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