Karma ratings

[Alicson]

About Karma ratings:

Karma ratings are a form of community-self-moderation.

It's a system in which fellow forum members can rate other members with a thumbs up or thumbs down based on their positive or negative contributions to the community.  Karma ratings are given and received anonymously but the received totals for each individual are seen publicly.

A forum member may rate a particular member no more than once per day.  The ratings will accumulate.  Anyone can rate anyone else equally, regardless of designation as Moderator, Administrator, Member, etc.  Guests do not participate in karma ratings.

------------

The plan is to implement this system in the new forum overhaul that will take place on November 18.  It's a notable addition/change, and warrants some input/discussion from the community at large.  
Please share your thoughts about it.

[Travis Sanford]

I do not see the point in having karmic ratings given by the other members of the fora. We are pretty much aware how others perceive us because they tell us what they think. A general rating, like a grade, lacks context and does not reflect the instant case to which the rater is reacting. I can already see posts like "Travis, no wonder your karma is so bad all you do is rant about the AB has no leadership and the momentum is leaking out of the movement." Fine but do they really need to bring a vote into the affair?

[sgahealth]

If the AB communicated more frequently about what is going on perhaps the desire to moderate the BASE would lessen.

[bethness]

I think it adds more potential bile to a forum which already sees it's fair share of drama.  The anonymity bothers me (after all, didn't we all have a long discussion about anonymous posting - how does it jive with the honor code)?  

And I've seen many a forum spiral downward after the ratings are introduced.  It's divisive.   If you like - or don't like - what someone says, say so and sign your name.

[praggy]

I also hope this rating scheme isn't implemented. Rendering anonymous judgment seems out of place here, unless alumni were being surveyed.

[Michelle]

I can't imagine a single positive outcome of implementing such a system here. It seems like an unnecessary distraction from the task at hand - keeping Antioch alive.

[erik]

we can always run a vote (poll) on the new system once it's up and let all the people decide whether or not they prefer to disable or keep karma.

i think this'll be both fair and inclusive and also allow for the possibility of something new and potentially good without squashing the idea of it before-the-fact.

[praggy]

What are these ratings thought to address?

Without answering that, Karma points and "community self-moderation" seem to prove the University is fundamentally correct about the college, its culture and its graduates.

[Travis Sanford]

we can always run a vote (poll) on the new system once it's up and let all the people decide whether or not they prefer to disable or keep karma.

i think this'll be both fair and inclusive and also allow for the possibility of something new and potentially good without squashing the idea of it before-the-fact.

I respectfully disagree Eric, must we actually try something before determining that it will be detrimental to our discourse? Squashing the idea is a very good idea indeed if the orginial idea will add nothing but a "thing" to the options available. It will not accurately gauge support or lack of support for individual arguments and well, just seems uneccesary.

[Carl Ulrich 59]

Can someone explain the rational for the following in  the new forum:

What is the purpose of the different levels of our karma?  Does it distinguish between the good folks and the not so good folks?  Or the agreeable positive folks and the critical folks?  Honestly I don't understand.

Why do we have different categories of membership and how does one advance to the higher levels.  It there a chart or rules  that explains this?

 I would hope, as an inclusive community, that we would all have a common designation (except for administrators and moderators).   I agree it is good to recognize the work done by those more involved and this can easily be done by listing the date they joined and the number of posts they have posted.

And maybe picky, but personally I don't like the smiley stuff.  As students and graduates from Antioch College, I would hope that we could express our  ideas and feelings  with words.

[erik]

Can someone explain the rational for the following in  the new forum:

What is the purpose of the different levels of our karma?  Does it distinguish between the good folks and the not so good folks?  Or the agreeable positive folks and the critical folks?  Honestly I don't understand.

Karma is a feature that shows the user-determined popularity of a member. Members, if allowed, can 'applaud' or 'smite' other members, which is how their popularity is calculated.

Why do we have different categories of membership and how does one advance to the higher levels.  It there a chart or rules  that explains this?

the categories such as "Newbie, Member, Hero Member, etc" and the "stars" are based upon post-count/contributed posts.

other titles are group-based permission for specific groups (such as builders, or other groups one can belong to/join/communicate with for specific things).

I would hope, as an inclusive community, that we would all have a common designation (except for administrators and moderators).   I agree it is good to recognize the work done by those more involved and this can easily be done by listing the date they joined and the number of posts they have posted.

And maybe picky, but personally I don't like the smiley stuff.  As students and graduates from Antioch College, I would hope that we could express our  ideas and feelings  with words.

others may feel differently. some like smilys some do not. some like to have the ability to post multi-media, others do not.

there are multiple themes that you can choose under your Profile tab -> look and layout preferences. try to find you that you think best for you. more will be added.

[Carl Ulrich 59]

Erik,

I find it hard to believe that we are really interested in the popularity of a poster.

you wrote:

"Karma is a feature that shows the user-determined popularity of a member. Members, if allowed, can 'applaud' or 'smite' other members, which is how their popularity is calculated."

It doesn't fit with my idea of an inclusive community that is trying to encourage honest debate and a wide diversity of opinion.  Also, very different from my concept and experience of Antioch College.  Actually feels sort of childish to me.

[erik]

I find it hard to believe that we are really interested in the popularity of a poster.

Carl,
I find it hard to believe that you think you are able to speak for the interests of we.

"Karma is a feature that shows the user-determined popularity of a member. Members, if allowed, can 'applaud' or 'smite' other members, which is how their popularity is calculated."

It doesn't fit with my idea of an inclusive community that is trying to encourage honest debate and a wide diversity of opinion.  Also, very different from my concept and experience of Antioch College.  Actually feels sort of childish to me.

The definition of the karma feature that I wrote and you quoted is from the software creator's glossary. You asked its purpose.. If you don't like the definition please take it up with their community at simplemachines.org.

Also, instead of nitpicking about meaningless software features and speaking of what you think we want, you could also use your experience and concepts to contribute instead to the many inclusive and diverse conversations going on throughout the forum that are encouraging a way to better save Antioch.

I will run a poll for the community to vote on whether to keep or remove the Karma feature. It will let the community decide for itself.

This is the last I'll say about the Karma feature.

Thank you.

[sgahealth]

Again, why are we doing Karma ratings?   As the ONLY person (as far as I can tell) that has a -1 rating, what is the message to me? Does it mean I need to be moderated or should stop posting?  If so, what post(s) does someone disagree with or which post(s) are too negative, not constructive and need moderating?  I thought the karma rating was for a particular post NOT the person overall.   Signed, Sore Loser

[erik]

Again, why are we doing Karma ratings? ......

 
http://antiochians.org/forum/index.php/topic,22143.0.html