Activate Karma?

[Matthew Schenker]

Everyone,
In another discussion (click here), we raised the idea of a system where people could vote to increase or decrease a member's helpfulness level.  SMF has a built-in feature known as "Karma" which can be used for this purpose.  Currently, I have Karma disabled in the forum.  But maybe people want it to be activated?

To test Karma, I activated it in the test forum.  To see what Karma looks like, sign into the Test Forum and open up any post.  On the left side of the topic window, you'll see a message that takes the following form:
Festoolian Level: 0
[ + ] [ - ]

You can click on the "[ + ] [ - ]" to increase or decrease the member's Karma (Festoolian Level).  The number displayed represents the total voting for that member from all other members.

I can customize the text and the voting buttons to be anything we want.  I just chose "Festoolian Level" and "[ + ] [ - ]" as an example.

With our forum, of course, we have so many great members it might not be necessary!  But I just thought I'd put it out there to see if there's enough interest in this concept to activate it in the main forum.

Matthew

[Dan Clark]

Matthew,

I have mixed feelings about this.   

A big piece of my concern is the extent to which people mix up "likableness" with "quality".   Most people here are likable and easy to get along with.  A few are less so.  But they may provide very good quality information.  A person who takes a controversial position may be less likable, but provide more quality.   

Another issue is  a persons mood when posting.   Sometimes people are grouchy and sometimes in a good mood.  That shows up in their posts.  And of course, their rating of someone else's posts.   

The positive side of the Karma rating is that it might encourage people to focus on content and less on .   To clearly state the facts in a reasonable fashion and not on feelings.

However, the negative side of the Karma rating is that it could change the focus of the forum from sharing information to "fitting in".   I.e., just a bunch of people slapping each other on the back and telling each other how good we are.   

The problem we have is that (statistically) people are about 3.5 times more likely to complain about something negative than praising the positive.   I'm concerned that people would be whackin' the minus sign much more often than the plus sign simply be cause they were upset at what was written - even if what was written was high quality and generated good discussion.

While it's great to receive a compliment, it's also good to have constructive feedback.  It's good to understand the pluses and minuses.    For example, some people don't like the C12 - mostly for it's battery technology.   So if a poster wrote that he/she did not like the C12's battery technology, would they receive lots of minuses simply because other people didn't agree with them?   Or the readers woke up on the wrong side of the bed? 

Or what about the situation where someone writes 100 good posts and receives a modest positive rating for each of them?   Then they write one bad post (the poster got up on the wrong side of the bed).   So, WHAM, everybody is whackin' the minus sign.   
 
Overall, I think the Karma rating has more downsides than upsides.

Regards,

Dan.

[Daviddubya]

...it might not be necessary!...Matthew

Agree.

[SRSemenza]

Hi,

           My experiences with this on other forums is that it gets in the way, and that it hurts the  community feeling that everyone is welcome and can have good input.


Seth

[Dan Clermont]

I don't like the ieda of turning Karma on although it does sound kind of cool. Nobody neds to have bad Karma attached to their name and it may hold people back from posting if they think they may ruffle some feathers.

Dan Clermont

[bruegf]

I guess I don't see that it adds much value, maybe some the first few times into the forum, but after that you soon know the degree of knowledge and willingness to share of the key members.   Personally, I don't think its worth effort, especially if anyone feels slighted by their rating. 

Might be more useful on a forum where you need to encourage members to help and share their knowledge, but that's certainly not a problem we face in this forum.

Fred

[Overtime]

Being totally sarcastic    
 
   I'd say if this were a Tarot Card Readers forum, a Scented Candle forum, Zodiac Signs, or Incense and Oils forum -

   Or even a Karmann Ghia restoration forum, I think it's a little corny. But I do see the very tiny value of it.  Just not for this site.

It's one of those accessories that we just don't need.

 Just my opinion.  And I have always  liked Karmann Ghias but never owned one 

[Dave Rudy]

It would really bum me out. . . .

[colinw]

Hi,
    I am in consensus with the replies we have had so far, I am not in favour of this. At the moment I know any advice given on this forum is based on experience,  from skillful and talented professionals and amateurs alike, we as intelligent individuals (at least most of us are ) don't need a scoreboard to know who has a"knowledge" and  "understanding" of the subject he is talking about.

Just my 10 cents worth

Colin

[Dan Uhlir]

  Sounds like a popularity contest, and tool dudes don't really have those unless they are in reverse. please no.
                                                                                                                                  Dan

[graphex]

Seeing the number of posts is enough dogma without turning on karma. The green names are good enough. I could see you using a different name color for people who have made official tool manuals (like Jerry or Brice, etc.) or have otherwise landed some form of Festool sponsorship.

[Brice Burrell]

  The one forum that uses karma I visit seems most posters don't use it or ever know what it is. Like everyone else I'd rather not see it here.

  Graphex, I don't have a Festool sponsorship (I wish I did) and my MFS user's guide is "unofficial", Festool didn't pay me or ask me to write it. In all fairness I did work with Fstool to help get some info out about some router accessories so I do understand why people might think Festool sponsors all my reviews on my site.

[graphex]

They should certainly give you a kickback on the edge plate and angle arm I bought last night. I was poking around the forums and saw your post on that and immediately realized that I needed those accessories.

Nevertheless, if someone is doing great reviews/instructions like yours, a different name color would be justified.

[alg]

This idea sucks  

My point is that one critical comment can turn someone into an outsider. There are plenty of people who have poor sense of humor trying to be sarcastic will also be penalized (that may not be a bad thing).
I have two tween (pre-teenage) girls, this sounds like a feature they would use in school to keep kids in-and-out of clicks.

This forum is very self-moderating. I don't see a value in this feature. And I thank you for asking.

Al

[Fred West]

I must say I agree with the consensus here of not turning Karma on. The harm level is so high and the helpfulness level is negligible at best. I for one would be terrified that some of what I write as humor would be savagely Karma slapped and for sure this would happen to Eli.  Fred

[Robert Robinson]

I agree with the others, I probably would noy have opened up about my dad's accident on this forum had it been a popularity contest.

[Matthew Schenker]

Everyone,
I agree that Karma is probably not useful, and could even be harmful.  That's why it is currently turned off, after all.  On other forums, it seems to work well, but the kind of community we have built here doesn't need it.  Just wanted to put it out there and get a reading on people's attitude.
Matthew

[Fred West]

And Matthew that is why you are the BOMB maybe just slightly dating myself with that reference. I truly love the interaction among this group and your incredible attitude and amazing work. Fred

[Eli]

Nah, we don't need it. If you read and post, we know what kind of guy you are.

[graphex]

You mean there are no women here? 

(good thing karma isn't active..)

[Eli]

I think there might be one or two. But you'd really be barking up the wrong tree so to speak....

[Matthew Schenker]

Good Morning,
Lately, there has been some discussion about giving members labels such as "contractor" or indicating who receives free tools.  This has at times been a messy, contentious debate.  In the end, the fact is we need to trust each other, and our value to the community is based on the reliability and usefulness of the information we provide.

Recently we have had a few members who do great work in their posts.  At the same time, we have had a small number of members who have caused some problems.

As the administrator, I often have to deal with all these issues at once.  I've struggled with how to involve the community in these issues, and yet not make too much of a big deal about it publicly.  After much thought, I believe the best way to resolve these issues is to have a silent but visible way for the community to weigh in on a member's positive or negative impact.

I have activated a feature known as "Karma."  It's been discussed before, as you can see from the posts above.  But I feel this feature is now more useful.  I've done my research, and when Karma is activated in a forum, the level of positive posts tends to go up.

Here are the benefits of Karma:

• When people are helpful to the community, their "peer rating" goes up, regardless of whether they are contractors, reviewers, or whatever.
• When you have a positive peer rating, you will be motivated to keep it -- and make it more positive!
• I may not have to deal with as many offline complaints, since people can make their negative feelings known by voting.
• Rather than me having to write to members and tell them they are causing issues, they will see an indication of that in their peer rating.

Here's the way it works...

In any given post, right below a person's name you will see this:

• Every member starts off with a peer rating of 0 (neutral).
• Any active member can click on positive or negative.  That adds or subtracts from the member's peer rating.
• As time goes on, the rating becomes more of a reflection of the person's general standing in the community.
• You can vote once every day for any member, thereby changing that member's peer rating.

If anyone has questions or comments, please feel free to post them here.

Stay in touch,
Matthew

[graphex]

Great move, Matthew. I think as this feature matures a bit, it will have a very positive affect on the tone of the forum.

[poto]

Just out of curiosity - is there any way you (Matthew) or any other FOG member can find out who has voted for/against them? The scope for retribution seems pretty vast - and unpleasant to comtemplate.

[Matthew Schenker]

Just out of curiosity - is there any way you (Matthew) or any other FOG member can find out who has voted for/against them?

No, the voting is anonymous.  Not even the administrator knows who voted what.  The only thing the administrator can do is prevent people from voting for him!  But to me, that would be dishonest.  I should be given a Karma rating just like everyone else.

The scope for retribution seems pretty vast - and unpleasant to comtemplate.

The key thing about this feature is, you can vote over and over again for someone (once every 24 hours).  That allows the Karma to be a fluid tracking of your effect on the community.  If your peer ratings suddenly shoots up, that says you're doing something right -- keep it up!  If the opposite happens...well, you know.

It's just starting out right now, so a couple of votes one way or the other seems like a lot.  But eventually, it will take many votes to change your Karma, which means it will gradually become a more accurate snap shot of your standing in the community.

We can try it out in an experimental basis, and determine if it's working or not.

Other comments or suggestions?

Thanks,
Matthew

[graphex]

Just out of curiosity - is there any way you (Matthew) or any other FOG member can find out who has voted for/against them? The scope for retribution seems pretty vast - and unpleasant to comtemplate.

Yeah, if I get my hands on the guy that gave me the -1 I'll k.... I mean I'll kindly thank him for showing me the error of my ways.  

After things get going and the karma totals start adding up (or down, in my case most likely) I'd tend to prefer "Enable karma total" instead of "Enable karma positive/negative".

[Steve Baumgartner]

It seems to me that the biggest weakness, which others noted in the earlier discussion, is that it is ambiguous what a + or - really means.  Value of contribution?  Quality of writing?  Agree/disagree with opinion stated?  Good photos?  Appreciation of humor?  Popularity?  I don't see how something with such vague meaning can improve the quality of the forum or of my own posts.

It's also not clear to me what the number of votes means.  Can the same person vote more than once about the same posting?  Can they search out all your postings and vote on each of them if they want to flood your rating?  Won't people who post frequently tend to get the largest positive and/or negative scores?  Can you vote on your own posting, or perhaps recruit stooges to enhance your own/destroy your enemy's?  It seems very vulnerable to manipulation.

That said, I guess we'll see how it goes.

[Daviddubya]

I just went back and reread this thread.  There was not one single post in favor of implementing the karma rating.

[greg mann]

I just went back and reread this thread.  There was not one single post in favor of implementing the karma rating.

Dave, I'm okay with it. And just so you know, one of your plusses was from me.

[Matthew Schenker]

After things get going and the karma totals start adding up (or down, in my case most likely) I'd tend to prefer "Enable karma total" instead of "Enable karma positive/negative".

I'm glad you mention this!  Yes, that is the other option, and some people may like it better than a +/- scenario.

OK, Steve asked some good questions, which I will attempt to answer one at a time...

It seems to me that the biggest weakness, which others noted in the earlier discussion, is that it is ambiguous what a + or - really means.  Value of contribution?  Quality of writing?  Agree/disagree with opinion stated?  Good photos?  Appreciation of humor?  Popularity?

In other forums that have had this system in place for a long time, it does start to become a reflection of the member's general contribution.  The system works, but of course it takes time for the votes to reach a high enough level.

... Can the same person vote more than once about the same posting?

You can vote once a day for a member.  Where you vote is up to you, but it's only once a day.  I can change the frequency, but once a day seems like a fair balance for now.

... Can they search out all your postings and vote on each of them if they want to flood your rating?

Again, they can only vote once a day.  So, if you have 100 posts, it would take someone 100 days to flood your rating.  I think that's unlikely.

... Won't people who post frequently tend to get the largest positive and/or negative scores?

Not necessarily!  It depends on what you post.  I believe the members here are wise enough not to just vote on numbers alone.

Can you vote on your own posting, or perhaps recruit stooges to enhance your own/destroy your enemy's?

No, you cannot vote for yourself.  If you look below your name, you'll see the "Peer Rating" is not there.  Regarding the recruitment of "stooges" (good word): that sort of thing is possible even without Karma!

It seems very vulnerable to manipulation.

Well, yes, but not any more than other elements of the forum.  The very idea of a forum is people posting ideas and responses.  That system is itself open to manipulation.

I just went back and reread this thread.  There was not one single post in favor of implementing the karma rating.

That's true.  But the forum has developed some new needs since then, and I wanted to give it another try.

The funny thing is, Karma is a default feature of the forum.  It's actually the more unusual thing to turn it off.

Have my answers helped?

Thanks,
Matthew

[woodshopdemos]

Matthew,
   I dn't like karma and beyond that Ithink re. the forum, less not more.. Specifically, we have too many sub=forums.

[Matthew Schenker]

Matthew,
   I dn't like karma and beyond that Ithink re. the forum, less not more.. Specifically, we have too many sub=forums.

The structure may be getting too complex, I admit.
Can you start a new discussionon this?
Matthew

[Tom Bainbridge]

have to say, i have mixed feelings, on this karma thing



ive seen it in operation on a couple of english sites

it simply decended into chaos


because peoples karma in the end

depended on your mates (if people liked your point of view)

SIMPLE disagreement with a point of view could get your karma knocked



even worse, if you were "billy no mates" you where knackered


anyway

we see how it goes



dd

[woodshopdemos]

I think not. Your response says that you are aware of it so I will leave it in your capable hands. Thanks.

[Roger Savatteri]

hmmm,

hmmm, Michael......

Minus 26 on your Karma level?

should I pull out the string of garlic and silver cross?

(or is it a wooden cross and a silver bullet?)

R.

________________________________________





________________________________________

Anybody wanna guess what my vote on the "KK" is?  (Karma Kops)

[Matthew Schenker]

Roger,
Hey, my record is under .500 at the moment!

Seriously, this is a feature that probably should never have been turned off in the first place.  In the beginning, the numbers can be swayed by a few individuals, but over time it becomes a better representation of your general stand in the community.  Give it a little time.  Besides, anyone who hates the idea can just not vote.

Thanks,
Matthew

[Michael Kellough]

hmmm,

hmmm, Michael......

Minus 26 on your Karma level?

should I pull out the string of garlic and silver cross?

(or is it a wooden cross and a silver bullet?)

R.

________________________________________


[ ERROR: SPECIFIED ATTACHMENT MISSING ]


________________________________________

Anybody wanna guess what my vote on the "KK" is?  (Karma Kops)

Since Rick has left the building...

Rick Christopherson
.


Peer Rating: +3/-135
[Positive] [Negative]
 Offline

I guess I win the bag of sawdust, eh?

[Steve Baumgartner]

Matthew, thanks for the answers  .  I have innate distrust of vague voting systems.  They tend to produce things like a definition I once saw for "history" (paraphrased - and I have no idea who originated it)  "history is the currently favored set of lies about the past".  But, again, we'll see what develops here.

Steve

[Matthew Schenker]

Steve,
We'll watch it.  But I feel that because it originates from our peers, the numbers do reflect something beyond a temporary glitch.  Also, because people can keep voting, one can always go up or down in the eyes of our peers.  In the beginning, it might be clunky, but after it goes long enough, it is hard to argue with it.

We're all in it together!

Stay in touch,
Matthew

[BlueMaxx]

I rarely comment on things of this nature but feel I need too on this "Karma" issue. It is misleading, childish, and inane. Inane as in lacking significance, meaning, or point...silly I am stopping there on adjectives.
 I was stumbling around and saw the feature, not familiar with it I clicked on it. I voted on someones rating thinking I was going to see something. So I effectively rated someone in ignorance.
I recently started coming to this site because I am fixing to drop a boat load of money into some festool equipment. I wanted to read from actual users on how they liked their equipment, how they used it in their shop. However after reading some of the odd ideas about how to label people and now how to rate them I am saddened.
I do not care if you are a contractor, a bloke who dreams about someday having some tools or the Grand-Master Wizard of all things Festool. Why does this have to become a popularity issue..which is basically what this "karma" thing is.
The more complicated you make the machine the more things there are to go wrong. This is only going to create animosity and folks threatening to meet at the bike rack after school.
A free exchange of ideas is powerful. Pigeonholing is dangerous.

[Matthew Schenker]

Good Afternoon,
Well, it's been an interesting experiment so far.

Some striking numbers... For myself, I seem to be hovering right around 50%.

Does it mean anything?  Should it last another day?  What's the use of having almost 5000 people in a room if you don't experiment once in a while -- take some chances?

Thanks,
Matthew

[Steve Jones]

Bluemaxx,

Hang in there, this actually is a good forum for Festool advice you just have to separate the wheat from the chaff.

(Actually, i suspect Matthew's purpose in experimenting with the rating system is to reduce some of that chaff - because some of the less positive contributors will start to see declining scores and maybe reconsider their posts before adding to the noise). As an example my own score was in the negative last I checked, which means I've offended two people on here - I'm disappointed....

I thought it would be more

[Per Swenson]

This is by golly the stoopidest flippin thing yet.

Whatever for. Smacks of juvenile insecurity.

This is just plain wrong on so many levels............ that I am flabbergasted.

I can hardly type coherently.

Crimeny if it ain't broke don't fix it.

Per

[Justin F.]

I don't dig it ------ man all I really want to do is to learn about Festool and woodworking here ----- and maybe discuss a pleasant off-topic scenario every once in a while.   I don't care to rate people or be rated ----


Justin

[BlueMaxx]

As an example my own score was in the negative last I checked, which means I've offended two people on here - I'm disappointed....

Well if nothing else, this gave me a great chuckle!
 Cheers Steve!

[Roger Savatteri]

Very simply,

Let's "De-Activate Karma".

No question mark, just period.

[PeterK]

Well Steve - I just had to give you a negative - just to make you happy!! (and you didn't even tick me off to earn it)

I really don't understand the idea of this rating thing. Makes me not want to participate. I think we will loose even more of the valuable contributors.

I have been having real concerns about how this site has changed over the last month or so and this Karma thing just adds to it. I come here to learn as I don't have much to offer but the feeling I get here sure has changed. If I was Festool, I would stop contributing here - and they have.

Pete

[Dan Uhlir]

  This is bullcrap. That should be worth a plus 10 right there. Not that I care of course.Maybe we could have a monthly prize, for the most liked woodworker. Dan

[Per Swenson]

Dan,

Only if you Friend me on facebook or my space or whatever LOL1!!!

Per

[graphex]

I was thinking this morning on the way to the breakfast table that the FOG people seem to be kinda mean too much, and that I find myself wanting to go back less and less. Then I saw the karma thing and realized that it was definitely the best way for the tone of things to improve. Its subtle, but I think effective over the course of a number of months. It doesn't affect specific things from happening - disruptive people can always disrupt, but they will never be someone who has an account with 3,024 posts and a karma total of +553.

I like the feature because it lets me just knock down someone a notch if they  me off instead of writing a pointless bit of flamebait. On the positive side, the people who are actually well reasoned and treat others like humans tend to get runaway positive scores. I think Per will be one of those people...

I often look at the post totals to get a sense of how long someone has been a member, as a gauge of their position in the community, and having another number with which to gauge someone's tenor is very useful in a forum where we really know so little about all but a few. The reason I think it should be just the karma total instead of the + and - totals separately, is that it is a bit more unobtrusive then, and I think the usefulness of the karma is mostly in the total anyway. We have the post totals with which to gauge the quantity of a members contributions, and the karma tends to help gauge the quality of a member's contributions. I do wish that people could turn off their view the feature, so they wouldn't see the totals for anyone, but that is only because I'd hate to see this feature turned off because some don't like it. I'm pretty confident that this is the only thread where people will be talking about it very much, and once it fades a bit, it will just be most evident in an improvement in the overall tone of the FOG.

I don't really care what my karma is, but I think I will really like knowing if I am unwittingly engaging in a conversation with someone who does nothing but annoy others enough to click the negative karma button below their avatar (and I'm talking about dino here...). I'll also have to admit that it subtly helps me improve my tone -- that isn't a bad thing for people to do. The golden rule applied to democracy.

[Per Swenson]

Graphex,

I thank you for your kindness, your reasoning is all well and good.

Now get ready to hit that negative button, its all well and good for a forum full of children.

Not for a forum, chock full of some of the best trade and craftspeople around.

The likes of Jerry Works, John Lucas, the sterling reputation of Bob Marino, the skills of roger Savetteri,

Bill Wyko oh crap, each and everyone of you, dang it.

There are no children present.

I find it insulting and demeaning and now I find it Orwellian with the name change to Peer Rating.

Good grief. I'm hitting the sack, maybe this nonsense will go away in the morning.

Per

[Michael Kellough]

This rating idea would be far more instructive if individual posts were rated rather than a global rating of an individual's popularity, if, in fact, that's what this rating shows.

Presumably, with my high negative rating I should learn something from this, but I'm not sure what. There needs to be a baseline example to extrapolate from and I don't see it. For example, Matthew's rating should be as lopsided as mine but in the opposite direction, not roughly 50/50. Everyone is indebted to Matthew so why isn't that reflected in his rating?

After all, without Matthew's moderation we wouldn't be in this FOG.

[d.epstein]

...it might not be necessary!...Matthew

Agree.

I see...

[Daviddubya]

...it might not be necessary!...Matthew

Agree.

I see...

You do???

[TomCrawford]

I'm with Per and Roger on this! As an amateur this forum has been a great help to me but now is less and less so. Seriously considering moving on.

[Matthew Schenker]

Good Morning,
Thanks everyone for posting your responses to this Karma thing.  We have some people for it, and a lot of people against it.  Maybe the Karma should get a Karma rating!

Some ponderings for the community -- positive, negative, and open-ended...

I changed the wording to "Peer Rating" because I thought that was more of a reflection that your positive level comes from your peers, not from the Orwellian State.  The administrator is subject to the same system.

Looking over the ratings so far, it seems that the best contributors receive the highest positives, and the more bad energy people have created the higher their negatives.  The administrator, of course, is a split decision!

If you're way up in the positive, you don't need any public voting.  You know what you're doing.  But if you're pissing people off, here's what happens... most people don't post that they are ticked off, and of course I don't make a habit of posting, "Everyone, I'm receiving angry messages about member XYZ."  What people do is send me messages offline telling me the are ticked off and asking me to do something about it.  The end result is, I have to deal with ticked off people myself, in private.  When I tell the person pissing people off he's pissing people off, he gets ticked off at me, and doesn't have any idea how many people he's purportedly ticked off.  Got the picture?

Please understand, I'm a lifelong tinkerer.  Ever since I was a kid, I took things apart to see how they work, and (sometimes) got them back together again.  I've done this with electronic equipment, musical instruments, computers, and software.  I experiment, I take chances.  You may not like some of my tinkering, and the things I tinkered with that are questionable seem to get more attention (like the Karma or the contractor thing).  But remember, this same tinkering mindset is also what got us the monthly contests, tools contributed by Festool, all those everyday features of this forum people like to use, the Gallery, and the sleek design of our space.  Hey, this forum itself is a product of experimental tinkering.  My point is, everything in a forum like this is derived from experimentation and trying things out.  Taking chances gets you great things, but it sometimes leads you down a wrong path.  But we have a safety net: if something doesn't work, we figure it out and stop using it.

We gotta get back to having more fun around here.  Fun, connections, and applying what comes up here to everyday woodworking is the very reason this forum exists.

Let me put a question to the community.  If I drop the Karma thing, how would you propose I deal with people who take away the fun of this forum?  Maybe we don't need Karma, but we do need all those people who like this community and want it to be fun to help keep it that way.

Put it all together, connect this Karma thing with the bigger picture, and tell me what you think.

Thanks everyone,
Matthew

[Per Swenson]

Matthew,

Sorry. by Orwellian, I meant same junk different name.

About the angry messages, are you the administrator or the moderator?

If you are the moderator, do not respond to angry PMs

Moderate the offending post , do it quickly or elect a moderator who will do the job.

How about Brice? Then just administrate.

This is your forum, granted. But I for one do not appreciate being experimented with.

As you mentioned earlier, about my strong opinion's and or lack of a opinon in certain things.

Yes you have a point, although it is not relevant to this peer/kharma thing.

But I expect you, if you plan on continuing to wear the two hats to frankly grow a pair.

The Christopherson Fiasco? You should have deleted and taken that off line as moderator and administrator

immediately. Ya don't engage em.

Good day

Per

[Matthew Schenker]

Per,
Actually, the idea of moderators has come up before.  I get about 20 messages a month about it.  They go something like this:
"Matthew, you really need a couple of moderators in the forum.  Of course, I don't personally want to do it."

Would you like to become a moderator?  Does Brice want to become a moderator?  I agree, that could be a step in the right direction, for many reasons.

I don't want you to misunderstand.  I'm not experimenting with you.  I'm experimenting with the structure of a forum, then people can choose to get involved in it, with all the features we see here.  I'm just never satisfied leaving things alone and always wonder how I can make it better.

The "Christopherson fiasco" you refer to is a good example.  Yes, a lot of people would have been happy for me to delete his comments -- end of story.  However, a lot of people like that this forum is not run that way and that members have a say in such matters.  I'll go further: a lot of this forum's success comes from openness, public ownership, and having a say in administrative matters.  This has been part of the plan all the way back to the Yahoo days.  Do you think the time has come for that basic principle to be reconsidered?

Thanks,
Matthew

[Woodenfish]

DD,

You are looking at this the wrong way.

History teaches, but that is all we learn.

We are doomed to repeat it for the exact reason of, "That is what we know"

Individually, as a community and finally as a culture, we will do as we have always done.

Look at it this way. All of what we know is in the past. Right? Of course it is.

So when it come to group think, which is what culture is, the easiest most secure thing in the world

is do what one has always done.

Think I am full o crap? Maybe, but in a microcosm look at the routine of any day in your life

and tell me how much it changes one day to the next. See?

Patterns make us comfortable, you often hear the word stability in all kinds of relationships.

As Carpenters we have a advantage of changing employment options, but that still does not change the routine much.

It does not fully change the patterns of the way we think.

Because we derive our comfort from what we know, and all we know is history.

Per

Per, I don't understand your current position.

I thought you liked change?

I thought you were for change and that all change is good? 

This karma thing is change but now you say change is not good, which is it?

[Michael Kellough]

Per, I don't understand your current position.

I thought you liked change?

I thought you were for change and that all change is good? 

This karma thing is change but now you say change is not good, which is it?

Where is the quote? Or, do you just like putting words into other people's mouths?

[Steve Baumgartner]

I'm with Per and Roger on this! As an amateur this forum has been a great help to me but now is less and less so. Seriously considering moving on.

To me, this is the saddest aspect - independent of the peer rating question.  An unfortunately large fraction of the traffic on FOG lately has been bickering over stuff like this or otherwise way off topic.  From some of Matthew's and others cryptic remarks, I get a sense that there is a lot more hostility taking place off line or deleted before many of us see it.  We are driving people like Tom away .  How can we get back to enthusiastic discussion of Festools and the great things you can do with them?

Steve

[Ron Pegram]

This is just my $0.02 but...

The reason anyone comes here is to read the postings of those who contribute a lot. Without that content, the board wouldn't have much value.

The rating system, however, allows anonymous people to have a vote. In other words, you don't have to post anything before you can rank someone else.

Because your intent here is to generate useful content, shouldn't there be a system by which people have a vote only if they participate. After all, we don't want taxation without representation, right?

If we decide to modify this, I'd vote that the karma is used only when a member passes a certain threshold of activity per period. I'm not sure how to manage it but my fear would be that those who never post could chase off some who do.

And then what would you have?

[John Langevin]

This rating idea would be far more instructive if individual posts were rated rather than a global rating of an individual's popularity, if, in fact, that's what this rating shows.

Like Michael, I think the ability to rate an individual post for the quality of the: question, suggestion, answer or just general intelligence would be helpful in toning down some of the more wayward discussions we have been having of late. If a poster turns a reply into a flame we should have a way of letting them know without ruining what may have been a worthwhile discussion. In the last few months this problem has been become more frequent.

If we want people to act like adults here we need to treat them as such and have the community let them know when they are not. You don't train a dog by rewarding bad behaviour and you don't punish a dog when he doesn't know what is expected of him. Lastly, no intelligent man argues with an idiot; which is what ensues when one poster pisses off another and the other person's only recourse is to flame back. We have way too many poeple walking around with wedgies of late; lighten up! I betcha I finally get a "peer rating" now! A "Per" rating would be much more useful.

[sainttjames]

This rating idea would be far more instructive if individual posts were rated rather than a global rating of an individual's popularity, if, in fact, that's what this rating shows.

IF the Peer Rating stands...( I personally would like it to just go away)...I think it should be changed to rating posts. Other forums allow posts to be rated and over time you can set your filter to exclude posts below a certain level. I personally read everything anyway...

I am a rank amateur who has come here to learn something. I have little to contribute as of yet so I deeply appreciate those who do (contractors, dealers, reviewers, etc., etc., etc.). IMHO, the reviews and tutorials STAND ON THEIR OWN...regardless of whether someone is getting compensated for it. People...no one is forcing you to buy anything!!!!

I'm with Per and Roger on this! As an amateur this forum has been a great help to me but now is less and less so. Seriously considering moving on.

I am beginning to echo Tom's sentiments on this as well...

my 2c
-james

[daveg]

Count me in with what appears to be a majority against a Karma system. This is the first time that I have seriously considered avoiding the FOG. It seems to me that someone needs to read the classic Lord of the Flies for a good presentation of the extreme case of implementing this general kind of idea. Not a perfect analogy, but still meaningful and instructive. Even though I find comments by some members not useful, I have no intention of rating those comments for all the world to see. That is the respect I would hope they would give to me.

Matt has said that there is no way for abuse. How do you prevent a group of individuals working together behind the scenes in order to trash/promote an individual they dislike/like? I'm not sure what prompted this other than because it's a previously unused feature.

I have an idealistic suggestion.. as a group, we can refuse to use this feature. This could only work if everyone chooses to ignore the Karma option. Since some apparently do favor the Karma system, then this suggestion probably won't work.

[Matthew Schenker]

... Matt has said that there is no way for abuse. How do you prevent a group of individuals working together behind the scenes in order to trash/promote an individual they dislike/like? I'm not sure what prompted this other than because it's a previously unused feature.

Theoretically, this sort of thing sounds easy.  But here's how they would have to do it...

First, the group would need to communicate offline and consipre somehow on which individuals they were going to give negative ratings to.  Next, they would all have to fan out and locate posts by the individuals on their list, then vote negative.  Remember, to cast a vote, you have to be reading a discussion in which the person you vote for has posted.  This group would have to repeat their actions every day.

Unless this group was large enough in numbers, even if they could pull this off, their effect would be minimal.  If the group was large enough in number to consipre against particular individuals and actually change their overall positive/negative level, then there are much bigger issues going on here!

This system has been in place in forums for ages.  The details have been hammered out long before we began using it, and there really is no way for the system to be manipulated in any measurable way after some time has passed.

Now, as to whether or not it will work for the FOG, let's see.

I have an idealistic suggestion.. as a group, we can refuse to use this feature. This could only work if everyone chooses to ignore the Karma option. Since some apparently do favor the Karma system, then this suggestion probably won't work.

That's a good point.  It's voluntary.  But just like the massive number of private messages I receive from members about various forum issues, there are a lot of people who will use this system who don't necessarily make their views known publicly.

Thanks,
Matthew

[Chris Billman]

I'm with Per and Roger on this! As an amateur this forum has been a great help to me but now is less and less so. Seriously considering moving on.

I am beginning to echo Tom's sentiments on this as well...

Me three.  There's some really valuable stuff here, and the vast majority of the members seem to be great.  But in my short time monitoring this place it really seems to be trying to stir up controversy.

Oh yeah - and someone dinged me with a -1.  Doesn't exactly make a newbie feel welcomed. 

I really wish the whole karma thing would go away.  Let the forum stabilize and get back to focusing on the tools for a while.  Pretty please with sugar on top.  (<-that's me trying to offer constructive criticism in a way that won't get me to -2 or -20)

--Chris

[Chris Billman]

Dang!  -2 already.  Sheesh.   

[Brent]

Me three.  There's some really valuable stuff here, and the vast majority of the members seem to be great.  But in my short time monitoring this place it really seems to be trying to stir up controversy.

Oh yeah - and someone dinged me with a -1.  Doesn't exactly make a newbie feel welcomed. 

I really wish the whole karma thing would go away.  Let the forum stabilize and get back to focusing on the tools for a while.  Pretty please with sugar on top.  (<-that's me trying to offer constructive criticism in a way that won't get me to -2 or -20)

--Chris

Well Chris, it took you 2 more posts than it took me to get a negative peer rating. Maybe we should be proud.

This peer rating stuff is for school children.

[vteknical]

Listen FNG's(Chris and Brent)

You better mind your P's and Q's around here or else!

Kidding of course,

Welcome guys

Victor

[John Langevin]

I tried to help Chris, I gave you a +. Is this not getting ridiculous?

[Woodenfish]

Poof! It's gone, done, over!

[graphex]

Children can't handle voting.

[Bill Wyko]

I gotta say, I'd have a hard time giving any of the members here a negative score. It doesn't bother me that it gets a little feisty around here once in a while. That's going to happen when you're in intelligent company with an artistic twist. Score away my friends.

[Woodenfish]

Children can't handle voting.

It's been my experience that in children's sports, it's the parents who can not handle game scores, wins and loss's record keeping or individual player statistics so these parent organizers do away with them to protect their kids from the evils of world realities. But, the kids know better and keep the records for themselves and use them as self-motivation regardless. Good for them.

I know many young children who are much more emotionally mature than their parents. That's probably why when these kids turn into a teenagers according to their parents they act like they have all of the answers. Well in their family they probably do because their parents pretty much acted like a dufus's all of their life.

[Eli]

I love it when issues blossom and go away again before I have a chance to log on. It's one place where I really don't mind the march of progress. 

Makes me feel like the sleepy Doormouse at the Mad Hatter's tea party.........

[Robert Robinson]

I love it when issues blossom and go away again before I have a chance to log on. It's one place where I really don't mind the march of progress. 

Makes me feel like the sleepy Doormouse at the Mad Hatter's tea party.........

Did you even get to see your score? I was happy that I didn't get ant neg. Bob Swenson said he didn't like the negative people.