Reputation System

Good point, but please remember most people don't want to be paying for land, paying for money, paying to keep dwell on land, paying for tools to spice up land, paying for event hosting. Depening on what ppl do, usually freebie ways to skiff outta responsiblities. Never been a sim I can't get in to trouble ^_^ but never been a place i intently tried causing it either.

Personally, i'd rather pay for my video games over L$, because i'd rather live off my 50 buck stupend a week. I just give it out to nubs anyways, and do i get anything back? Yes something i treasure alot more then L$, friendship. <and not the moocher's kinda friends>

Without a doubt Pyp, friendship is the most important thing on SL. It's more important than merchanting, more important than devices, homes, fancy clothing. Friendship is the major bond that keeps most people coming back to SL. People own land because of friends. People wear fancy clothes to look good with their friends. Like you pointed out, for 50L a week, one can have lots of fun on SL just by hanging around with friends.

I don't know what this has to do with the reputation system exactly... except that one doesn't need L$ stippends to make friends. Friendship comes from a simple "Hi" to a newbie, or listenting when someone is having RL problems. Don't even need ratings for that.

I still think a nerfed reputation bonus would encourage more socializing.

Unfortunately, that means that some people who build but incorporate parts of stuff picked up in SL which was designed by someone else will not get the credit for the item they built _MOSTLY_ by themselves. EG: I built a prefab shop, total prims 15, including an attached pool in front (12 prims without the pool). The water in the pool is a texture designed by someone else, however... and when you right-click on my prefab, it says it was created _IN TOTO_ by this other person whose only contribution was the water in the freakin' pool. So exactly who would get the credit for creating _MY_ building?

I don't think anyone in the game itself should be allowed to neg rate anyone... however, I do think that any abuse report to the Lindens should reflect on the rating of the person who has been reported... so any abuse report would show up in a person's ratings as a negative rating.

The "you rate me/I'll rate you" practice is just bullshit... if that's how so many people who joined SL before me got such astronomical ratings, they are completely meaningless...

And the idea of "rating parties" is asinine (self-serving, corrupt, sleazy... reminds me of some politicians I despise... grrrr!). Surely there is a way for the Lindens to script an auto-cancel for such behavior? Say, limiting individuals to rating no more than 1 person per hour? And putting a cap on the number of ratings made in a specific location (say, all contiguous lots owned by the same person in a particular sim).

RE: VOTING -- Personally, I've been offline for the last few weeks and didn't know that the voting function had been cancelled, but it would seem to me to have been pretty worthless to begin with.... most SL-er's don't vote for anyone/place that they don't hang out in habitually. Alot of people who spend alot of time in clubs dancing and chatting vote for the clubs, simply because they're also there for prizes and awards of Lindens, and the voting supposedly increased the Lindens available for the club owner to hand out to regulars, which was another way to "game" the system, I gather. Lots of people = lots of dwell = lots of votes = Lindens for the "VIPs". I've seen lots of shops with voting machines, but casual shoppers don't often vote... they're there for a few mins and then leave. Those who are repeat shoppers at a vendor whose products are particularly good will vote, but that seems to be superfluous -- the vendor's income is as good a gauge of their contribution to SL as the votes, as far as I can see. Property owners (like casinos and shopping malls) who expect people to vote for them are pretty silly - why would I vote for someone (whether an individual or a group) simply because they own one more of the ubiquitous malls/casinos which blight the landscape in SL? Voting is basically a waste of time.

How about having an SL "EXPO" which awards those who have the most useful or beautiful products/creations in SL? Such as homes (I'm sure the Lindens could tell you how many Damani homes there are in each sim, for example), furniture, cafes/sites set up for group chats, or just beautiful landscaping, like the SL Botanical Garden? Of course, this would benefit those who create, rather than those who simply socialize, but there has to be an environment for people to socialize in, right? And those who simply cruise around and socialize don't actually contribute much to SL apart from their charming conversation and ability to buy clothes and skins.

I think creativity, rather than consumption or socializing, should be the basis for any awards in SL. And "organizing" an "event" at a nightclub is hardly creative. Organizing a conference or a seminar would qualify, but that's more work than 90% of SLers want to do.

Again, tie abuse reports to neg ratings, and put a cap on ratings in terms of time/location.

I like the idea of tying negative ratings to abuse reports, just make sure the people dealing with them have two buttons "Negatively rate abuser" and "Negatively rate reporter" (for people making phony reports).

In my opinion now that I think about it, I would personally remove positive ratings entirely. Being a good person should be reward in itself as you'll make lots of good friends, and if you're a shop-owner with good building skills, then you'll get sales.
Free the money up for better traffic bonuses or something.

I'd like to see something that reflects whether people's personality or skills are deemed by others to give added value to SL citizens. Negative ratings have to be a no no, they are only breeding grounds and mechanisms for vendettas. We so do not need that.
Why not just have a free positive rating vote - one or none - and the total number per week is used in a calculation to add to stipends. Maybe the weekly average could be used as a base figure over which any extra votes earn L$. That's my 2 cents worth.

DID YOU HAPPEN TO NOTE THE DATE THIS THREAD WAS STARTED ?

As some people have said, there are ways to game the system...

You want to reward event hosters such as the employees of "nightclubs" which set up stupid contests like "best in white" or "best in whips/chains/tats", or the organizers of Tringo games? Asinine. The people at the clubs are there to pick up the awards dropped by the owners as payback for the dwell they create for the owners, and the prized offered in these "events". The employees of such clubs are not hosting/organizing REAL events, such as exhibits of creative work, or musical performances, or game events, or seminars in building/design.

Staying online for 24 hours at a stretch can be done without the person being anywhere near their computer -- many people do it in the so-call "Linden chairs" or "camping" chairs... I've done it, and it has forced the people who own these sites to set a limit on the time they will pay for camping. So TIME ONLINE as a criterion is asinine.

The "rating parties" are the epitome of sleazy corrupt bullsh*t - dishonest and self-serving.

Negative ratings should be retained, but should reflect abuse reports regarding that user's behavior in-game.

Ratings in particular sims/property during a specific time period should be capped, which would prevent such idiotic, unfair, and sleazy scratch-my-back-I'll-scratch-yours behavior.

A ratings attack? Like if you rip someone off or get into an argument and some drama gets going and now you got like 10 people in your house all clicking on you at once again and again and again. Like they are raping you but it's only your in-game reputation, or if you will a reputation gang-bang.

When building a rating system that is directly tired into monies you need to look out where people can just abuse the hell outta' it. If it was tied to money you would start gangs where the members all rate the boss and he pays his members and they go to rival AV terf and gang-bang him until his exchange rate is so horrid his homies just join your gang because thats where all the money is.

Your thoughts?

as far as a rating system is concerned, users shouldnt be able to negitive feed back each other, cause whats goin to end up happening is one person is goin to get neg from another for just cause, but then turn right around and leave a negitive rating on the other person. personally i feel that abuse reports should be tied into a rating system. it almost seems that abuse reports do nothing more than send an email to another client, rather than any serious action being taken. perhaps if someone is recieving a few abuse reports, they should have their stipen docked until they can show they can contribute to society in a productive manor.

Usagi Looks................HEY ITS Jan 2006

late ideas are still good ideas

I think we should be able to rate a person reputation for the negative as well as positive. For example I had land I had just bought and was setting it up and put it for sale by accident (I am new at having land) a person named "Unknown Player" bought it for 1L, I im'd them and explained what happened several times they would not return my im and sold the land the next day for 3500L, By the way i called the help number to Linden;s for 3 days and left messages for help and never received and answer, so my land is gone. I think there should be a way to rate that person for such a thing.

We had negative ratings for a long time, and they were only recently done away with. People would abuse them, neg rating others for the slightest little thing or even for nothing at all. There are other ways to deal with these issues besides bringing negative ratings back.

P2

Well, as far as I recall there USED to be a negative way to rate someone.

However, abuse, abuse, abuse. Last night someone banned me from their land and the bottom line is because of real life issues like insecurity, ego, etc. The gentleman could not communicate otherwise, having never replied to my messages; I don't think I save a screen cap of my message history, which told a story of 'abuse of power', not that I'm going to lose sleep over it. I did explain myself and apologize. I saw a storm trooper with a gun so I pulled out my lightsaber and goofed.. bumped into him and I take it that constitutes an attack. In fact I didn't even know he was talking to me. I dont think my lightsaber works, I get an error, as well, the incident took approx. 1 second. Anyway I think I got banned becase the person realized they were in the wrong but couldn't handle the embarassment. This leads me to say that I probably would have gotten a negative rating based on one person's inability to communicate properly. Well, two people's I suppose.. takes two to tango, but I sure tried.

Well, it is against policy to post conversations without consent, or we could post exerpts from conversations, showing the public who to needs to be reprimanded.. of course the exerpts would have to be authenticated. If this were the case, my ordeal last night would have left the other in a cloud of embarassment...

Perhaps making reputation harder to build? or specialized.. perhaps volunteers can witness good deeds and rate accordingly.. perhaps to keep it away from reputation growth by means of money (L$)...

I am fairly new to SL and the current ratings system means nothing to me. I never look at them and I never give them. I already know I am at a disadvantage as far as ratings go as I am new and there are people who have been playing for two years so I won't even indulge myself in associating with this rating system. That is my only recourse being at the disadvantage of being new. After over a month I am still at 1,1,1,1, whatever. Dump this idiotic popularity contest because new people already know they can't compete with it and we will not indulge this disadvantage to us. If you want to make a system that means anything, fine.

This is my THIRD attempt to post a reply to this thread -- for some reason, neither of my other posts can be found by searching under my av name -- so here goes:

-- DISABLE all neg rating for anyone other than LINDENS -- neg ratings should reflect complaints filed by other users with the Lindens and substantiated by their investigation of the incident.

-- LIMIT ALL POSITIVE RATINGS by individual avs to a certain number per 24-hour period, to 5; limit ratings BY SIM to no more than 25 per sim for a 6-hour period.

That's it. Keep rating categories for style, building and behavior, but limit them.

Problem With Neg Rates......The had their good point BUT.......................

There is a big problem to this part,One...........LLabs Does not have the man power to deal with Rate abuse cases. Second Some of the largest powerful neg rate attacks came from those that either give alot of capital to LLabs. So they are less likey to deal with such people doing this selfish childish action. In my past with this problem LLabs only used a half a ear letting go of the person how caused me nothing but problems. Now she is stil in the game after causing aharmful problems to purposly to hurt me. Now tell me is this fair? NO, but who am I i just a nother stupid people playing this game with no real worth to the game. unlike others that give alot of money in the form of month fees and countless alts( yes i was rated attacked by ( now count them Over 12 of her alts ) That alot of money in the cost before the pre freebie accounts A?? So there you have it I am shit player and she still in the game why? because money talks and i just a piece of rabbit shit to LLabs.

How can you have only positive feedback and no negative feedback? If you want feedback to be somewhat real and worthwhile you need both after all you cant have good without evil and why should people only receive good feedback for being good what about all the people who are bad?

The Issue is not good and bad, its how some of thse kids abused the system. Many did this in a way that was old style TSO games.

The only reason to limit them is if there's a direct benefit to rating that's more than the cost of rating. Limit the benefit (ratings bonus, whatever) to less than the cost of buying a rating point, and there's no need to limit it.

Before I totaly dismis the idea of ratings, I want to ask one question.

How would/does a ratings system improve the second life experience?

Does it entice people to play because they want to be popular?
Does it entice people to be more social?


I just don't know, but before we waist any more processing cycles on this business we should figure out if it's any good at all.

Is it?

After we figure out what it's usefull for, and ergo, how we will use it, THEN we can decide how it should be implemented.

/me remembers gang-neg-rates

/me wakes up in cold sweat

Whew, glad that was just a dream.

I think it does. It entices them to be more social with more different people. It also entices them to do things that will get them pos-rated. Me, I'll spend an hour helping someone with a scripting problem because it's fun. Some people need a little more encouragment.