Reputation System

I'm not going to read 20+ pages just to catch up, but I have a few things to say. If we remove the fee for rating, people are just going to go crazy and start causing problems for everyone. I am not the most lovable guy on the planet, and I get into my fair share of arguments I will admit. And if people could just rate with no fee then people would kill yours for being in a bad mood. I personally don't really care about the system, I dont use it and people dont really use it against or for me. But if it's in some way defective then I would say lose it. I mean why have a feature that isn't liked? Personally, its kinda pointless, but until I have issues with it, I don't really care if it lives or dies. Thats my 2 cents.

This is my first posting and I feel very strongly on this issue. The ratings were probably a good idea at first. When I first came into SL i was asked many a time to attend these so called ratings parties.

I listened and watched people before i rated anyone, but would get rated for all three and I had never built a thing. So I realized that they were used wrongly.

Now there are people going around just negative rating anyone in the area. When reported it does not get you back your ratings that you worked for.

As was said before: There can be a rating system but based on your performance within the SL life.

Hosting
Building
Teaching
Mentoring
etc.....

The reward will not be from anyone rating you. It will be based on your performance and write ups. If a person has to report in writing what good you have done you will see that most people only take the time if they mean it.

Just a suggestion and my opinion

Yup...Soshia Wishbringer is the type of psycho that throws neg rating parties ! We need to throw a Neg rating party in her honor !

Here are my ideas about this:
In many "games" they have "mini-games" in which players can earn money. Why not have a rather complicated system linked to that? What if discovering a new continent actually needed workers? What if you had people actually digging and mining and planting in the SL soil? Bob Newbie needs to get a job that isnt in anyway sexual. While he's learning to build up to par with the vets he still needs a parttime job inorder to get money. So Bob Newbie becomes a miner for LL and goes to work on excavating the new continent. And have this job be interactive so you can't just "right-click >> mine rock" and walk away from your comp.
Because if you are going to take away stipend bonus and give a flat rate based on age you need a way for those who WANT to work harder, but dont have at par talent, to gain money.
If you are going to keep anykind of rating system then make it so the number of ratings you can give is based on how long you've played. to stop people from creating alts just to tripple neg rate thier enemies.
I'd also like compensation for the rates I have already given if the system is to be scrapped. $L means something to me because it IS tied into real money so when I buy a SL friend something that costs 1k $L, its like buying a RL friend a lil gift for $4.10.

Here are the ideas I like so far:
{{I think if the rating system is thrown out.. we ought to get some kind of reimbursement for "given" ratings. I know I'm up to 1200 or so and I'd be thrilled to have that money back instead it scrapped with the system.}}

{{Very early in this discussion, Cray Levy brought up an idea that I think was ingenious. Here's my adaptation of his idea:

Instead of a rating system like the current one, where everybody can rate as many people as they want, each person gets to make a fairly short list of people they admire. You can list your top 5 most admired builders, top 5 scripters, top 5 avatar designers, and so on; and there could be a few social categories as well: top 5 friendliest people, top 5 people I have a crush on, and so forth. As a user, I can change my lists of idols at any time, but if I already have 5 people on my "best builders" list I'll have to remove somebody in order to add someone else. Each person's rating is simply how many people's lists they're on. Editing my lists costs nothing. When my rating changes because somebody adds me to or removes me from a list, I am not notified of it automatically, and there's no way I can see whose lists I'm on, though I can of course see my own rating. There are global leaderboards showing, for example, the top 50 best builders in SL. }}

{{Each player is only allowed N idols. Players are rated by putting them into a list at a position from 1 (admired) to N (liked, in some way... or whatever they'd end up with at the bottom of their scale).}}

{{1) Rather like the 10 Top Places we can all log in our profiles, we each have a '10 Fave Residents' list. No more than 10, although we may choose to nominate none. We can assign a name, position in the list, whenever we wish - move people up and down or remove them. The position in that ten should count. Only we can see our list.

2) A resident must be ****1 month old**** before they can assign their own list but they can be added to others lists immediately. This at least attempts to halt the Alt voting scam as there is such a delay.

3) Assignments 'die' after 1 month automatically. The player gets the option to re-assign again just as the group vote boxes pop up now.

4) We can only see our own list, not anyone elses. The count of entries we have earned appears in the weekly stipend window but otherwise we should have no idea who has us listed.

5) A resident that does not log in for X period (say 3 months) is removed from others lists and cannot be added to any list until they begin playing again.}}

{{Say Oz Spade in his profile has the Skills: "Scripting" "Building" "Texturing" "Animating" checked, these would be skills he would think he is good at.
...
This allows everyone to decide what they want to be rated on. }} - esp. good for those wanting to opt out of society altogether, they don't check anything.

{{Does everyone remember the forgotten little page in our profiles, that say "I am good at:" followed by several checkboxes? "I am good at building, textures, socializing, organizing"

What if that was decided by your peers?

A person could right click on your avatar (or your profile), and go to 'rate', and get a selection of choices. "This person is a good:" followed by a list of choices. They would get to choose ONE thing the person is good at. They would then click their choice, and be done with it.

Then, if another person bebopped by and checked out the rated person's profile, they would see something like:

"208 people think this person is a good builder"
"156 people think this person is a good texturer"
"24 people think this person is a good socializer"

This would also give someone wandering by a good idea of what a person likes to do. If 208 people think this guy's a nifty builder, then by God, he must be at least competent. "}}

I already posted earlier that this was, by far, the best suggestion I've read - and your modifications, Zoe, have even made a good idea better

I surely hope that after so many dozens of posts we are able to convince LL that this is definitely the way to go...

Jeez the cures I have seen posted are so convoluted it would take a rocket scientist 3 hours to figure out whether to rate someone. Either make it simple and easy to understand or junk the whole thing.

No room for negitive ratings??? wouldn't it help to have the negitives so we know who we should and shouldnt trust. People contradict themselves quite a bit, first its " this is a fantasy game we can make of it what we want to, then choose to compare everything to real life as if thats how this game should be done. Of course there are ratings in real life you just dont give them out the same way. I personally would like to much like i read in another post here, be able to know who im dealing with like ebay, since $L is getting slowly pulled from our fingers one way or another, i want to know theres some security behind the purchases i make or whatever the case may be. Not everyone can afford 300 dollars a week to buy linden offline, some of us depend so very highly on whatever we can make, however we can make it.

I say, keep what you have but have a 'write in' feature where people can vote for recognition/prizes for people who make the game a great experience.

I also like the fact that Lindens, like the gods of old, can walk amongst us.

Perhaps the Lindens can give 'prizes' to people they see making the game more than just a game.

I can't even begin to tell you how many people have gone above and beyond the call of duty to make this a great experience for me...

The ratings are, for the most part, not a bad thing if used to reward someone for good work. The biggest problem is that the negative rates are more a tool of griefers as opposed to being used constructively. And the sad thing is - if you ever have a true problem a negative rating will not change the situation or the person's behaviour. It will either escalate the situation or bring simple derision and being ignored - neither of which is productive. I have always found that in a true crisis there is ALWAYS a Linden or Live help person available and the abuse report system not only works - the Linden's POST the actions taken.
Plus while a bunch of negatives might have meant something at one time that meaning was lost when certain groups/social circles would intentionally target an avie for negatives. Also - there is no redemption. Rarely are people rerated after theyve cleaned up their act. They are saddled with the negs until the rate dies its natural death. There is no way to identify if these folks are truly abysmal or simply victims of this system.

So I guess I'm saying - why bother with the negs? Find a way to reward those that contribute in postive ways to the SL Metaverse.

No matter how much you work.. nobody cares in giving rates anymore... I have worked tons and help a lot of people and I don't get rated like before.. but oh well.. I hardly pay attention anymore... I just keep helping...but get shocked if someone rates now.

I don't go to clubs and dance to get 1 or 2 rates... I don't want to get my rates because I went to a club and dance and someone just saw me and wanted to rate to get my attention. I want to be rated for what I work hard for. But if this is not the way, well.. is ok.. I have fun anyway in what I do in SL, working and helping others. That is why I am here for.

Not complaining but I don't see a point in rating anymore. I just see the ones that really work hard for others are harly rated. Maybe would be better in working on leadership skills, games, creativity, social, merchant. Stuff like that.

Ohh and poor noobies they want to rate but 75L for them are a treasure and they can't even rate either.

Oh but yes... people get into their "alts" to come and waste their 75L on giving negative. Wasting time... what creativity is that?? what leadership is that? unbelievable..!! I maybe could understand negative ratings on behavior and still dumb for me.... I won't waste my Linden not even in a negative rating when I can use it and buy a nice outfit for 75L and help a noobie.

Lindens should get rid of this system.

I can attest to the reality that there are many positive ratings I would have given but for lack of Lindens.

Personally, I'd like to see a simple 'Thank You' rating... if someone does something nice for you, or have helped you, you should be able to 'thank' them and that along with your comment should be part of their history (viewable by you and the world).

Negative ratings seem pointless but for griefing, since there is no control on who gives them, you can't see who did it, and etc. I only use them when people blow me across four sims, or insist on pushing me across the floor somewhere. =/

All in all, a reputation system has very few controls against abuse. But if all there were was a 'thank you' system, it seems that would be greatly lessened. A 'low' number of thanks doesn't mean you're a bad person... but a high number would mean you go out of your way to make life more enjoyable for those around you. I think that's something that should be heralded.

I suppose you could 'thank' someone and enter a nasty comment... but even so, those could be removed upon request (albeit possibly a new workload for already over-taxed Lindens?).

Anyway... my $0.02L worth.

My name is Steve Fox. I remember when mature lands value was 8K lindens a 512 plot. I remember when you rated someone for a mere 3 dollars, people would spend the money. I remember when you rated someone, you only had to doit once. I remember when Mature land ment *Mature* and that if someone didn't like what was happening, they could just leave. I remember when the first people who were cool on this game, had the best ratings. I remember when the lindens put more time into fixing bugs, then introducing new ones. I remember when SL was fun. I remember when you didn't have to agree to new TOS agreement everytime a new version came out. I remember when my sim didn't drop while i was in the middle of working on something. I remember when you could make a basement on your land wich made all of those sims better looking because of the space, Wich reminds me of when you could edit your land better and actually have something that works for you. I remember when value of the Linden, was more than twice what it is now. This is how i remember SL, unfortunatly its not what i deal with currently every time i log into SL these days. It ends up getting you so frustrated you wonder if your going renew that premium account, or just go basic to keep in touch with a few people who didn't get upset enough to leave all ready. Theres a lot of things wich give this game the potential of being one of the best. We need to get back to the basics and start running the show the way that brought most if not all of us here in the first place.
Steve Fox

I agree SteveFox.

I think they need to slow down and fix things instead of adding or modifying for the sake of innovation. I commented to someone in world yesterday that they're gonna upgrade us right out of the game.

Damn straight...

Heck, who needs "users" anyway... Gosh darnit I'm pretty sure that's one of those buzzwords these city slickers brought in... I say get rid of the "users", and then complaints will be down 300%! Then we'll be free to put in all manner of whizzy gizmos, and flyin things...

Bug Fix! That aint a bug there love, that's a feature... Just more game for you to grab hold of sweetie...

look, it's NOT like ebay where you can write things down to explain why you rated someone negatively.

it is entirely possible that a group of griefers can target an individual and ruin that individuals reputation. What would stop them? a lousy 75$L from each group member? big deal, a group of 10 greifers could ruin someones fun wether they deserved it or not and that is lame.

I was asked by a new friend to 'do her a favor' by rating someone negatively, I refused and gave a lecture, either way I lost, my friend was upset as I didn't blindly 'help', should I have just accepted that she was right and gave a neg rating to a stranger?

I think ratings should be processed by a linden and require evidence.

i think there should be a rating wipe personally every 4 months or something like that

One word - STREAMLINE! I hardly pay attention to this aspect of the game any more, but it would be nice for what is there to actually mean somthing.

As the system currently stands the negative ratings are a gift to ill-tempered players who use negrates (often with multiple alts) for griefing or for personal attacks. A typical cooperative player is more likely to favor low-key methods to distance himself from intrusive people. These methods would include muting, banning and agreeing to disagree.

I knew someone would bring up eBays system, so i just have to say that it is the worst system of this sort of thing that I have ever come across.

It all seems to work fine as long as everyone is getting Quadruple "A+'s" (the eBay standard), but just try to neg rate or even "nuetral" rate someone and see how far you get.

It is impossible to do, and its partly due to the transactional nature of it. They may neg rate you for a simple neutral coment and by the time you get throught the lengthy negotiation and appeal process, you either agree to delete each others ratings or leave it as it is. There are lots of sellers on eBay that I have had dealings with that are even slightly criminal in their actions but the sytem is unable to deal with them or even seriously "flag" these folks for others.

It just does not work.

I dont know the solution but I know of some of the problems.

1) As long as someone can neg rate you, for you neg rating them, then you are going to have ratings wars and ratings that are more about how angry you were than anything else.

2) As long as there are only positive ratings (suggested by many) then it is not really a rating system but just a lot of pointless backslapping amoung friends. Why the Lindens would want to spend their time on that I dont know.

I have a suspicion that the answer has more to do with the "system" rating us rather than other poeple, as people are flawed and foolish and will always find a way to "game it" as some have already said.

I think our new system has something to do with that control panel that prok posted

but also no more ratings system...

There is no point to doing this.
You might as well just eliminate the ratings system altogether if you are going to leave it all "positive". These systems are just a sop to poitically correct ninnies that seem to believe that making any kind of judgement is inherently wrong in itself.

An interaction where all you allowed to say is "great" or "really great" is meaningless. We might just as well get the Lindens to start handing out mandatory virtual sedatives so well just stumble around and say nice things to each other all the time.

Further, if a system has no connection to any tangible reward or detriment, then it is also not a ratings system and is even more pointless.

Well...
I've finaly read the whole thread, (except for a couple of waaay too long ones), and I have the solution...

The problem (as many have pointed out or intimated) is with us. With people and human nature in general. "As long as there is a way to game it, people will" and "you cant stop (insert expletive her) from neg rating you if they feel like it" are both commetns that come up again and again.

Any ratings system relies inherently on "mature" people with some kind of moral compass. However moral compasses are few and far between nowadays and there is always the problem of minors and other social misfits. We are also not a cohesive community in that we are from all parts of Earth, many with different ideas of what is right or "moral."

The problem then is the same as the "Utopian problem". A Utopia tends to works only ith perfect "Utopian" people; "regular" people tend to screw it all up.

My proposal is that we give up our right to determine the ratings for ourselves. That we essentially "let the Gods decide" or in this case the Lindens.

It seems to me that there is ample information available for such a descion.
There must be records kept of how many times peple talk to one another, or how many friends one has, or how many times one has given someone and not expected anything in return. It should be easy for the Lindens to determine who is "naughty" and who is "nice".

The only fair way IMO is to come up with some kind of Golden Rule algorithym in the Linden labs that simply determines who the good ones are and who is an actual asshat. Thus the Gods can bestow their bounty on whomever they determine is a good subject.

I think the Lindens avoid solutions like this cause it makes them feel they are "controlling" the system rather than letting it evolve, but that is just a perception.

The awful truth of it is that they do in fact control the system even though at the same time they are at the mercy of this great thing they have created.

Our reltionship to the Lindens is (Creator --> Subject) or (God --> Man/Woman), and it cant be any other way.

At least until the later "Nietchean" stage in our evolution.

Dianne Mechanique

PS - Apolgies to anyone offended by the God references. I am an atheist and speaking Anthropologically not relative to any faith or belif.

Discrete rewards (and punishment for that matter) presume universal and absolute truth in order to measure. If this condition does not exist then any measurement (dynamic or static, user or Linden, etc.) will be flawed. If you have this condition (absolute truth) then you have a self-maintained closed system against which precise measurements can be worked out. In this scenario precise measurement produce acceptable rank order. Gaming the system would simply be about exploiting algorithms or discontinuities in information.

If there are different prevailing values and/or perspectives on what constitutes good or bad behavior, reputation, etc. then you no longer have a closed system. And measurements, no matter how precise, are essentially worthless in determining rank order. Two different systems apply - one is economic, the other is political.

Capitalism is the Linden system for SL - enough said. Democracy, even representative, is a political system. The metaphor of the Lindens being creators may not be as true as the role they play as Governors. The present political system seems to be an Autocracy, with some interest in self-regulating laws.

So rewarding behavior (good, constructive, whatever) with financial rewards is a dynamic re-enforcer in line with Capitalism. Deciding what those expressed behaviors are is a good question that could be resolved politically. Or it could be left to the market to decide... This works well if scarcity is real - but in SL there is no real scarcity.

The old quote "May you live in good times" applies equally to everyone in SL. But there are entrenched interests who benefit from their accumulation in both ratings and bonuses... These interests artificially inflate incomes and land prices versus any system of dynamic behavior. And the same would be true for any measure of reputation if it was simply accretive. So one of two approached could be taken:

(1) reset ratings/reputation scores to zero periodically at random intervals; and/or

(2) introduce other random environmental cycles (like the weather, see Joseph Schumpeter for more info)

So the first alternative might be more practical. I would even randomized the algorthms for ranking whatever behavioral variables are chosen over time to minimize the possibility that folks would game the system from a standing start following any reset. The reality show "Survivor" is a better model for accomplishing this than any system I've seen online (such as eBay, Omidyar Network, The Well, etc)