are going to resolve A LOT of problems (including the ones about how we as a MEMBERSHIP appear to agencies!). Please consider this.

I also think "Member" should be renamed "Guest" and "Guest" renamed "Lurker", but don't let that distract from my primary message.

As far as I'm concerned, the only reputation I care about is whether or not an individual is a NANFA Member or not, and I post accordingly. Go figure that it works out that people who have "NANFA Member" next to their name that have posts I enjoy reading (this extends into newbie type questions btw), and consequently respond. If that's elitism, then I guess I'm elitist.

FWIW
Todd



todd great suggestion....paying members should be called NANFA Members in red like it is....and forum members that dont pay should be called guests. that may spark people to join as well. and will clear up confusion that i have seen with members saying "i thought i was a member" while they are a forum member they arent a NANFA member.

#12 Guest_mikez_*

Guest_mikez_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 July 2010 - 01:06 PM

Good luck to you.

Somebody should change my status as member. I haven't been able to afford to pay for awhile but I'm still listed as member.

Hope you have good luck recruiting new QUALITY members. might be a bit quiet for awhile.

Edited by mikez, 05 July 2010 - 01:21 PM.


#13 Guest_Kanus_*

Guest_Kanus_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 July 2010 - 01:26 PM

The system should serve as a tool for members to recognize what is expected of content on this forum. A thread asking "what do largemouth bass eat" will likely get poor marks since anyone who has read a few words on the subject knows they eat anything. Many longtime members have stopped using the forum due to clutter and it seems the forum no longer serves the membership. Something has to be done to to maintain content here.


Alright, I do see the utility in that, though it is still ultimately a function of how we collectively utilize the feature. I have a suggestion then, in case no one has mentioned it. For people registering for the forum, there needs to be a disclaimer, a little information about the system and its intents. This way, new forum members will already be aware of the system before their first post, and can't claim newbie's ignorance. Also, is there a way to post a net tally of the person's "reviews" next to their profile picture and/or screen name? This would aid people that don't feel like going to each member's profile to investigate them after they read each post.

#14 Guest_ashtonmj_*

Guest_ashtonmj_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 July 2010 - 01:39 PM

Im already seeing - on statements that are quality content...just because people dont agree they reflect it negatively. like in the forum change....i get marked negatively by a member that obv is above everyone else. its gonna be a popularity contest. there are old school members here that dont understand forums and realize it is a gathering of people discuss whatever the forum is about. i can say this now...i wont be apart of this if its gonna be like "scientific knowledge only" or topics about "why dark rocks make a certain snail produce more offspring". everything doesn't have to be so serious all the time...people need to chill out. look at martin. he has a sense of humor..makes joke posts....thats the way it should be. people need to get with the times...


The old school members are the ones that created this forum, volunteer their time to maintain it, moderate it, and have slowly begun throwing their arms up and walking away from it and the organization. It has nothing to do with how to function within a community,or how some people think an internet forum that has had a relatively clear direction since day one should work. This isn't a bunch of dinosaurs lagging behind in social media, emoticons, slang, and random 140 character or less thoughts about native fish. Those members never even joined the forum in the first place. The fact is many of us don't NEED the forum to enjoy NANFA and native fish. If I want to talk to Todd, I send him an email. In fact, most of my communication with NANFA members exist solely outside of the public view of forum.

I personally like the suggestion of changing the distinction between forum members and NANFA members to make a little more explicit distinction, so I'm giving it a positive vote. That certainly isn't a popularity contest, that is giving kudos to a valid point. If it does turn into one, I'd imagine I'll recieve many negative votes or have somewhat of a nuetral rating, since I rarely contribute things to vote positively on like identification assistance and inverts anymore. If my reputation is tarnished so be it, no sweat off my back. It's the internet. This has been a great way to spend parts of my paternity leave while my newborn son sleeps; pondering why I come here, not coming here for days, since after all it was assumed I'm wasting tax payer dollars with my ample "free" time by visiting the board to rant while on the clock.

#15 Guest_ashtonmj_*

Guest_ashtonmj_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 July 2010 - 01:40 PM

Alright, I do see the utility in that, though it is still ultimately a function of how we collectively utilize the feature. I have a suggestion then, in case no one has mentioned it. For people registering for the forum, there needs to be a disclaimer, a little information about the system and its intents. This way, new forum members will already be aware of the system before their first post, and can't claim newbie's ignorance. Also, is there a way to post a net tally of the person's "reviews" next to their profile picture and/or screen name? This would aid people that don't feel like going to each member's profile to investigate them after they read each post.


Awesome idea Derek. I think this was even posed once amongst mods, some sort of auto PM with an introdcution, etiquite, background, etc. Positive vote for you!

#16 Guest_bumpylemon_*

Guest_bumpylemon_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 July 2010 - 01:47 PM

The old school members are the ones that created this forum, volunteer their time to maintain it, moderate it, and have slowly begun throwing their arms up and walking away from it and the organization. It has nothing to do with how to function within a community,or how some people think an internet forum that has had a relatively clear direction since day one should work. This isn't a bunch of dinosaurs lagging behind in social media, emoticons, slang, and random 140 character or less thoughts about native fish. Those members never even joined the forum in the first place. The fact is many of us don't NEED the forum to enjoy NANFA and native fish. If I want to talk to Todd, I send him an email. In fact, most of my communication with NANFA members exist solely outside of the public view of forum.

I personally like the suggestion of changing the distinction between forum members and NANFA members to make a little more explicit distinction, so I'm giving it a positive vote. That certainly isn't a popularity contest, that is giving kudos to a valid point. If it does turn into one, I'd imagine I'll recieve many negative votes or have somewhat of a nuetral rating, since I rarely contribute things to vote positively on like identification assistance and inverts anymore. If my reputation is tarnished so be it, no sweat off my back. It's the internet. This has been a great way to spend parts of my paternity leave while my newborn son sleeps; pondering why I come here, not coming here for days, since after all it was assumed I'm wasting tax payer dollars with my ample "free" time by visiting the board to rant while on the clock.


i agree. my communication is mostly done now outside of NANFA with members as well. but without this forum in the first place to have new recruits then i wouldnt of ever had that ability. which i greatly appreciate. sure if NANFA wants to be skull and bones and turn away from new members it has that right. but lets not discourage people who lack the knowledge and experience some people have gained from here. fact of the matter is NANFA is small and it should want to grow...the more numbers we have the bigger the effect we can have on conservation. for example mike going to that NJ meeting about protecting the mud, black banded, and bluespotted sunfish in NJ. A state where they are great in numbers...his voice was heard but not listened too. if NANFA was larger and had members how up its possible their would have been a bigger impact.

#17 Guest_ashtonmj_*

Guest_ashtonmj_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 July 2010 - 01:55 PM

for example mike going to that NJ meeting about protecting the mud, black banded, and bluespotted sunfish in NJ. A state where they are great in numbers...his voice was heard but not listened too. if NANFA was larger and had members how up its possible their would have been a bigger impact.


This is a completely different discussion that revolves around credible, quantitative data, somewhat of a lack there of, global population trends, habitat loss, and collecting pressure, not the size of NANFA or its members not being heard out by resource managers.

#18 Guest_Uland_*

Guest_Uland_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 July 2010 - 01:57 PM

Golly Bumpy...this isn't about moving to a secret society, it's about having thoughtful posts once again becoming an expected part of the forum.
Even new members can put some effort into questions that more experienced people might know off hand.

#19 Guest_bumpylemon_*

Guest_bumpylemon_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 July 2010 - 02:03 PM

Golly Bumpy...this isn't about moving to a secret society, it's about having thoughtful posts once again becoming an expected part of the forum.
Even new members can put some effort into questions that more experienced people might know off hand.

i agree. i think everyone agrees thats what needs to be done...but by reading a lot of other peoples post it comes off that NANFA is heading that way. which i know people who run this forum such as yourself don't think that or wont let that happen. but i can stop outside and see thats the general consensus. but we all know new members are gonna have thoughtful posts...they are "newborns" to native fish for the most part. im not gonna expect a 1 year old to ask in depth questions. it takes time and education for them to grow. but at the same time i understand that google works wonders and most questions can be answered easily. but is it really that bad when people are new and they want an ID of a LMG or some simple fish? does it really take time out of peoples lives? there are like 2 new threads a day....some times a few more....its not like members have to skim through 8 pages to find an informative topic" sometimes its nice to have new members come in with an ID and help them learn. you never know the doors that could open....worked for me.

#20 Guest_Uland_*

Guest_Uland_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 July 2010 - 02:09 PM

Well....much of the new posts every day are simply chatter or stuff you could answer via a quick google search. This has driven NANFA members away that have paid dues for a dozen or more years.
Thoughtful discussion is what brought most of the new membership but I don't see much thoughtful discussion these days. I don't speak for anyone but myself but, I'd rather have 5 good posts a day rather than 25 posts of chatter.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users