Visit the Beginner's Box
Introduce yourself, read some of the ins and outs of the community, access to useful links and information.
Discussion in 'Announcements' started by Furai, Mar 31, 2013.
Original post: http://devlog.kag2d.com/post/46709382597/more-photos-of-gdc-soon-its-over
User reputation is going to be a fucking DISASTER.
Why? All you gotta do is sit in on a random RTDM match. Talk shit on some 12 year old with a clan tag "2PRO" or some shit, and watch as he and his cronies drive your "reputation" into the ground.
Awful, AWFUL idea.
Obviously you know nothing and it would be better if you had stayed silent.
It will take a lot of tweaking. Downvoting like that won't be really possible.
well, a pic is a pic.
I know nothing? That's an awfully pretentious and pig-headed thing to say. No offense, but this is a message board, a place where people come with opinions and comments. Best if I stayed silent?
You're pretty much taking away guards and giving the power to a bunch of children. That's like taking the keys out of the hands of someone in their 40s with a spotless driving record and giving them to a 16 year old who just passed his driving exam after failing 4 times prior.
Also, you really need to look into how you talk to this community Furai. You treat a lot of us like we're brainless morons. That really isn't right.
User rep could be bad if poorly implemented or, done right, could be pretty damn effective. Given that it's FLAB implementing it, things should be okay. Don't shoot it until you've looked it in the eyes, bone. ;)
While I would tend to agree with TBS - user rep systems often get pretty saturated with misfires - I'm sure if it sucks, they'll turn it off.
The rep thing could really work out if implemented correctly. I'm just worried about my lag affecting the rep. :(
Should just be safe then sorry keep guards. :p
This was kinda my point. You can't take away power from players who have established themselves as trustworthy and helpful enough to be guards and hand it over to the community. Especially considering only a small percentage of this community visits the forums, and an even SMALLER percentage (maybe even a fraction) visit the forums REGULARLY. You have to keep the general intelligence of the in-game community in mind, and realize it's very very very low.
e: My only real issue for being angry right now is how Furai approached his reply. FBB made it clear without being a dick.
Did he mean 'keep guards' as in guards of the keep or was he talking about the guards, TBS?
Guards, as in global administrators.
Getting rid of Guards was a great administrative decision. It leads the way for the game community to grow much larger while embracing the future popularity from Steam.
I believe Furai was trying to say "It is better to be silent than have vulgar critique about someone you know nothing about which also has not been finalized". I think more modest discussion would have been welcome. No offense, but you kind of were ranting like a "brainless moron".
Guards are still very much alive, aren't they?
Oi, I'm still thoroughly tired so this will be reasonably brief, but I figured from all the "ooooooh rep is a terrible scary idea! halp, crazy devs" posts, PMs, and ingame rants I've seen, clarifying how we're planning on making the system work would be a good idea.
One vote on any given user per day - you can vote on as many people as you like, but you can't vote multiple times on any given user per day. This limits the rate of exchange in the system.
Cost for voting - 0.5 reputation will be taken for an upvote or a downvote. This means you have to either have high reputation or care pretty earnestly to up- or down-vote a player. It also means that counter-downvoting someone for downvoting you is expensive, and that voting on the whole server isn't really long-term feasible. Noone with negative points can vote.
Limit rep between -100 to 100 - at this point we feel a sane ceiling and floor on reputation is a good idea to prevent someone gaining +5167815 rep and being able to "afford to be a dick to everyone".
Give new users 0 reputation - prevents spamming zombie accounts.
Regen - Give users with <20 reputation 1 point per week - this compensates for "misfire" a little, and implements "ban expiry" for downvoted accounts. Basically you can afford to be very slightly negative. 1 week should be a long enough time to make farming points like this very inefficient (it should be noted that zombie accounts like that would be very easy to find as well).
Reasonably lenient "deny join" threshold - at the moment we're thinking you'll have to get to about -25 or so before default servers don't let you in. This number will be able to be configured per-server of course (which means if you want an elite 50+ only server, you can have it).
Give prominent users in the community a good rep from the get go - this will apply to guards in particular, but also probably some carefully selected long term players. This means that power gradually flows from the hard-cap moderation that we have now, into the community.
Obviously the numbers in there are subject to change (eg if 20 is too high a rep to be able to "idle" to, we can decrease it), but the overall design should be apparent: democratic leadership that scales perfectly with the number of users.
Obviously, if the system turns out to be a total failure we'll have to find something else, but I can honestly see this working very well.
that's a smart idea, it has my approval! :) something like that would be great, though like anything it might have a few problems at first, like some people might figure out a way to glitch or "hack" the system, making a player with a high rep lowered or a low rep person to be amazing or something like that. But I'm sure it would be fixed quickly.
Maybe make the voting cost something like 0.25 instead of 0.5? 0.5 is a little harsh.
Who the fuck are you again? Ranting like a brainless moron? HEAVEN FORBID I have an opinion.
YES! LEAD THE WAY FOR THE TWELVE YEAR OLD AUSSIE CROWD! I'll be sure to check this thread again at lunch to see if you're jerking Furai with both hands instead of just one.
e: I kinda like the way Geti explained it, but I still think there should be SOME global administration.
thebonesauce, please behave. Guards have to go - simply put - they are not enough to guard all the servers. Recruiting more is not an option. How would you imagine managing such a large group? Now it's pretty vague at times and brings a lot of hate.
In my opinion Reputation System will work out well.
He got it right. Sorry for not being a native speaker and having problems with expressing myself.
Also, there is always a way to express yourself in a nice way, without raging, swearing and all that unneeded bad emotions.
As to me treating the community members like "brainless morons"...well I cannot deny that. It is probably because I'm dealing everyday with reports of cheaters which slowly drives me mad and lowers my esteem of this community.
Well, while I'm not against this user reputation system if it's well implemented, I'm more against removing all Guards from duty.
I mean, if they're tired of being guard or are not active, sure, but if they are happy to help and administrate the game, why remove them? They aren't getting payed, so it shouldn't be a problem.
A mix of Guards and User Rep could work great, if there's a Guard on IRC and there's an issue, he can go there quickly and solve the problem immediately, and if there are too many problems at once, the user rep system can be used. Best of both worlds.
Separate names with a comma.