While this isn't really needed and is a pretty small, insignificant function compared to most, I still feel the need and over-all desire to post about it, suggesting the following idea.

Remember on Topix they have the voting system implemented into posts, where people can rep the post and a small image appears to the top with the number of total votes in parenthesis?

For instance -Peanut Icon for a NUTTY POST- (12) meaning 12 people had submitted that rep to that specific post.

I sorta feel like we should have something closely similar to that, for our posts. One for a "great" post, one for a decent post, one for a good post, one for a meh post, one for a poor post, bad, and so forth. Even for nutty posts, bright posts, deep posts and so on like that.

With the little image to the top beside the name of the poster who the people are repping in a sense, with the total number of people who voted for that rep.

But there should only be allowed for 3 to 5 reps per post, so it doesn't spam up or stretch the page. If anyone votes for one that can't make it on the post it goes in a hidden Que of sorts and if more click that specific rep and it goes higher than the lowest of the already posted reps, it will replace it.

Completely anonymous based, and fun, adding in a little bit extra for us to do.

I just feel like there is too many trolls and newbs on this site to be able to maintain a system such as this one in a feasible manner.

>>2

And what would be the problem? Then you'd get more often than not, some misplaced ratings. People should be smart enough alone to tell the troll and newb rep/ratings from the genuine kind.

>>3 Yeah, but if it's the trolls/newbs that are rating it, they would kind of fuel each other. If somebody makes an idiotic post on Main, but idiots see it and think "think is a great idea!", Then it kind of perpetuates itself. It might work and would be a great idea if we had a better overall community, I'm just not sure in reality.

I agree with Solace. I don't see much of a point behind this. People can more or less tell from the OP and the latest 3 comments posted what kind of a thread they're looking at. In addition to that, the whole idea of a rating system for threads should be good in theory (and I swear it's been discussed before but hell if I know if we have a thread here about it since I hardly ever come on to this board), but in my opinion the potential abuse of it isn't worth the implementation.

Like reddit

>>6 theres other examples.

why would you implement a rep system on a board like this? doesn't that contradict the point of rapid anonymous discussion? i don't want to use this site anymore if people are going to use it like reddit to reinforce their preconceived ideals of how clever they are based on a points system.

>>8
No offense but I give absolutely no shits if you do or don't wish to use it.

It defeats no anonymous factors given it wouldn't say WHO repped. Just someone liked it via the rep itself.

>>9
If people don't want to use it, then the idea won't get implemented, so that should kind of be your concern.

>>10 i think the bigger problem thia has with >>8's comment was how theyre base for being against it is that this idea is somehow destroying anonymity.

>>11
Exactly.

it destroys the prospect of rapid anonymous discussion when people have to worry about whether or not they'll get a score based on how relevant they are. when there's no score no one cares what they say. i stand by my previous statement, getting a score based on your posts is ridiculous and will add nothing to the concept of this board

>>13 This isn't really rapid anonymous discussion; it's a pretty slow forum.

>>13
Not doing it also doesn't take away or give to the concept, either.

And while some may disagree due to the functionality of it, even the sage button adds nothing but aesthetics to it given with or without it, mods would sage/delete/lock topics.

Even the most commonly used function for this board (which already isn't rapid for discussions) is here just for the looks, given most people hate to see badly done topics at the top each time.

In all seriousness while it's implement serves a more in-depth purpose, it is the same as a point system mainly for looks. I really doubt it would kill anything dealing with anonymity, and wouldn't hasten or slow down the rate of discussions, because if you believe so, you're newer here than I thought.

Mainly due to this place for the longest time has been very slow paced. Some topics itself may be quicker in posting rates than others, but over all is pretty laid back, and I wouldn't expect someone new to know any better, and those who "use" this site enough should have known that by now.

Now while you're against my idea, I couldn't give two shits about. You don't like it, I respect it, but your point it totally irrelevant as to why you don't agree. Your point totally doesn't actually hold any merit; it lacks the proper know-how of these forums, of the boards in all of it's generality.

I really suggest if that is going to be your point, that you work on getting to know how and why this site is used, and by whom it is used by, else you're spouting off nonsense for the sake of trying to argue against my suggestions.

To make my argument concluded, your reasoning is so weakly underhanded, as if by saying this place is using rapid discussions actually makes it so, or you expect us to believe it just because it has the potential to be as such.

While it could be used as well as one, the rep system would only harm it in my mind if it was implemented way after it had become rapid. But if added before hand so people got used to it, I highly doubt it'd drastically break a system of sorts (the rapid discussions) not yet being the case, on here.

I like how Thiamor has shut down any arguments with "weakly underhanded reasoning" yet he hasn't given his reasons why it SHOULD be implemented in the first place. I mean, I read through this and haven't found a lick of reasoning why we should care if it should be implemented.

>>16

I only used that "weak" comment once, so I like to see you provide your source that shows I shut down any arguments with that statement.

You shouldn't care to a great deal, but those honest members who actually provide on the boards may care to an extent, both as a repper and a repped member of sorts.

But the main issue would be how to limit abuse of the system where it would push those away with the intent of rep spams and over all abuse.

This site is already dangerously close to not being anonymous at all. Everyone reuses their same username so the site is essentially built up entirely of tripfags to begin with. Adding a rep system only further sidelines the very purpose of anonymity in the first place: to avoid circlejerking and personalization.

Creating such a system allows people to vote on posts in a fair and unbiased manner, sure, but it also allows it to happen in an unfair and biased manner. People that know each other will just upvote themselves on principle, and people can start crowd-manipulating to get more upvotes through appealing content. It's like asking for tryhards.

Voting systems exist and thrive on content-sharing sites, not discussion boards. Why would you encourage people to judge at a glance (only reading the thread title, looking at its "rep", etc) when that's basically the biggest problem this site has in the first place?

It almost sounds like you just want recognition. The main issue is not "how to limit abuse of the system" - don't pretend it's moved past "why would we do this in the first place". See >>10

>>18
Well it may have a point but his point was placed into the wrong context.

So far there isn't enough information minus the same few people, stating they wouldn't like it, to make a good call on whether or not the people want it.

The context >>10 was in, was thinking I didn't care people wanted it, when the original context of my post was based on how he thought this site was fast paced anonymous discussions. Hell, this site for the longest time wasn't even about being anonymous, but just to converse with each other.

It's like your solely stuck on the "Anonymous anime" scenario that you can't see what this site really is. If you don't give the people on here enough respect, to believe they will use the voting in a good manner, then we're not going to get anywhere.

Sure, we have those who WOULD and COULD abuse it, but most of the people who actually stick around, actually use functions properly, post properly, and are the main people keeping this site going (not literally).

Those who actually create topics, more times than not, create them worthy of being voted on, and those who create shit topics, at least for the time being, is a dying breed mainly due to how used and known this site actually is.

It's not like it's super meaningful and don't act like there is not a single anonymous based board of sorts that don't use such a system. One site where people aim to be anonymous (mainly for insults and shit talking) is Topix.com. But we're not near their level of bullshit, and I highly doubt we'd get to that anytime soon.

Also I really suggest the reps only being seen at the end of the entire first post, rather than where it takes only a glance to see them. This way they have to go into the topic to view the ratings of the topic at hand. At least it lessens those lazy bastards a bit more than if it were there at a glance.

Also those TRIPFAGS normally are the people keeping the site going anyway, so it seems like you're trying to insult those who don't change names, or trips. If that is the case it's a massive insult to the people you should thank for actually taking time to keep conversations and topics going strong, rather than it being flooded with shit all of the time.

Scuse me tho, I couldn't give a rat's ass about anime. Why would that even come to mind? Sounds to me like you're the one who watches too much anime when you start relating real scenarios to it.

I ain't talking about a minority abusing it, I'm saying 100% that it'll turn out shitty. Literally everything with a voting system's asking for it, and this site's already one push from reddit levels of circlejerking as it is. "Most of the people who actually stick around .. and are the main people keeping this site going" won't abuse it? That's a fucking joke if I ever heard one. I mean look at you right now, telling me I need to treat people with respect and putting people on a pedestal for just being here, while giving my points barely any credit. That's seniority, buddy.

I'm not saying using names is bad; tripfag is just a fucking term. Using names can be done without a problem if those that do it treat each other on equal par with the ones that don't, but clearly this site has failed that test. The only reason we're not "near the level of bullshit" of other anonymous message boards is because your "regulars" are such a tight-knit group that only considers themselves as the core of the site, while cutting off the rest. Don't even try to deny that either, you literally just said the only people that matter are the ones who manage the site. What happened to this being a community effort?

Given that, what do you think a voting system would do to even the playing field? It'd make it worse, especially for new members trying to get in that circle. Your core group gets special treatment while everyone else is under scrutiny until approved. And that's some bullshit.

>>20

No, I said the only ones who matter are the people keeping it going. Not running. IE, those who actually contribute in bumping topics, saging posts and contributing in the creation of topics and over all conversations.

I did not once say those who manage it in the sense I think you mean. As such it sort of implies the community who actually do shit are the one's who matter, and as of lately it's those regular members putting in the effort.

Also you're not actually able to prove without a doubt that it WILL turn out shitty and I suggest you drop that out of your attitude.

You're acting like the regulars are not listening to the rest and act like they are the top, when in fact almost EVERYONE who uses this site are the regulars. This site is a dying site, slowly and surely losing people, and leaving the rest of the active, caring members.

How you're wording it seems like you think this site is filling to the brim with members, and we here are sitting not giving a shit, when it's not true.

I don't ever remember it being a rule that you had to pull your weight in an open community to be considered worth a damn. I thought that was just a nice thing to do - a merit, not a requirement. What do you say about the people who just come on here to talk about stuff on a discussion site? Do you throw them under a bus, then turn back to your clique and shittalk them because you're "more involved"?

But you did just admit yourself that the only people that matter are the ones you've decided matter. So I guess I don't need to push that issue any more since it's clear.

I remember at one point when people were more impartial in here. Even the older members kinda didn't give a shit who's been around or not. There's probably a good reason why it's dying and the only ones left are so inclusive and condescending towards everyone that isn't them. If your idea of fixing a problem is to relish in it then by all means keep it up. You weren't willing to discuss this idea from the get-go, given your first presumptuous response to me.

>>22
If they walk they are contributing. How dense are you?

Talk...not walk >.<

What I mean are the people who matter are those who actually contribute. It doesn't mean if it's posting, or saging, but if they are here doing nothing, then it doesn't matter what stuff is added or removed because they don't use it.

Now as stated like many posts ago, this adds nothing special, just a little something "fun" that in turn could end up being very useful, it just depends on how we go about it, as I stated many times and instead of trying to argue, how about you actually help talk about ways we can alter the idea up.

If all you have is telling me you're against it, good, you did so, stop beating a dead horse.

Thiamor is talking about the Regulars that police the site, keeping it clean. For that task the perform, it would be natural that they would have a better understanding of what would benefit the site over that one guy who posted on the introduction thread once, skipped the FaQ, made a bad thread on Animation, had a sook and left.

Anon is talking about the scrutiny and mistrust that the regulars hold towards all members, rather than just those who prove themselves annoying shits. What the regulars should start doing is treat innocent until proven guilty, rather than treat guilty till proven innocent. Granted, some are worse than others, but we could all use a bit of improvement.

It just seems like both of you are misunderstanding each other quite a bit.

Also, neither of you are actually asking how the regulars feel; from the first few posts, it seems that they too are dubious. You're both kind of speaking for two large groups without recognising either of them.

I dont think thia is even going so far as to say the regulars decisions are the only ones that matter, just that the people who dont do the whole "im gonna post once on this random board then never return to the site because hurdur" matter immensely more than those that do do that.

i dont really think that voting for the great quality of a post should really exist..every post is great in its own special way..we dont want the dollars to be known for judgement, do we? no..we want the dollars to be known for doing good! we can do good deeds to make this happen..we can fight for good and we can overpower evil!! lets do this!

>>28
Please go back to your anime and leave it from my topic.

sorry..

I have to disagree with you, such a system, especially on a anonymous message board, is way too easy to abuse. I've seen some comparisons to reddit, and while a sort of karma system can work well, I think the risk of people attempting to abuse it for the sake of imaginary internet points is just too high and has the potential to ruin discussion. If the point of this place is to have interesting, anonymous discussions I see no reason to change the system.

>>31
If anyone takes the points more seriously than a "I want to see how this topic pans out" then they don't need to be on here. Mostly new members would abuse the system, and most likely get weeded out when we see their names on a topic with a an unusually large rep count.

Not counting how unless they change computers, it won't let them vote again on a topic.

>>33 People treat it like a popularity contest. Alot of socially susceptible chimpanzees will give a bad reputation for an existing user, simply because another did. This is why reddit is dead.

Just asking, would this system be like the like/dislike buttons on Youtube? Well anyway, if it was, would it matter? I'm not saying I am against the idea, I am actually.
But really, does it matter who likes and dislikes what?To be honest, the people who disagree should just pass it by because it takes more energy to hate on something than to say "What a nice idea" and being on your way?
I might be taking this debate (if it is one) off track, but put simply: This is a good idea. People who don't like a post shouldn't even bother with it.

>>35 That's silly and you should feel silly.

>>34 Reddit is thriving.

I still hold my original stance; while this is a cool idea, I feel like it's open for abuse and might be tricky to implement.

What would it matter well lets see some people would just follow the every one else and not even know what there voting for thaimor this site is to post what you feel you need to post whit no judge ment or freedom of spech well all diserve to have our voice herd and what will that really do for us as a whole make it a contest on who could get the most likes that would only divide us and we wouldnt accomplish anything

>>37

I'd read that if you didn't post it so stupid.

If you're going to take time to knock an idea down, while using concepts like "no one should be judged" then at least take time to spell properly.

>>37
Plus you're pretty new here and yet you're telling ME what this site is supposed to be used for?

To be honst ive been on and off this site since 2011 so no im not new here im just saying what it said it was origanally created for not trying to piss off anyone just stating my opion on the topic

But then again in all the time ive been on here it really doesnt feel like im making a diffrences anywhere so you mite be right about this being just another socail site used for the point of just talking about current events but still what would be the point of having a rep system to see who gets the best vote by the most people on this site 50 people could just be one person trying to look cool so that is one of my reason why im talking about this system you perpose but tell me why do you even want a rep system?

>>43 That question mark is the first piece of punctuation that I have ever seen you use.

>>41 Although I agree with you for the most part, I don't think seniority should decide authority. We don't want to look like assholes, now.

>>44

I don't really mean it in a seniority sense, but anyone new person should work towards making themselves known in a proper light before telling people what this site "is" supposed to be used for.

>>45
Any new person.*

Not anyone new person.(

Seems fair but a rep system mite not be the best way to do it we could go over the option for the stituation

>>41 I'm going to put tacks on the saddle of your high horse if you stick your ass that far in the air again, Thiamor.

First of all, zero's been here for a long time. No, his points usually aren't valid, and I usually don't read his posts since he doesn't write English very well. But don't pull that seniority bullshit with someone who has been here just as long as you.

And you don't have to make yourself known to have an opinion. Whether you're an anon or a user who sticks to one name, if the point of the post is valid, then it's open for discussion. It doesn't matter if you've been here for four years or four days or are an Anon of unknown membership age (*coughsomehavebeenherelongerthanyoucough*).

Regardless of the name on the post, an opinion is an opinion. There is no one thing that this site is for, so everyone has their own idea of it (even if they're wrong /shot), and it's open to discussion - to an extent. You can't shut down someone's entire post based on the length of time that they've been on the site (unless they made a ridiculous thread about it on Main or Missions or something, in which case feel free to rip them a new asshole). Quite frankly, Thia, the way you've been responding to zero with this snobby, "Oh, shoo, get away you little noob! You might rub your newbiness on me if you get too close!" attitude is just no. I want to smack zero as often as I want to smack you, but I'm concerned about exactly how many other members you talk to like this just because you're under the impression that they're new. Any member who screws up a thread annoys me, and I'm more strict if they're new because I want to shock them into double checking for threads at an early age, yes. This, though? If they're not breaking any rules, don't give them such a hard time.

Have a little respect. Yeah, we all go bitch!mode sometimes, but the way you're acting is a perfect example of why Misuto had to go back in the 'why are old members so mean' threads and apologize for how they didn't realize the senior attitudes would get to the point that it did a couple years ago. You are one of the only members from that general era who never fully grew out of that phase, and I worry that it's inspiring newer police members to have an attitude even more so than my own crude vocabulary does.

Everyone's opinions matter so long as they're not breaking any rules or causing disorganization with the way they're stating them. If you don't like what they have to say, instead of telling them their opinion doesn't matter because they're new, just don't respond if you have nothing better to say.

Anyway, onto the topic at hand!

I'm kind of confused as to how this would work. Will it have like weird 'nutty' achievements? Why not just have an up/down type of feature where it will say the total score for that post? There's no real point to it, but I guess it could be cute, excluding the periodic spam that the system would undoubtedly face.

And I really don't see the point of a system any more complex than an up/down system, so I hope I interpreted that right. We don't need little 'Hot!' or 'Nutty~' labels next to the post that get up'd a lot.

>>48
One moment for me to commemorate you. The way you stated you didn't like zero much yet defended him was honorable to me. I just wanted to say that was inspirational to me.

Back to the topic... To be clear, what was the point to this system? Like >>49 said, a simple like/dislike or up/down rating would be simple. Why not stick to that instead of using words (I find odd to use but that is just me) like "Hot" and "Nutty~". What would nutty imply anyway? Some may take it the wrong way.

Well I figured with a few more options based on your feelings, it might explain the topic a bit better.
Like up and down only explains whether or not you think it's good or bad.

I don't mean images of nuts, or even called nutty, and shit like that, but with a few more options you might be able to explain what the topic is with the rating/reps a bit easier.