Feel free to discuss ideas about the Reputation system, known to some users as the "karma system", although "reputation" is what we'll be calling it on AG3.
The Reputation System may not be present at AG3 launch, but is a high priority post-launch. It will allow other users to participate in ranking your community involvement, to a degree.
We're still open to ideas on it, so feel free to share your thoughts and ideas, and ask any questions.
The vote down feature would counter that. And even if bad comments get voted up, if a moderator/administrator spots it, then they could turn it back into a regular comment or simply delete it. The voting feature would work well because it'll most likely result in good comments/reviews getting voted up and it'll be easier for them to spot merit/review worthy comments. I do see how it could be abused, but there are things to prevent that/counter it.
I think the part of no moderators was during the April Fools' joke, Valboss.
Really?! Oh, I'm dumb! I didn't even noticed that!
The vote down feature would counter that. And even if bad comments get voted up, if a moderator/administrator spots it, then they could turn it back into a regular comment or simply delete it.
So, you said if a bad comments get voted up, mod have to change or delete it? Why? If some people like it, the comment must ramains as it is.
So, you said if a bad comments get voted up, mod have to change or delete it? Why? If some people like it, the comment must ramains as it is.
Say a comment is "lolfirstcomment" or "good game, 10/10" and many people voted it up. Those comments would be at the top of the page, and considering that those comments are spam and bad, they should get deleted. If a comment is like "I like this game a lot because it's fun" Well, that really isn't a review and shouldn't be at the top of the page either due to it being a useless comment, so that should be made back into a normal comment.
But how will you see that accounts are alternate accounts?
This is off-topic.
So the alternate accounts for people will be shut down?
We're going to work on a way to merge your alternate account back into your main account. That way, if you have an alternate account for a multiplayer game, we can merge that saved progress from your alt account back into your main account. Where it'll get tricky is if you have saved game progress on both accounts.
Again, this is off-topic, so I'll stop replying about alternate accounts. Feel free to start a new thread topic if you want more info on what we're planning.
will moderators and administrators also be allowed to vote?
Why not? We're still users, too, playing games, participating in the forums, etc.
if a moderator/administrator sees it and places it in the review section if there is one, will the person who wrote the comment receive more reputation since it got promoted?
We haven't decided yet.
If they are able to vote, will their votes count more since they are moderators and administrators, or will their voting power be the same as users?
The same, based on our relationship with the user who wrote what we like.
I think the part of no moderators was during the April Fools' joke
Correct.
I think the only way for the game comment vote-ups to work would be from mod/admins, just the way merits work, because if users could one up, then it would be abused too much.
I believe that's how merits *used* to work -- when enough users 'liked' something, it was auto-merited or something. We'd obviously change all that, and I think the idea we have is to allow moderators and admins will have a way to 'romote' a game comment to a "game review", which will be similar to a merit. WE HAVE NOT FINALIZED this idea, though, so it's subject to change.
if a moderator/administrator spots it, then they could turn it back into a regular comment or simply delete it.
Say a comment is "lolfirstcomment" or "good game, 10/10" and many people voted it up. Those comments would be at the top of the page, and considering that those comments are spam and bad, they should get deleted.
We'll have tools to reset a comment's Reputation, and of course, to delete a comment outright if it's spam or against our posting rules, etc., the same as we do now.
im sorry for the off topic block of text above but anyway.......I think that in regards to the reputation system maybe have some sort of way to tell if the person actually played the game befor rating it or commenting on it also giving negitive points for people who just try to run through a all the games they can just to farm armor points also maybe adding a like or dislike function to the comment section so that you may or may not get more points based on if your comment was contstructive or not. another thing I thought would be neat with the ranking system is having subgroups for each of the game genres along with a general community ranking like we have now. i forgot what else I was going to suggest so Ill get back with that later
So, if one of my comment is flag, I'll loose reputation or I'll loose only when it will be deleted?
When we launch the Reputation system (after AG3 launches), we'll probably only have a 'like' or 'thumbs up' or something. We probably won't do a "down vote" until phase 2. So the only options users will have for a comment are "up vote" and "flag as abuse". Flagging it will just make your comment available for admins/moderators to review it and decide whether to delete it or not, but if we delete it, it will remove any Reputation you gained from it.
We aren't sure about a "down vote" simply because we don't really like the idea of a "negative" Reputation score. Unless we cap it at 0 or something... It's trickier than an "up vote" control, which is why we need extra time to think about it.
I hope this isn't off topic - Will game reviews be based on the same standards of merits?
Yes, it's off-topic. Merits don't exist in AG3.
"we need to discourage bad game developers"
Also off-topic. This isn't the place to rant about whether you think someone's a bad developer or how to 'fix' it.
I think that in regards to the reputation system maybe have some sort of way to tell if the person actually played the game befor rating it or commenting on it also giving negitive points for people who just try to run through a all the games they can just to farm armor points also maybe adding a like or dislike function to the comment section so that you may or may not get more points based on if your comment was contstructive or not
Holy run-on sentence, Batman. ;o)
AG3 already restricts you from rating more than one game every two minutes. Also, since it appears you haven't kept up to date:
just to farm armor points
There will be no way to 'farm' points on AG3, as points can only be awarded through Achievements, and Achievements will require you to play the games. Right now, we're not planning on awarding points for rating games. (this may change but as of today, we're not planning on awarding points for ratings)
another thing I thought would be neat with the ranking system is having subgroups for each of the game genres along with a general community ranking
Also off-topic. We have a thread discussing ranks already.
What does the reputation will looks like? Points? Or a bar which grows when one of my post or comment is voted up?
Since we haven't even finished *talking* about it, we haven't even gotten to a design stage. That's partly what this topic is for: how *should* we display, *where* should we display it, etc.
Back to Topic, I think the reputation system works better if you give a detailed review about a game, or maybe add achievement awarded in game instead of the reputation system.
The vote down feature would counter that. And even if bad comments get voted up, if a moderator/administrator spots it, then they could turn it back into a regular comment or simply delete it.
if there is a bad comment voted up. i am sure it wont be by much, most people will know if it is good or bad depending on the context. but there is that option or mod/admin getting rid of it. should have a report for that so valid point.
I've been thinking about this for a little while, and it seems that discussion on the checks-and-balances predominates. While abuse is prevalent I'm actually quite confident that the culture in the AG community is on the whole good, so while there'll be some room for error in reporting reputation as the result of malicious behaviour, it'll be mitigated or diluted. In the event that it's ostensibly improper, I'm under the impression that the mod and admin team can act in their discretion to "correct" those changes.
I'll gloss over the specific argument about what reputation is actually meant to represent as I'm sure there'll be some concern over what defines "good" users as opposed to "opular" users (but then, what's new?), but just suggest that since reputation is actually a quality, the quantifying details should be secondary. That is to say a bar graph on the user's profile would be good, and the purpose of providing the numbers would purely be to indicate how many people bothered to set up that reputation. A qualifier might be that a user's reputation can't be defined until enough data has been collected, so maybe some predefined threshold on votes should be set before the information is displayed.
A bar graph will probably be impractical to apply to comments though.
