A poll for the new JF members.

Admin wrote:So far we have ten votes for and if you add both opposing votes up 14 against. I am thinking a compromise is in order whereby the overall reputation is not activated but the individual post function is. That way you're indivisdual posts can be voted upon rather than your whole character. This would still allow people to flag trollike posts and say thanks for good posts but would not allow character assassination by disgruntled posters and trolls. So basically option two.

I get what you are aiming for. Rather than have any pluses or minuses why not have a thank you button? As I have written this would NOT be subjective nor a collective positive on a persons reputation.
A thank you is just a statement that that individual post has been appreciated by that one reader. No ones reputation good or bad comes into debate.

The thought of having posters at a key board making HIDDEN subjective markings on each others posts cant be a positive?

This is so simple. If you like the post, click the thank you. If you don't like the post reply and debate making your point known, this leads to debate rather than armchair critics making subjective HIDDEN votes on a persons reputation.

The thank you click is non accumulative so no posters will be placed on false pedestals only to be shot down latter when we discover we are all human! Show appreciation with a 'click' and show disagreement by a written reply, all up front and in the open.

This is food for thought. Trying very hard to prevent rather than after look for cures.

Mike

Quicksilver wrote:
Also, where there's a system like that there will be the temptation for some people
to abuse it, and one person with a grudge can have a surprisingly big effect- the
result being that there's not guarantee the results of reputation function would
even be accurate enough to be of practical use.

But this aside, my opinion is that I am inclined to vote against the reputation
system.

Let me state clearly, that I am against any reputation system. Quicksilver is right there is a temptation for forum abuse by the immature. Its very easy for a cloister group to develop and pat each other on the back raising their reputations, then do a coordinated attack against other board members--giving negative reputation to posts/posters that are infact well thought out post. Yes even the internet forums have 'gangs'.

Forums like these serve as another learning avenue for the judoka. So an additional problem with the reputation system is it 'post-frames' posts/posters in the 'ad hominem' bucket. The reputation system doesn't have the granularity to pull out single bad ideas from good ideas so instead it focuses of the reputation of the individual not the arguments themselves. And of course, some readers will take this post-framing (postive or negative) to become their guide and start their thread reading with a pre-framed idea around reputation. Do we really want to guide judoka post readers this way?

I suggest the best system is to use judo. Meet bad arguments with well timed good arguments to make the princple under discussion clear to the judoka readers. In short, let the reader decided for himself/herself the validity of the discussion. Isn't this the best way to learn? Let's not try and build a censorship tool.

Hanon wrote:

Admin wrote:So far we have ten votes for and if you add both opposing votes up 14 against. I am thinking a compromise is in order whereby the overall reputation is not activated but the individual post function is. That way you're indivisdual posts can be voted upon rather than your whole character. This would still allow people to flag trollike posts and say thanks for good posts but would not allow character assassination by disgruntled posters and trolls. So basically option two.

I get what you are aiming for. Rather than have any pluses or minuses why not have a thank you button?

Mike

Hello there,
I have only given it a cursory look so someone with a programing background like Carlo might be better suited to examine this, but the answer seems to be in the way the forum software is set up. As far as I can tell It allows for the following options only :

1. Activating the cumulative reputation system . The "Thankyou" button is part of this function - you cannot have the "Thankyou" button without the cumulative reputation system being activated.

2. Individual post + or - however it appears you cannot have only plus's for individual posts the options are plus or minus. This does however give generalised feedback for individual posts not accumalitive feedback. Not everyone has the time to write a detailed response/argument to every comment they read on an internet forum so I think this is useful - it can give feedback on an individual post without muddying someones overal reputation.

Dew wrote:

Hanon wrote:

Admin wrote:So far we have ten votes for and if you add both opposing votes up 14 against. I am thinking a compromise is in order whereby the overall reputation is not activated but the individual post function is. That way you're indivisdual posts can be voted upon rather than your whole character. This would still allow people to flag trollike posts and say thanks for good posts but would not allow character assassination by disgruntled posters and trolls. So basically option two.

I get what you are aiming for. Rather than have any pluses or minuses why not have a thank you button?

Mike

Hello there,
I have only given it a cursory look so someone with a programing background like Carlo might be better suited to examine this, but the answer seems to be in the way the forum software is set up. As far as I can tell It allows for the following options only :

1. Activating the cumulative reputation system . The "Thankyou" button is part of this function - you cannot have the "Thankyou" button without the cumulative reputation system being activated.

2. Individual post + or - however it appears you cannot have only plus's for individual posts the options are plus or minus. This does however give generalised feedback for individual posts not accumalitive feedback. Not everyone has the time to write a detailed response/argument to every comment they read on an internet forum so I think this is useful - it can give feedback on an individual post without muddying someones overal reputation.

Hiya,

Thanks for the reply and consideration.

May I pass a cast iron example of the problems we now face?

I cant recall the gents name? but on the JF this gent' had been a member for years. He used to post regarding independent judo in the UK? He posted and was well received. The BJA forum closes and the JF has a large influx of BJA members. Now regardless of what this said gent' wrote some of the BJA members would give him a negative post? Some of this gents posts got 20 negatives and was, without a doubt, hounded by one chap in particular. How was such s system useful?

Do we need any bells and whistles at all? It is good to debate how we can improve a forum, is this what is needed? I agree with the post made by Afulldeck, its making a potential problem where there is non.

In the past on the JF we had some truly amazing knowledgeable posters. Who is going to pass a judgement on their posts. Sam sensei comes to mind? If he kindly joined this forum who here is qualified to pass any comment on his judo reputation?

I am now in debate with a decent poster about tsuri komi goshi, I disagree with one of his posts. I would NEVER just give a negative reputation for that, I would do what I have done, reply adding my comments in the hope he will reply so we can both learn from the exchange. Much easier to just press a negative but so unproductive.

There is then what comes next, Forum rank, stars...

YOU have to decide what your expectations are for your forum and set the tone. The JF did the same and here we are today.

This sort of media is not innate or benign it can and does affect on peoples lives in the real world of judo. I think the simpler the system the better. Post and reply, partake and debate or shut up in silence?

Mike

Very good points - out of curiosity has anyone decided to change their vote after reading this thread ?

Admin wrote:So far we have ten votes for and if you add both opposing votes up 14 against. I am thinking a compromise is in order whereby the overall reputation is not activated but the individual post function is. That way you're indivisdual posts can be voted upon rather than your whole character. This would still allow people to flag trollike posts and say thanks for good posts but would not allow character assassination by disgruntled posters and trolls. So basically option two.

That would mean you go for the option with the least votes...

I think a new poll is in order, as a new option that gathered some support came up. Namely Hanons option.

Dutch Budo wrote:

Admin wrote:So far we have ten votes for and if you add both opposing votes up 14 against. I am thinking a compromise is in order whereby the overall reputation is not activated but the individual post function is. That way you're indivisdual posts can be voted upon rather than your whole character. This would still allow people to flag trollike posts and say thanks for good posts but would not allow character assassination by disgruntled posters and trolls. So basically option two.

That would mean you go for the option with the least votes...

I think a new poll is in order, as a new option that gathered some support came up. Namely Hanons option.

I am getting myself into trouble. I respectfully suggest we all post and reply end of. IF the membership want some form of monitoring posts then the thank you click appears the most positive option I can think of?
Going down the rout of passing reputations is unwise and a step back to the old.

New forum. Fresh new start. let bad feelings be put behind us and new friendships made.

Mike

Dutch Budo wrote:

Admin wrote:So far we have ten votes for and if you add both opposing votes up 14 against. I am thinking a compromise is in order whereby the overall reputation is not activated but the individual post function is. That way you're indivisdual posts can be voted upon rather than your whole character. This would still allow people to flag trollike posts and say thanks for good posts but would not allow character assassination by disgruntled posters and trolls. So basically option two.

That would mean you go for the option with the least votes...

I think a new poll is in order, as a new option that gathered some support came up. Namely Hanons option.

As previously explained Hanons option is not an option as you cannot activate the thankyou button without activation the cumulative reputation function. Its built in to the forum software.

What a pickle!

I remember the case that Hanon is speaking about, I won't use his real name, we shall call him Jeff Goldblum (might get us some more traffic!), I believe that to be a unique case and a unique gentleman.

The +/- system is used everywhere and for a reason, it would be interesting to know how many of the half million posts on the JF read only "+1", by restricting the use of +/- you cannot stop people from posting just that, and as previously stated some people just don't have the time, there could be 100 posts since your last visit!

I would be happy with a thank you button, but I would also like to think that our membership can be trusted to use a software tool without abusing it.

ThePieman wrote: What a pickle!

I remember the case that Hanon is speaking about, I won't use his real name, we shall call him Jeff Goldblum (might get us some more traffic!), I believe that to be a unique case and a unique gentleman.

The +/- system is used everywhere and for a reason, it would be interesting to know how many of the half million posts on the JF read only "+1", by restricting the use of +/- you cannot stop people from posting just that, and as previously stated some people just don't have the time, there could be 100 posts since your last visit!

I would be happy with a thank you button, but I would also like to think that our membership can be trusted to use a software tool without abusing it.

Thanks for the debate.

The opposite of this system where people are given a negative reputation is what happened to some us on the JF. WE got a high reputation, expected to be saints when its not realistic to expect that of any member. I don't want to go back to being one of the "forum bishops, trilogy, purist, traditionalist" etc etc. I just want to post and my posts be read and replied to if some posters want to debate.

Reputation......Really....are any of us here qualified to pass such a reputation on another judoka via this media? It doesn't end well. History repeating itself over again.

However, it looks like we are going to get a reputation system and if it goes South I shall say I told you so

Enough from me on this topic.

Mike

The heart of the forum is always in the posts debating topics of interest. The +/- for posts is just another way for a member to express an opinion in favor or opposed. It is natural that if someone expresses an opinion that goes against the grain, then a few minus ratings should be expected, and I'd rather see that than a bunch of posts saying "you're wrong, you idiot." The plus or minus simply indicates the general reaction of the membership -- which may be wrong, biased, and uninformed, or accurate, revealing, and helpful.

There is nothing wrong with providing a way for members to easily express an opinion about a post. I think this is different than allowing members to express opinions about other members with a member reputation. The member rating tool can more easily be abused.

My first post here

May I say I have enjoyed reading and occasionaly posting on all forums over the years.
Saying that I do tend to post when I see something that that I do not agree with and try to add my experiences as to why. In doing so I have been called an "o" sensei, a troll and some do not like the way I respond to say custodians of the British NGB.

Besides Mr goldman who eventualy I never bothered to read, theres one guy on the JF forum that would be a threat to any forum, don't know why he has not been removed. But as I say, some of my postings rub people up the wrong way, which would end up with negative scores good or bad who knows, but hopefully it opens thoughts which would not have been.

Should be down to moderators in my opinion to say if anyones over stepped the mark and to act accordingly.

I would rather see 20 minuses next to someones post rather than see 20 negative posts written (and end up reading them to get to the topic).

As far as someone being able to anonymously posting negatives --- who cares? Most people don't use their real names anyway. What difference would it make if you wrote it or checked a +/- sign. Your "screen name" isn't going to stop a negative post. Again, i would rather have it checked to save me the reading time!

At the same time i would also rather see 20 pluses checked rather than read through 20 posts of "great post" with the entire post quoted!

As far as rep goes, your rep is gained individually. I have friends that people have asked me "why do you like that guy? He's always an a-hole" and i tell them that they have been nothing but polite and kind to me, i can see the type of person they are to me. And i've met people that many people like but i don't mix well with them...

My vote is for +/- on post, no rep button. I'll build my rep without seeing it!

heikojr

I dont think a rating function is really required. I think, instead, moderators and admins should have the option to ban somebody if they are persistent trolls, abusive or are posting misleading information.

I think the suggestions offered by Hanon are quite sensible. It seems to me that if we keep the focus of this forum on Judo it will succeed. If we disagree with a poster it is easy enough to respond to that poster in a courteous manner and state our opposing view.

heikojr wrote:I would rather see 20 minuses next to someones post rather than see 20 negative posts written (and end up reading them to get to the topic).

As far as someone being able to anonymously posting negatives --- who cares? Most people don't use their real names anyway. What difference would it make if you wrote it or checked a +/- sign. Your "screen name" isn't going to stop a negative post. Again, i would rather have it checked to save me the reading time!

At the same time i would also rather see 20 pluses checked rather than read through 20 posts of "great post" with the entire post quoted!

As far as rep goes, your rep is gained individually. I have friends that people have asked me "why do you like that guy? He's always an a-hole" and i tell them that they have been nothing but polite and kind to me, i can see the type of person they are to me. And i've met people that many people like but i don't mix well with them...

My vote is for +/- on post, no rep button. I'll build my rep without seeing it!

heikojr

Exactly what I wanted to say, if there was a + button I would click it!

JudoSensei wrote:The heart of the forum is always in the posts debating topics of interest. The +/- for posts is just another way for a member to express an opinion in favor or opposed. It is natural that if someone expresses an opinion that goes against the grain, then a few minus ratings should be expected, and I'd rather see that than a bunch of posts saying "you're wrong, you idiot." The plus or minus simply indicates the general reaction of the membership -- which may be wrong, biased, and uninformed, or accurate, revealing, and helpful.

There is nothing wrong with providing a way for members to easily express an opinion about a post. I think this is different than allowing members to express opinions about other members with a member reputation. The member rating tool can more easily be abused.

+1

nomoremondays wrote:I dont think a rating function is really required. I think, instead, moderators and admins should have the option to ban somebody if they are persistent trolls, abusive or are posting misleading information.

we have that option. and I'm not afraid to use it if I think the situation warrants it. thankfully nobody yet has done anything to make me even consider taking any form of action. judoka are generally respectful folks.

genetic judoka wrote:

nomoremondays wrote:I dont think a rating function is really required. I think, instead, moderators and admins should have the option to ban somebody if they are persistent trolls, abusive or are posting misleading information.

we have that option. and I'm not afraid to use it if I think the situation warrants it. thankfully nobody yet has done anything to make me even consider taking any form of action. judoka are generally respectful folks.

Beast!

Mike, forum pussy cat

JudoSensei wrote:The heart of the forum is always in the posts debating topics of interest. The +/- for posts is just another way for a member to express an opinion in favor or opposed. It is natural that if someone expresses an opinion that goes against the grain, then a few minus ratings should be expected, and I'd rather see that than a bunch of posts saying "you're wrong, you idiot." The plus or minus simply indicates the general reaction of the membership -- which may be wrong, biased, and uninformed, or accurate, revealing, and helpful.

There is nothing wrong with providing a way for members to easily express an opinion about a post. I think this is different than allowing members to express opinions about other members with a member reputation. The member rating tool can more easily be abused.

Totally disagree. The use of the ratings in the JF was used on many occasions purely to attack the person e.g. John Goldman - irrespective of what they wrote. Very often those who do judo outside the iJF NGB environment are attacked. Also it is ginst Forum rules to call someone an idiot. Let's encourage people to honk before they write and explain their reasoning.......

Judo Dad wrote:

heikojr wrote:I would rather see 20 minuses next to someones post rather than see 20 negative posts written (and end up reading them to get to the topic).

As far as someone being able to anonymously posting negatives --- who cares? Most people don't use their real names anyway. What difference would it make if you wrote it or checked a +/- sign. Your "screen name" isn't going to stop a negative post. Again, i would rather have it checked to save me the reading time!

At the same time i would also rather see 20 pluses checked rather than read through 20 posts of "great post" with the entire post quoted!

As far as rep goes, your rep is gained individually. I have friends that people have asked me "why do you like that guy? He's always an a-hole" and i tell them that they have been nothing but polite and kind to me, i can see the type of person they are to me. And i've met people that many people like but i don't mix well with them...

My vote is for +/- on post, no rep button. I'll build my rep without seeing it!

heikojr

Exactly what I wanted to say, if there was a + button I would click it!

And if there was still a + button, i would click it for your post of clicking my post!

And if there was still a rep button, i would click it for you (again) --- even though i voted against a rep button it!

AND if you notice that because there is no + button to click, i have just started the repost of many "Great Post" quotes --- which i said that i hate!

Wow!

heikojr

Going with the crowd…why assess whether something is good or bad when you can have a whole forum do it for you? How much should one value their free will, their own personal agency? I suppose when it comes to very important things, a lot. Subject matter found on a forum? Not so much lol I will be completely disregarding this function as I value my thoughts and judgment regarding xyz more so than the amount of +s and –s that were volunteered anonymously by others. Amazon’s ratings or imdb/rottontomatoe’s, that is a whole other story. If I have to take the subway, part with $30 for tickets to the theater and spend 1.5 hours watching something, it would be wise to know in advance what people are saying about a particular movie. When it comes to a post on a forum? I can risk the time it takes to read it and decide its worthiness along with the value a poster brings to the table.

There will always be those who will stand up to the occasion, to say and do what is right. There will always be those who stand up to the occasion, to say and do what is absolutely stupid and moronic. The vast majority of us will fall somewhere in between those two extremes. By allowing this mechanism to exist you have simplified the process and lowered the cost of doing wrong. If the plus/minus mechanism wasn’t there someone who disliked the poster or his content would have to publicly state an opinion, subject to scrutiny, allowing the poster the opportunity to defend him/herself. With this option available anybody can cowardly and anonymously take a stab at a poster. Will it add any value to the forum? Yep, sure, why not. Will it be abused? Not a doubt in my mind.

To simply express, yeah that's just what I was thinking a +1 was a useful option, or to indicate, no I don't agree a -1 was an ineffensive option
The +1 or -1 was an option that has now been lost.
You didn't have to use it but you could if you wanted to.

Hi All,

I can live without the repfunction although I think it was usefull and even if somebody does have a personaly grudge they only get one chance to have a pot shot at you, On the old JF my open, honest, humourous and forthcoming personality did not always impress people the way it should but i still moved between 3 and 4 stars because at least the majority of people giving a "rep point" thought that overall they benifited from my posts, I found it a usefull tool for judging the seriousness of a poster.

On the otherhand I find the the +/- for posts an invaluable guide for the beginners to judge the value of a post. This system was only massively abused once that I know off when the BJA refugees attacked our dearly loved Mr Goldmann

atb

sodo lite

sodo lite wrote:Hi All,

I can live without the repfunction although I think it was usefull and even if somebody does have a personaly grudge they only get one chance to have a pot shot at you, On the old JF my open, honest, humourous and forthcoming personality did not always impress people the way it should but i still moved between 3 and 4 stars because at least the majority of people giving a "rep point" thought that overall they benifited from my posts, I found it a usefull tool for judging the seriousness of a poster.

On the otherhand I find the the +/- for posts an invaluable guide for the beginners to judge the value of a post. This system was only massively abused once that I know off when the BJA refugees attacked our dearly loved Mr Goldmann

atb

sodo lite

so why "sodo-lite" - is this the start of an all new softly softly aproach to trolls ? diet ?