We should bring down the voting system for good

You were trolling this thread:
http://www.gamedev.n...a-viable-career
...and those downvotes were a warning from the community that your trolling isn't helpful. N.B. "unhelpful" not "offensive".
You keep replying to that thread for some reason, which bumps it back to the active threads list, which makes more people read it and see your troll post about LSU, which makes more people down-vote you...

If the community didn't downvote you there, then a moderator might've had to give you an official warning, or just a polite PM instead. Would you prefer that?

P.S. I up-voted your post about the global variable because it was correct and helpful. Not sure why that one was downvoted, but you can see by now that that single 'incorrect' downvote has been counteracted. [edit]Actually, as noted below, you probably got that downvote because your 'correct' answer was a (less detailed) copy of the post immediately before you, with a 3 hours time gap. Nonetheless, it's still gotten 2 upvotes to counteract that 1 downvote.[/edit]

You'll be back up over 100 in no time.

nobody votes up

Really?
At the time of my writing, the topic that prompted you to post this currently has nine up-votes (not counting the additional three that are on off-topic responses), and the first response (which succinctly and accurately answered the question) currently has five of those up-votes. In the entire topic there are only two down-votes, and one of those is on an off-topic response. That hardly supports the idea that "nobody votes up"... It might have been a little harsh to vote you down for your response to that topic, but I don't really think it can be considered unfair, and our community has already counter-balanced it -- which is something many of our members choose to do if they see a vote they disagree with.

In the topmost (most recently active) topic in the For Beginners forum at the time of my writing there are nine up-votes, and no down-votes. Again, that particular topic doesn't seem to support your suggestion that "nobody votes up".


I think perhaps what you really meant was that nobody votes your posts up? Looking through your post history, that isn't true either, but you've collected more down-votes than up-votes.

I know several people here will say: "Look at your posts they contribute nothing, everybody is calling you out etc etc"

It's good that you recognised that people would probably respond that way... but have you actually done so?

Hodgman linked to an example where you seemed to be trolling; your responses were barely on-topic, it turned out [s]you didn't even seem to actually know which university was being discussed[/s](EDIT: upon a more careful read of the topic in question this is incorrect, my apologies), and apart from the very obvious "work hard and good luck" you didn't offer any useful advice.

In the first example I've linked you responded with a factually accurate answer -- but it was one that had already been posted by another user over three hours earlier, and your own version was less detailed -- not only that, but at the time of my writing you've actually only received one down-vote and two up-votes for that particular response. This particular topic isn't the only example of such a response either -- in this response you didn't provide any additional information than SimonForsman's response about four hours earlier, and you still received 3 up-votes for the post.


Do you really think the voting system (and I count the users that operate it in that) is treating you unfairly? Really?


To me it seems that the system is generally reasonably fair -- it certainly has some problems, and we do take steps to try to improve it and rectify any problems -- but I think it does a reasonable job and is mostly used as intended. You're also more than welcome to simply ignore it -- it's just a few small UI elements on the page -- although in your particular case I'd suggest that votes you've been given indicate some valid community feedback on the value and usefulness of some of your contributions.

The use of language in a text world with no visual or other cues to provide contextual data as to how or what you are communicating clearly means that involving anything of an opinion (non-factual) or the use of sarcasm, humour etc can very easily be misinterpreted. When I first joined GameDev I actually got downchecked on a couple of posts...it was not until a moderator messaged me on the side about this and suggested the use of emoticons to further communicate context of some of my more sarcastic or ironic observations to other people reading what I have written, that I was able to be myself without being downgraded.

You have to remember - What you post may be absolutely crystal clear in your head....but to the reader (esp. readers who do not use English as a first language) it may not be so. My only other suggestion is if you are expressing an opinion in a non-lounge thread, then qualify your opinion -- justify it. The lounge is about the only place where you can pretty much get away with being trite, but out where the posts are about answering people who (in some cases) really need answers or advice, then you need to explain your answers in such a way as to communicate effectively and impart understanding as to the why.

Hodgman linked to an example where you seemed to be trolling; your responses were barely on-topic, it turned out you didn't even seem to actually know which university was being discussed, and apart from the very obvious "work hard and good luck" you didn't offer any useful advice.

Amusing, check out that post again, turns out, the guy who said I didn't know about the university I was hating, didn't know what he was talking about, why is nobody down voting him? How can you hate something you don't know?, it's just ridiculous, I've been @ the LSU campus, I've spoken face to face to the head of Computer Science department at LSU, I just laugh at people accusing me that I have no idea about LSU.

But lets discuss that post: The guy opens the topic saying that he is getting a Computer Science degree at LSU, He's already taking a step, once there hopefully he will know the reality about the industry, That's why I saved time and effort warning him to "never give up". And people immediately down vote without thinking about what I wrote

But anyways, we live in a society quick to judge and that voting system is a prime example of it.

Thanks for taking your time explaining the logic behind all this,I really appreciate it

Amusing, check out that post again, turns out, the guy who said I didn't know about the university I was hating, didn't know what he was talking about, why is nobody down voting him?

My apologies, upon re-reading the topic more carefully you are in fact correct -- I've edited my response above to also reflect this -- there are currently two down-votes on the other user's post however, so it seems the system is again working correctly in that particular case.

But lets discuss that post[...]

Sure, but in context with all the lengthy, advice-loaded posts before your own response in that topic can you really blame people for not considering your post useful?

Thanks for taking your time explaining the logic behind all this,I really appreciate it

Not at all -- I might sometimes seem like a bit of a nazi trying to squash such discussion when it comes up as an off-topic distraction in technical topics, but I think we would be doing a terrible job of running this site if we weren't willing to discuss such things with people who take the time to make a topic in the appropriate forum or contact us privately.

we live in a society quick to judge and that voting system is a prime example of i

What if users were able to change their minds and un-do their own votes if they later realised they had made a mistake? Do you think that would help to improve the system? Users would then still be free to rate posts based on snap-judgements, but if they were later corrected or had a change of heart they could un-do a vote, or even offer a vote in the opposite direction.

I'll be honest here: we're not going to remove the reputation system any time soon. We consider it to be valuable over all, and despite occasional problems and objections from some users it does seem to be reasonably effective. We will however be continuing to improve it over time, and suggestions for how we could possibly improve it are always welcome.

What if users were able to change their minds and un-do their own votes if they later realised they had made a mistake?

I personally wouldn't mind this ability to uncheck a vote incorrectly marked by myself. Have considered the idea of suggesting the idea of having a weekly review report of your up/downchecks with the ability to alter a vote that may have been overlyhasty at the time. On reflection though just considered it as a form of red tape destined not to be overly-utilised and more annoying in the long term...but the ability to repair a incorrectly posted up/down check would be nice, though not truly necessary as the overall tidal force of reputation gains nowadays floats you up anyway.

Amusing, check out that post again, turns out, the guy who said I didn't know about the university I was hating, didn't know what he was talking about, why is nobody down voting him? How can you hate something you don't know?

I'm going to go ahead and assume you're talking about me here. If not, I apologize and ask you to correct me. First of all, yes, when you said "LA" the first thing that came to my mind was "Los Angeles." Sorry for getting it wrong, and thanks for correcting me on that. Second, I'm not sure what you mean by "How can you hate something you don't know?" Is that directed at me? If so, I don't hate you, LSU, or your opinion of LSU. I said nothing hateful. At all. Third, I never claimed you didn't know the university you hated. I claimed LSU wasn't in Los Angeles, which of course was a mix up between us in communication. A summary of what I said would be: 1) nobody likes it when people troll; 2) cliche, generic, or unspecific advice doesn't contribute anything; and 3) "Good luck" (or similar sayings) can be misunderstood, and it's usually better to not say them than to be misunderstood (that is, if you say them, make sure you won't be misunderstood if you do and try to think of how others (who don't have access to your mind) may interpret your words). If any of that offends you, I'm sorry, but tough; sometimes you just need to thicken your skin. I'm not going to sugar coat things, especially because I didn't say anything rude or mean.

I'm not attacking you. I'm not demeaning you (at least not intentionally, and if I have unintentionally, let me know so I can fix my wording). I want you to be a helpful contributor to the GameDev.net community. I want you to actively participate. But to be honest, there's room for improvement in several of your replies.* I, and others, tried to inform you of some ways that I think you can improve (others may have downvoted your post to let you know you can improve). I did it bluntly, as I usually do things (and as I'm doing things now). It wasn't personal.

As to your questions, I don't think people downvoted that post of yours because you said "never give up." I think they down voted it primarily because it was a troll-ish post (2/3 of the sentences were troll-ish). A secondary reason people may have downvoted it is because "never give up" is the only constructive thing you said (that is, they didn't downvote it for what it said; they downvoted it for what it didn't say). "Never give up" is great and all, but it's not helpful to what to OP asked, and it's so broad, generic, and cliche that it comes across as "fluffy noise" instead of something of substance. Alone, it's useless. It needs to be paired with something in order for it to be useful (though even then it's cliche). These are at least my thoughts on why that post was downvoted. I can't read the minds of others. However, with these two points, I think a downvote is fair.

For the most part, votes don't indicate the post as "offensive" (that's what the "Report" link is for). They indicate the post as "not helpful." Your downvoted posts aren't offending people. They're downvoted because someone deems them as "not useful and [do] not improve the conversation" (quote from the mouse over text of the downvote button).

[size=2]*And I'm sure there's room for improvement in mine. I'm not claiming to be the God of Forums. If I can improve, I would appreciate if others helped point out how I can improve as well.

Personally, I like the rating system. I don't care about the number so much as I care about whether the number is increasing or decreasing. I'm happy to get an upvote because it signals to me I did/said something right so I know how to be more helpful. Also, I'm happy to get a downvote because it signals to me that I didn't do/say something helpful, and gives me the opportunity to stand back and say "This wasn't (apparently) constructive; how can I do better?" I'm glad people downvoted my post because it helped me stand back and say "How can I do/say this better?" Stepping back, I see I should've sent that message as PM instead of continuing to derail the thread. Hopefully that will help me in the future. I'm glad to get feedback from the community.

And for the record, I never down voted you (in these relavent threads, at least). If you have any concerns regarding any of my responses to you, feel free to PM me and we can discuss things more without derailing any additional threads.

What if users were able to change their minds and un-do their own votes if they later realised they had made a mistake?

This has been requested before, and I'd like to re-request it.

P.S. I up-voted your post about the global variable because it was correct and helpful. Not sure why that one was downvoted, but you can see by now that that single 'incorrect' downvote has been counteracted.

I don't think it can be called an "'incorrect' downvote" because it was likely proper usage of the system (that is, it wasn't some clown getting revenge or something like that). I'm guessing the downvoter downvoted because of the reasons jbadams mentioned. I don't think that reply deserves a swarm of downvotes, but a single downvote may be deserved (and the same with a single upvote). Either way, I think the real message behind the downvote was what jbadams points out, and regardless of what the reply "deserves," it's worth making the point that jbadam's shared. Sorry, I'm going off on this more than I meant. I just didn't want the downvoter to necessarily think their vote was "incorrect."

The reputation system seems to be fine to me. Granted, I haven't been around very long. But I've been downvoted for being an asshat, upvoted for being helpful, and from what I see of others the same mostly holds true. Seems to be working as intended. I'd say, just ignore your reputation for now. Try as hard as you honestly can to just be helpful, without regard for your score, and if your answers are technically sound for the most part, then your rating will improve. And if you occasionally flip out and get some downvotes... well, that's part of being human, but try not to be an ass and it shouldn't happen that much. In fact, that could be a question you ask yourself before you press the Post button. Is what I am about to post going to make me look like an ass? If yes, then maybe revise it. (There are a couple times in my own history where I should have asked this.) Internet anonymity brings out the troll in all of us; systems such as ratings and reputations are imperfect attempts to counteract the troll impulses, and if the system has flaws it is still at least better than the alternative.

Can somebody please explain me the voting system???

Last night My reputation was up 86 points, and I kid you not, went down to 63 in 5 minutes, 5 minutes!!! I went to look my recent voting history and nobody down voted anything during that period of time, Did the system voted me down?? I am baffled and bewildered.

Editing your vote might be an improvement, but let's be honest. who will take their time to analyze their votes and undo what they did? Very very few. I understand the majority is happy with the system, but I'm still taking a stand against it, Bring it down

Last night My reputation was up 86 points, and I kid you not, went down to 63 in 5 minutes, 5 minutes!!! I went to look my recent voting history and nobody down voted anything during that period of time, Did the system voted me down?? I am baffled and bewildered.

Have you taken a look at your reputation history? Those show you had 5 downvotes last night. Things will fluctuate a lot during the day.

Editing your vote might be an improvement, but let's be honest. who will take their time to analyze their votes and undo what they did?

I would, and so would others. Maybe not everyone. Either way, people won't change their votes (whether they were upvotes or downvotes) without good reason. The changing ability is good though because it allows mistakes and misunderstandings to be corrected.

Last night My reputation was up 86 points, and I kid you not, went down to 63 in 5 minutes, 5 minutes!!!

If you look at your reputation tab on your profile -- the lower of the 2 reputation tabs you will note there was a set of downposts made on you within a short period of time. Don't forget if you do believe the possibility of an inappropriate action has been taken - it is in your right to seek redress through a Moderator. I would suggest speaking to one of the two mods who have already posted in this thread as being somewhat familiar to the situation as being a sensible choice.

The staff updates in this link will explain the various reputation aspects
http://www.gamedev.net/blog/1037-gamedevnet-staff-journal/

Editing your vote might be an improvement, but let's be honest. who will take their time to analyze their votes and undo what they did?

I would and having seen several posts by other members regarding a mistaken vote -- I feel fairly safe in trusting that far more than just a few would also.

I understand the majority is happy with the system, but I'm still taking a stand against it, Bring it down

I am all for you being allowed to express your opinion of disagreement to the system. If anything it proves the site is healthy. Just please, for the sake of all that is semi-decent in the world, don't turn your belief into a ongoing fanatical tirade of unending proportions...that would suck and most likely alienate others into flexing their cursors on the downposts (regardless of how unfair that might seem - human nature is not always kind)

Have you taken a look at your reputation history? Those show you had 5 downvotes last night. Things will fluctuate a lot during the day.

Ok, I realize people down-voted, If my math serves me correctly that means: 86 - 5 = 81 points. We are talking about a 23 point differential, unless I am missing some sort of coefficient, where did the other points go?

You know what would be better? Somehow enable or disable the points system in your settings. This system makes me feel bewildered, believe me, I did my best trying to understand the point system, First I thought it was a normal point system, +1 and -1, then I thought it was basketball system, sometimes +2 sometimes +3, sometimes +2 and 1. I fail to understand the system

Ok, I realize people down-voted, If my math serves me correctly that means: 86 - 5 = 81 points.

Receiving a downvote or upvote is worth +/-3. Giving a downvote or upvote is worth +/-1. There have been times on GameDev.net where a votes were "weighted" (so a user with a higher rep would have a higher impact when voting (it's always been clamped to sane values, though)). There's been talk of brining back the weighted system, though I don't know if they have or will (seems like every up/downvote is +/-3, so they don't look weighted at the moment). I don't know all the history of your rep though, and if you have concerns I too suggest you take it up with a moderator or staff member, as they have access to additional information.

You know what would be better? Somehow enable or disable the points system in your settings.

Or maybe a good tutorial on GameDev.net's rating system for beginners (that new users are shown when they sign up)? I think an "introduction video" or something that goes over the basics of the community wouldn't be a bad thing.

In addition to the link I gave you in my previous post - you should also read through this thread

http://www.gamedev.n...ging-in-really/

while the down vote may only show -3 -- if the reputation of the person is sufficiently different or large enough (not really sure which tbh as haven't worried about it) the reputation can be changed by up to 5 and still only show as 3. This affects both positive and negative votes. As to why it still only shows 3 (despite being at times 4 or 5)...take that up with Gamedev...because I has no clue.

while the down vote may only show -3 -- if the reputation of the person is sufficiently different or large enough (not really sure which tbh as haven't worried about it) the reputation can be changed by up to 5 and still only show as 3. This affects both positive and negative votes. As to why it still only shows 3 (despite being at times 4 or 5)...take that up with Gamedev...because I has no clue.

Is that so? Mods/staff, is this correct? If so, can we please get this fixed?

Receiving a downvote or upvote is worth +/-3. Giving a downvote or upvote is worth +/-1. There have been times on GameDev.net where a votes were "weighted" (so a user with a higher rep would have a higher impact when voting (it's always been clamped to sane values, though)). There's been talk of brining back the weighted system, though I don't know if they have or will (seems like every up/downvote is +/-3, so they don't look weighted at the moment). I don't know all the history of your rep though, and if you have concerns I too suggest you take it up with a moderator or staff member, as they have access to additional information.

So it is basketball system or not? Why gamedev.net did this? Was there a competition on which forum came up with the most complicated system? What's wrong with the classical +1 and -1?

while the down vote may only show -3 -- if the reputation of the person is sufficiently different or large enough (not really sure which tbh as haven't worried about it) the reputation can be changed by up to 5 and still only show as 3. This affects both positive and negative votes. As to why it still only shows 3 (despite being at times 4 or 5)...take that up with Gamedev...because I has no clue.

Look at us man, we have no clue what is going on. According to Gamedev.net you have a good reputation and my reputation equals to Ivan the Terrible but we don't know what is going on here, I mean it is my fault? it is the website's fault? I've read tons of replies on this particular topic and I still fail to understand, somebody the other day told me it was ++ and -- system, Y'all are confusing me.

Something else, people voted down my post because allegedly I gave bad advice, but people get +1 for just logging in to the forum. How does that work?

Thanks

Actually I should correct myself I believe it is capped at 4 not 5. but it still shows up as 3. My apologies for the error, posting at 3am does not make cogent statements at times.

Look at us man, we have no clue what is going on. According to Gamedev.net you have a good reputation and my reputation equals to Ivan the Terrible but we don't know what is going on here

Mostly I don't know because I don't truly pay attention to the ins and outs of the rep system. Sure, I have opinions, and absolutely if I think something shonky has happened to my rep I will raise it with a mod. But at the end of the day my primary goal is to provide others with what little I know in terms of knowledge and advice whilst sucking the thoughts of others on this website for my own needs and interests. I take an active part in pointing out bugs where I see them (as I believe this is a website that tries very hard to make itself a good site) but sometimes I can miss the obvious ones such as Cornstalks picked up on. If you look at the breakdown of my rep you will find that a large chunk of it is not related to scholar related activities but rather participation and moderation (i.e. reporting threads that need to be moved to a more appropriate forum). Also you will find that the majority of my posts are within the creative forums of design and writing (far more accepting of opinions) followed mostly by business and law (far less accepting of opinions). My one technical post has a downvote on it.

I can understand your frustration at being downchecked. No one likes to be downchecked except trolls and I don't think of you as a troll but simply as a person who has walked into a glass door and realised after the fact that the door was closed. My only advice is relax, don't take it too seriously, chase up a mod if you believe that last set of downchecks was not appropriate (chances are given this thread one of them will check anyway). Mostly however, don't wake up the natives.

According to Gamedev.net you have a good reputation and my reputation equals to Ivan the Terrible

Trust me on this simple fact -- you are nowhere near the most downvoted person on this site in recent times on a scale of 100's. Just focus on providing good advice and it will show through. That's all I can suggest,

I don't know man, I normally don't care about reputation or so, but when I see that number highlighted in the title bar of my posts it annoys me

And what's more interesting is the fact that the hottest topics in this section of the forum are from people complaining about the system, yet the Mods are saying that the people is happy with it.

Think about it, the system needs improvement, Gamedev.net. I love this forum but that rating system is just... wrong.

Think about it, the system needs improvement, Gamedev.net. I love this forum but that rating system is just... wrong.

Nobody claims the rating system is perfect, and I think many would agree that it does need improvement. That's why there's continual discussion about it. That's why it's continuously evolving (it's changed a lot over the last year). Removing it doesn't improve it though. The rating system was put in place because people were misbehaving and trolling too much. Since it was implemented, behavior on GameDev.net has improved, showing that it at least has some value and merit. GameDev.net is a place for professionalism, and if the rating system encourages that, then great, let's keep it. But it can probably be improved. If you have any ideas on how to improve the system, I'm sure the community would appreciate hearing them. "How do we improve the rating system?" is a surprisingly tough question to answer, though, and it's why the rating system isn't perfect (I don't necessarily think it's perfect, but I don't think it's that bad either; I think the primary problem is that people don't use it enough).