Southperry Reputation System

I don't know about in other countries, but in America ''otaku'' generally just refers to people who are really into anime and manga.

It doesn't have entirely the same meaning here than it does in Japan. It's not that the people ''don't know what otaku really means'', it's just that the word's meaning was changed when it came over to other areas. It's like when people call ''normal'' cartoons, ''cartoons'', and they call Japanese cartoons ''anime''.

No, I know what you mean with this. The problem is, unlike using anime for Japanese animation and manga for their comics, otaku isn't a word needed to differentiate two things. It's just a misinterpretation of a word. Though I guess one could argue that it's used to separate normal geeks from the kind that are into Japanese nerdom, but otaku isn't synonymous to nerd or geek as manga and anime are synonymous to animation and comics.

This looks pretty interesting; something I'd never have expected to be added to Southperry, haha. I'm neutral with this.

I wonder if it shall remain? Hm.

I like this really. I always think too much about everything(I mean everything), and this should ease my mind up a bit.

Too bad only the popular folk get voted on.

I FOR ONE DO NOT APPROVE OF THIS FEATURE BECAUSE I AM AFRAID OF WHAT PEOPLE ON THE INTERNET MIGHT ANONYMOUSLY THINK OF ME.

-Southperry

We need to keep in mind that behind these monitors are real, fleshy, thinking people.

Too bad only the popular folk get voted on.

It's for the best.

what does 0% of 1 voters mean?

Does this mean not enough votes to make it valid?

Cause i have some that show 0 votes but a few shoes 0% of 1 votes.

This leads me to request a change in the way the results are displayed.

If the % is less than 50, the complement should be displayed, to make it clear that more people voted "no" than "yes" (rather than simply abstaining).

For example, if 20% of voters said someone is X, the results should say 80% said he is not X. Makes it easier to understand, for people who don't know exactly how the voting works.

You know what would work out way better? A feedback tab in your profile. It would be similar to the Wall tab, but instead it you would have an option to leave either positive or negative feedback and would give an explanation for the feedback you were leaving. You would be able to choose whether or not you post anonymously and carelessly given feedback without an explanation could be reported and reversed. Feedback would not lead to any kind of rating or statistic in your profile; only an average of what feedback was positive or negative. This way you can get REAL feedback and REAL statistics and not this kiddie facebook RATE ME!!!! garbage.

All that would do is inundate the mods with mountains of "appeals" over idiotic little kiddie crap he-said she-said 'this isn't true' garbage. That's what your visitor messages are for. This is anonymous unless you brag about your votes, uses a controlled yet flexible set of questions to keep all comparisons as equal as possible and most importantly doesn't try to lump the entire sum of your personality and reputation into a single meaningless number.

That's what I thought this was when I read it at first. I was expecting a rep system, like fame.

This is just asking for drama.

As I see it, there already is drama. :/

This is the internet, everything is drama because there's always a drama whore waiting in the wings to explain why any form of change is the apocalypse and if nothing changes there's another one on the opposite side screaming about how stagnation will doom humanity.

Fame and similar point systems are meaningless crap. Everyone knows it. Points tell you absolutely nothing about a person, do not reflect on their actual reputation in any way and give you zero insight into what a person is known for. This system is the best compromise towards resolving those gaps and making it meaningful, consistent and, for some people, fun. If we were a transaction system rather than an open ended discussion a point system would actually be relevant, but last I looked we're not eBay or Basil.

I agree with Fiel on reductio ad absurdum now. All you are doing is belittling people's concerns and demonizing them by calling their concerns peaching and moaning.

They are quite little concerns, well deserving of mockery.

Also, what good will statistical smoothing do for the site? how important is it?

Because the blips certain people are freaking out about won't matter if the majority of voter vote accurately.

And the consequence is that this system create create prejudice, allow for people to defame others while hiding behind their screen, etc. I've already quoted a threat from a member of this forum, were he threatened to abuse a system like this. Is statistical smoothing worth this?

There are no consequences. Each person gets one vote. That's not going to tip the scales, now is it? This system doesn't create prejudice, at best it exposes already present ones.

I know most of us will forget about it eventually, but I'm mostly just infuriated with the way Eosian is trying to attack anyone that doesnt agree with him. If he presented his arguement in a logical manner, I probably wouldnt mind at all, but the fact that his demagogue like approach is what keeps dragging me here.

You're welcome to that. It's an opinion. Go register it on my reputation panel where it belongs.
The problem is, so are all the so called "arguments" you expect me to rebuff in a logical manner. You can't argue opinions and feelings. "I feel insecure about this!" "I feel OK with it so you're wrong!" See? Just doesn't work. Thankfully I don't need an argument. The feature exists whether you're comfortable or not. Come back in six months with actual facts regarding how it's causing the downfall of the site and will usher in a new age of darkness and despair and we'll talk.

If you happen to stumble upon an actual argument against this system that involves actual facts and meaningful logic by all means, present away.

Because the blips certain people are freaking out about won't matter if the majority of voter vote accurately.

I'm not so sure of that.
Problem is, people tend to vote only about those members they feel strongly about, for either good or bad.
I think maybe some kind of threshold of statistical significance should be implemented. If fewer than, say, 5% of active members have given their opinion on someone (or on a certain question about that someone), the total should either not be displayed or be flagged somehow.


In principle, I agree that this system is much better than any kind of single-number rating system. Could be really useful for someone new to the site, to be able to tell whether the person who just responded to them is known for trolling or for expertise. (Unfortuantely, I doubt many new people would actually be aware of the reputation system and know to click on the profile and on the tab). The usefulness for veteran members is less clear to me, but I'm curious to see how that unfolds.

I'm not so sure of that.
Problem is, people tend to vote only about those members they feel strongly about, for either good or bad.
I think maybe some kind of threshold of statistical significance should be implemented. If fewer than, say, 5% of active members have given their opinion on someone (or on a certain question about that someone), the total should either not be displayed or be flagged somehow.

I'm not implementing a threshold. Each item already identifies the number of votes it's had and if people are too ignorant to be able to detect bias in a minority of respondents no amount of flagging is going to help to them. We're talking 5th grade math here, not high level statistical analysis.

Either way, how many posts are required to vote? :O

Either way, how many posts are required to vote? :O

There are secret minimum requirements to be able to give your opinion to limit mult abuse, if you haven't met them yet you may not see that tab.

I FOR ONE DO NOT APPROVE OF THIS FEATURE BECAUSE I AM AFRAID OF WHAT PEOPLE ON THE INTERNET MIGHT ANONYMOUSLY THINK OF ME.

-Southperry

If I didn't love my sig so much I would sig this.

I don't understand I just saw this thread, checked my reputation thing, and people voted on me. *starts crying from the bad ones* *checks my last 10 page visits...*

Time to go...Abuse some people.

I personally dont even care about the rep system. Why? Because I dont care about what other people think of me. I really is kind of pointless to worry about something like that. No matter what, if you have the type of personality that you feel the need to be liked by everyone, it is not going to happen. There is always going to be someone who doesnt like you. Life is too short to worry about what others think of you. If you really are that worried about it then just dont look.

I personally dont even care about the rep system. Why? Because I dont care about what other people think of me. I really is kind of pointless to worry about something like that. No matter what, if you have the type of personality that you feel the need to be liked by everyone, it is not going to happen. There is always going to be someone who doesnt like you. Life is too short to worry about what others think of you. If you really are that worried about it then just dont look.

Yes, but sometimes it can help you find out if your personality gives off a positive or negative vibe. We all know at least one person who believes they are very likeable despite people around them hating/disliking them, and needs someone/some people to simply point it out that they aren't likeable or have a flaw that makes them not likeable.

Don't worry guys, google ads have your back.

Yes, but sometimes it can help you find out if your personality gives off a positive or negative vibe. We all know at least one person who believes they are very likeable despite people around them hating/disliking them, and needs someone/some people to simply point it out that they aren't likeable or have a flaw that makes them not likeable.

This is true, however it is also just as likely that same person will not believe what is said and continue the cycle.

This is true, however it is also just as likely that same person will not believe what is said and continue the cycle.

But other people be able to see they're known for that sort of behavior and potentially know not to take things personally.