NT,

It seems like a pretty good idea to me. It's not a perfect system, but there seems to be enough variables to limit easy manipulation.

Getting positive responses to your posts increases your ability to rate others.
Being around along time increases your ability to rate others.
Post count increases your ability to rate others.

It actually seems pretty fair to me.

I briefly outlined it in the original post, but I'll do it again. There are 3 ways to add to your rep-altering power:

1. Posts - every 1000 posts earns you 1 more point of altering power (1000 is arbitrary, just what BB happens to use)
2. Time - every year of membership earns you 1 more point
3. Reputation - every 1000 positive reputation points earns you 1 more point of altering power - this is the main way your power goes up

So everyone who has been around a while, posted a lot, and posted valuable contributions will have higher rep-altering power. As mentioned before also, anyone with negative overall rep ("in the red") has zero rep-altering power, so people who consistently make terrible posts won't have any effect.

If the system was implemented exactly like BB, it would take a while for it to become effective just because everyone will start with such little power. BB has been around for quite a while and has huge membership, so posters have anywhere from 0 to 100000+ points of altering power. I have only seen mods with huge amounts like that, but some regular posters have 5-10K points (typically ~3-5 points from Time, ~10 from # of posts, and thousands just from receiving reputation from others).

The admins could of course customize all the numbers to best suit our forum. They could automatically give mods extra rep-altering power. You could make rules in OOT such as rep-begging = temp ban (or if mods have extra rep power, just neg the guy which will eliminate any positive rep he got from begging plus some).

Every week, the three lowest point totals get permabanned. It's kind of like the 2p2 FedEx Cup.

A) Give certain posters a high rep count to begin with, so they can semi-veto the onslaught of noobs helping each other.

B) Make rep points be the biggest factor in how many rep points you can in turn give out. Post #'s and Time don't really matter as much in OOT.

It could work. Make a rule that says if you talk about rep points or beg for rep points you get banned

would it be possible to make such a system specific to sub-forums? because i can see how BBV posters wouldn't really want OOTiots rating them (and vice versa).

I doubt that would be a problem. If BBV people aren't posting in OOT, then they won't be on the radar screen for OOT readers.

I have no idea how the software logistics would work, but that definitely sounds good. It would work out well for the strat forums as well. A well seasoned LHE player would have a great repuation in the high stakes limit forums, but should not be automatically accepted as a great NLHE poster. They would have to prove themself there as well.

you're right, a forum that starts near-daily threads about how bad OOT is and routinely produces multi-account trolls would have no interest in dicking around with that same forum by gaming a rating system. it's not like these people have a ton of time on their hands, mischief on their minds or the will to complete such a task.

i like BBV a lot, and the posters who would do something like this are not the ones i think of as good posters there. so this isn't a 'F BBV' post, it's a 'F that segment of BBV that has nothing better to do than complain about OOT because they think it's cool' post.

I think this whole thing is lame because it becomes an internet circle jerk. I had a much longer post typed out but whacked all of it. Also, I think it's hard for noobs to get noticed even when they have a good idea, and this just makes it that much harder and could discourage quality posters from regging.

If a poster sucks that should be recognizable without any rating system.

Just ban more people. Come on this isn't hard.

You build up your rep points so you can later rip off other posters in a Stars for Full Tilt money exchange, obv.

Yep. To add, I'm active on another forum where they have this and it's just the suck. It doesn't mean anything to the quality posters and it means the world to the crap posters.

A workplace analogy:

Anyone who's spent a significant amount of time in a leadership position comes to realize good employees want two things.

1) To be rewarded for their good work.
2) To see the workplace assbags get punished.

There needs to be a way for the good posters to see the horrible ones get what they deserve. Maybe a read-only LoloBannedU forum where the mods can post who they've temp- or perma- banned and why would work.

I keep trying to find a way to describe why this is stupid, but I promised myself I'd try to stop calling things "gay" or "******ed" because it's insensitive.

this is gay ass ******ation. klybe has the right idea

just ban all the idiots then only good posters will be left. did you think of that yet? i am pretty sure it was already suggested by some genius in this very thread.

i am awesome

i am going to start using this for people who post terribly



if you see this directed at you, don't post in my forum because you are probably a fat jerk anyway and i will ban you for being a terrible poster

kyle we aren't looking for any more OOT mods, you can stop auditioning

it's not like i would moderate i would just ban them

we could call you a banerator

nah it's okay you are doing plenty good of a job

keep up the bans

kyleb and AngryRover's mancrush for each other is getting pretty weird. At this point it's hard to figure out which one is the Gatekeeper and which one is the Keymaster.