Voting Power

[Airandius]

There should be something like users that are more active have more voting power then users that only come online twice and that's it.

You could use post count, rep points, or w//e.

---Example---

For example, a user that just registered votes for map A.
It's voting power would then be 2. (Normal standard, using whole numbers for simple math.)

Now when mriragealot votes with -20 rep.
His vote power could only be 1 for example.

And when somebody with +100 rep votes, his vote power would be 1.5.

---Example---

Now to help people that don't understand it, it does not mean if you score a 5 that it will become a 2.5 if you have negative rep.
It will just check how much worth a vote is, just like marks with school.

---Example---

A map has 3 votes.
A user with -12 rep votes a 1. (His vote power is 1.)
A user with 10 rep votes a 3. (His vote power is 2.)
A user with 123 rep votes a 4. (His vote power is 3.)

The formula would then be: ((1 x 1) + (3 x 2) + (4 x 3)) / 6 = 3.16
So basically ((entered score x vote power) + (entered score x vote power) + (etc)) / total vote power = score.

As an extra I'll show what the score would have been now.
(1 + 3 + 4) / 3 = 2.67

So the score is higher, because mriragealot his vote is worth less, and because better people have more vote power.

---Example---

I guess rep and post count is rather useless.
I think the vote of normal users should be 1.
The vote of mini mods should be 2.
And the vote of normal mods should be 3.
And Ralle should have 10. =P

Well, this is a system I saw implanted on other sites, where users with more points (rep in this case) had more power. (I think).
It's rather successful there

 

[Joe-black-5]

so if Kimberly vote (1459 rep) the voting ends :/

 

[Airandius]

Lol, read the whole thing. (At end I said it's better to use certain standing not rep.)

Anyway, it wont increase every 100 rep or something.
Vote power stops at 3 in this case.

So 142 rep guy has vote power of 3.
So does a 472042 rep guy.

 

[Billy the Cat]

I am not really for the support of repwhoring D:

 

[CMarket]

There is a similar system on m&m where the vote power is determined by the overall votes of the voter where people that only vote 5/5 and 1/5 on everything more or less have no say in the overall score of what they voted for.

Making vote power depend on post count or rep is stupid at best as it would only encourage spam and rep parties.

It's not a bad idea to change the vote power but since a rating of a resource isn't worth a penny it is just more trouble than it's worth. A rating of a resource is just the number of friends or enemies the author has and, in 95% of cases, does not show the map's quality.

Furthermore, because of the recent increase in the general standard of what a good map makes new and good maps are getting lower grades than maps that were submitted a year ago, back when the Hive was generally a more friendly place, and, to some extent more noobish. Instead of getting encouraged now you get bitch slapped for submitting a below average map and there's even a social group dedicated to "killing maps". Sure, you might get more advice on what to improve but a lot of your enthusiasm will be demolished by arrogant members. But that's another subject. The point is, newer maps are graded with a worse score than lower quality maps that were submitted a year ago. Another reason why the rating of a map does not show the quality of it. And besides, everything is subjective. Somebody might like a map with an average grade of 2. Someone might hate a map with a perfect rating.

 

[Captain Griffen]

Go for mean of interquartile range. Or maybe median.

 

[Pyritie]

Well, this is a system I saw implanted on other sites, where users with more points (rep in this case) had more power. (I think).
It's rather successful there

Newgrounds? Incgamers?

 

[Airandius]

Yeh, those are example. But people people... I never said that it has to be either post count or rep. Read the whole thing lol.

I guess rep and post count is rather useless.
I think the vote of normal users should be 1.
The vote of mini mods should be 2.
And the vote of normal mods should be 3.
And Ralle should have 10. =P

See?

 

[Billy the Cat]

The ranks seem like a better idea to me ye.

 

[Zombie]

Well, the general idea is good, but I don't think it would work out.

I don't support determining one's ability to judge the quality of a certain resource by rep/post count/join date either. Rep is abused, post count can be spammed and join date is really just accidental. Not to mention I know users that (used to) have rep below 20, post count below 200 and have quite good skills in both submitting and rating resources belonging to a certain field. I will refrain from listing names, but I could name like 5 in a matter of seconds.

Judging one's rating shouldn't be determined by the position in the staff either, since only moderators and users tend to rate resources. Moderators have their own rating scale in their resource section, but they tend to rate resources outside their field too. Despite that, I don't believe they excel at every other fields too, so I don't believe an icon moderator could judge the quality of a model for example (>.>). Therefore, the criticism may not be worth more than a standard user's, so increasing their rating value is rather useless.

Also, I don't believe this is such a serious issue, as ratings are often ignored.

 

[TheDivineBoss]

If this idea will get green light, everyone in the contest section will give mass BJs high-ranked members.

 

[Hawkwing]

We don't have mini-mods anymore.

 

[HappyCockroach]

It could be like
3 to moderators,
2 to respected users and people who donate
and 1 normal users
negative rep guys shouldn't be alllowed to rate resources, they always say "baaddddd 1/5" to pretty good stuff

 

[Dr Super Good]

This whole idea sounds stupid. It is like saying that only smart people in a country can vote, it just will not happen.

Just because we are moderators does not mean we diserve a stronger vote, also stronger votes to donaters is discriminating as it encourages bribary. Also we do not have more than a hand full of respected users so that is pretty pointless as well.

The best idea would be that any new account with under 25 posts and is under a week old can not vote in contest polls.

 

[Airandius]

It is like saying that only smart people in a country can vote, it just will not happen.

Well it should, for these stupid people basically are ruining my country with their racist thoughts. They all feed their vote to two people in our government that are basically the same as Hitler, but not with Jews but with just foreigners.

I say screw the stupid people, its the same as people under 18 (some places even older) not being able to vote, because they think they are stupid (even though some are smarter then the average adult.

Might not be as severe here, but I truly think that certain people should not be allowed to have a strong vote, give the stupid or new people a low vote and make then proof themselves for higher votes.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[M4stah]

The problem is 60% of the users either say 5/5 OMG OMG AWESUM MAP D00D or
1/5 this suxorz d00d. If they would give a serious rating we wouldn't need this

 

[ike_ike]

Or maybe screw votes over completely and only have a judge panel of *skilled* users? We still have enough of those, fortunately.

 

[nastyboy_44]

Horay for Democracy!