Bitcoin Forum

That is all.

Make good use of it folks.

It will now be easier for us all to wade through some of the BS on this forum!

Yes--please try and treat the feature wisely people!  It will be good if we can use it as effective meta-data rather than as a joke or game.

I'm curious what, in your opinion, is a wise circumstance under which to "smite" a user?  Sometimes there are people on here whose attitudes severely annoy me, and I'd like to give them a smack, but the whole smiting business seems so... unsportsmanlike or something.  When would you use it?

Well, I haven't so far.  But I might be tempted to use it for people who are repeatedly abusive to newcomers.  In any case it should definitely be used sparingly, or else it will lose meaning.

IMHO... Smiting someone purely because of their attitude would be non-productive to the rest of the community.

I for one will only smite someone based on purposely incorrect/falsified information (of which I believe there is much of on this forum, in the mining section at least...) and/or engaging in other practices that are counter productive to the bitcoin community. Like DDOSing mtgox for example... If we ever figure out which members might be associated with it.

There are no official guidelines yet so the correct answer would be "whenever you feel like". Personally, I plan to freely smite people I dislike/distrust.

I can imagine that smite will get out of hand. I would much prefer an applaud feature only, although I could see how that could be abused as well. Alternately and maybe better yet, if the applaud/smite feature only becomes available for ~Jr/Full Member levels or better....does it already work this way? I don't have an alternate account to try it.

Applaud me and I'll send you .02 BTC.
Donate me .02 BTC (138otncA6ZYKMCcPEgqPbbnBn8jtdqEpdd) and I'll applaud you.

j/k of course...I don't want to abuse this system :D

I think it should only be available to full members and above...but then I'm already a full member so I'm probably biased.  And I'll probably get smited for this comment.   ;-)

Actually, though I think it is important for the current user base to take the rating system seriously so that newbies who come in will realize it's a serious deal and not something to toy around with. 

Oh, it's already out of hand. I don't see this lasting long.

I say hero members and above :)

Second :)

Limiting it only to members that have a certain post count would be retarded as post count is not a measure of reputation. Think of Keefe for example, he is the most trusted person in the OTC web of trust but has nowhere near 500 posts here on the forum.

I think it's a mistake to conflate reputation with how many people agree with what you said here on the forums. I see a lot of minuses being handed out already, and I'd hate to have people think these numbers have anything to do with how trustworthy a person is as a trade partner.

+1

:D

Integration with the OTC web of trust would be really nice.

+1 to the idea of tying it to the OTC Web of Trust. It takes work to vote there.

So... everybody who doesn't use the OTC or, like me, who stays away from IRC is out of the system... Seems fair!  ::)

I see you and I raise you one: Moderators only?   ;)

True.

What was decided? Do you need a certain number of posts to be able to applause someone else?

Maybe we could say that if someone was applauded 10times, he can applaud others himself.

Theymos (moderator) says you need a post count of 250 to applaud or smite someone, I'm not sure how that was decided.  This is irony because this post is my 250th....



EDIT: And I can now applaud/smite so 250 post count is the required amount.

Any idea how you got so many negatives already?  People mad at you?  From the posts that I've read of yours you seem to be legit as hell.  And that's a compliment....   :D

I'm not fan of those "posts limit" (because some people post few and insightful messages when people like me post a lot of small and useless messages). But I agree that, at least, it draws a barrier which is definitely needed. Better than nothing I guess.

Yeah, I'm not sure of how better to do it.  Perhaps if everyone only got a certain number per month: 10 plus and 5 minus they can use each month.  By limiting the supply you will increase the "price" of the ratings then and people will be a lot more cautious in doling them out.  Of course, then we might see the rise of a meta-bitcoin currency where people buy and sell ratings.  :P  I think it will be an imperfect system any way you look at it, but at least 250 posts isn't too unreasonable to reach if you've been a part of the forum for a while.  Even if aren't a loquacious poster.

It needs some limit for sure. Or else we'll find out who is most liked by the people who most like to give out ratings.

I think it would be good to charge .1 positive rating for every rating you give out. Or even make the price go up with each rating given and drop over time.

Gimme a minute and I'll think of something even more complicated :)

Yeah, this actually makes me think it's a bad idea or at least not worth it.

I don't think most will neg people for disagreeing, but only for doing it in obtuse or hostile ways. Well, if that is true then maybe people will try harder to avoid losing trade rep. I dunno if it's a good proxy or 'fair', but maybe it improves incentives. I guess I'll withhold judgement for a while.

Whoopiedoo I have a -1 now.

Any way I can find out why?

I guess the answer is no.

Suggestion: add an option to view which post was voted down.

Here is an idea I had that I posted in another thread:

That's not a new thing. vbulleetin reputation system works just like you described.

I hadn't heard of it before.  By any chance, do you know of an open-source system like that?

Not really. I have one phpbb forum and getting a simple MOD for a thanks button to work properly was a challenge :D

Now that I've searched their site, I'm not sure that their system works like what I have in mind.  The user-unique weighting isn't there.  I don't think I explained my idea clearly.

Example 1:

Joe rates Sam +1.  He rates Albert +1.  He rates Julie -1.
Clifford rates Sam +1. He rates Albert +1.  But he hasn't yet rated Julie.

So for Clifford, when he looks at Julie, he sees a suggested rating of -1.


Example 2:

Joe rates Sam +1. Albert +1. Julie -1.
Clifford rates Sam -1. Albert -1.  No Julie rating.

In that case, Clifford sees no suggested rating for Julie.


Edit:

Example 3:

Joe rates Sam +1, Albert +1, Julie -1.
Clifford rates Sam -1, Albert -1, Julie +1.
Frank rates Sam +1, Albert +1.

Therefore, Frank sees a suggested rating of -1 for Julie.  (non-correlating ratings are ignored on a per-user basis)

Can someone please post a screenshot where the buttons are located? I can't seem to see them... (does it matter if someone has a bad rep?)

Edit: I see in this thread: http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=7502.0 that you need to have 250 posts before you see the buttons. OK.

In case you want a sneak-preview:

http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm45/antiwave/ScreenShot-2.jpg

Bad reps only matter if people think they matter.  For example you have a net rep of 0, but I've dialogued with you enough on this forum to think that you deserve higher so it isn't going to affect what I think of you.  Newer members or members who haven't dialogued with you may be more hesitant to trade with you. 

And to be perfectly honest, I've decided not to trade with this account anyway. I try to keep my politics away from other things.

This rating system sucks  >:(
It needs to be abolished!

* I wave my hand *

Done.

 8)