Reputation System

Aha! I get what you're saying now. Well, first of all, let me say I don't really appreciate being accused of trying to sway the course of the entire system that governs SL for my own financial benefit. I'm just not that underhanded.

For what it's worth, I've had the pleasant fortune of reaching a moderate amount of financial success in SL. I don't even know what my stipend is at these days - it's become unimportant in my second life. I'm pretty confident that I've donated more to VERTU than I've ever earned from my stipend. But enough of that. I just don't want people to dismiss my opinion as purely self-serving.

You know though, you do have a point. The "total" rating bonus has never quite sat right with me - it's like getting something for nothing. Although, if you look at is a "reward" for helping the SL community grow when it was still in its infancy, it's not so bad, is it? At any rate, I think the weekly rating bonus should stay - the newbs need some pocket money.

As for how to interpret ratings scores, I've already posted in this thread how you can infer useful information from those 8 numbers. Of course there's a certain amount of noise in the current system, just as there is in any system. People give +rates and -rates for no reason all the time. Exactly how you interpret them is up to each person. It's not perfect, but hey, for 8 numbers, it's not bad.

To give you more extreme examples, there are people who are around +18, -12 in terms of rates. I know, because I give tech support to these people.

As to the "permanence" of neg ratings, pos ratings are "permanent", so neg ratings should be also. Why should pos-ratings be permanent? Well, because part of the numbers reflect "reputation". Someone who's developed 600+ bracket ratings have been around for a while, and they've touched hundreds of lives. The permanence of the numbers serves to reflect this.

I don't think anyone counts a handful of neg rates against you. There's noise in the system. People know this. Myself, I think neg rates received is the least informative of the 8 numbers. It's only useful in extreme cases. Much more revealing, I think, is the number of neg rates given.

If you want a "demonstration" of how I interpret specific numbers, hit me in-world. Discussing specific people's reputation is not a topic for forums.

Can always just make the ratings cost a lot more, like 5L or something. Rating parties would make people broke if that happened.

Allow ratings, but, just dont affiliate it to any rewards system. This way there is no conflicts of interest.

[/I]

True, but this is one of the arguments I hear -for- keeping the ratings system. "Stop whining/Toughen up/Who cares, *I* don't." - You can't just say "I don't care about ratings so you shouldn't - problem solved." The problem isn't solved. New users, upon coming to SL, are introduced to a system where ratings have a bastardized meaning. Just because a few folks can cope with it, and know how it's "supposed" to be, does NOT remove the society-wide detriment. Ratings are a problem because they are a currently a problem; railing about how they were "meant" to be isn't going to change it any. Yes, ratings should be thought of differently. But they are not, nor will they be.



Agreed completely on this front. If Linden Lab wants socialization and communicative networking to happen (this 'metaverse' everyone speaks of), LL is going to have to realize that you cannot quantize or digitize reputation. If it was an escrow website, an auction site, or a reseller site, fine - then you can develop a "reputation quanta" because of such a site's limited scope.

But we're talking about a complete virtual world here. How nonsensical is it to say "Bill is 20 points bad at virtual world-ing."






Exactly. Points for the win. I think it's nuts that we have a "high score" leaderboard. High score? What is this, pinball?

Some may say that LL implements ratings, scoring, and leaderboards to attract a certain gamer faction of clientele. But, this is unneccessary: We have scripting! We can have scoring and rating in in-world instances, however we want it! The entire world doesn't need it.

Let me just say a few points about ratings which I think make them ludicrous:

1> They are not scaled. They're open-ended. They have a low of negative-infinity and a high of positive-infinity. (Or, at least, where 'x' is the number of users on SecondLife as a whole.) - Because of this, your "behavior quanta" means nothing in comparison to others.

2> They are absolutely arbitrary. Joe and Jane both sign on 06/01/04, but by the end of the month, Jane has a +550 in building and Joe has a +10 in building. Joe built an intricate and detailed bridge, that everyone who came to his little corner of SL loved so much that they +rated him. Jane, on the other hand, built a casino, and gave out free slot-machine games in return for a positive rate. Who's the better builder? A Republican rates a Democrat negatively in behavior; a Democrat rates a Libertarian negatively for behavior -- who's actually badly behaved here?

3> They are permanent. No amount of reform can undo a negative rating. LL claims that you could talk to the person who gave it to you --- but in reality, when the person who gave it to you is wearing a giant penis on his head, naked in welcome, and yelling profanities and shooting bullets shaped like three headed dogs... I guess you take your punches and walk away, and hope that the rest of SL doesn't judge you badly for this permanent, indelible negative mark.

4> They require no interaction or transaction. I could fly over a sim and neg-rate everyone in it. This capability in itself absolutely invalidates any possibility of the ratings system having any actual meaning as a system of social reward and punishment. A person can give ratings to ANYONE, for ANY REASON, and what they actually mean is open to interpretation to the viewer. Yes, ideally, people shouldn't prejudge. Yes, ideally, people should get to know eachother before saying 'oh, that person has a lot of negs'. But in reality, things aren't ideal. They almost never are. And if you DO get neg-attacked, even though maybe your reputation SHOULDN'T be harmed, there's nothing you can do about it, even if the attack was absolutely unjustified

5> Which leads me to my next point: There is NO MECHANISM IN PLACE AS A RECOURSE TO ABUSE OF THE RATINGS SYSTEM. The Lindens almost SUPPORT arbitrary use of their seemingly sacred ratings system. Perhaps it's part of the Great Experiment, but it's going to cause people to hole up on their own land and not interact with others. This is already happening. And no amounts of shouldn'ts are going to change that fact.

Let me make this point more clear:

People are beginning to become reluctant to interact with others they do not already know, for fear of unprovoked, unjustified, and random neg rating.

If any of you personally reading these forums "don't give a rats ass about ratings", good for you. It's not you that Linden Lab has to worry about. It's the fact that there are two types of people: those who don't care about the ratings system, and those who are experiencing a social chilling effect from it. Those who fall into the "chilled by ratings" category are for the most part, new users, the very people LindenLab should NOT want to alienate.

The reason I've emphasized so much here is that I want to make a point that, in a forum where people jump to the opportunity to say "Well *I'M* not like that, I dont care about ratings", or "They should quit whining and suck it up and take their negs" -- WHATEVER: The point isn't that you can take it, the problem is that the system HAS ALREADY HAD a detrimental effect on the community, any way you slice it.

Reread that: HAS ALREADY HAD. Not "shouldn't", not "will if we don't do something", it already has. If you are personally above it, great. You've probably been here a while and know what's what.

But try to imagine yourself a new user trying to get a foothold in this community, and you get neg-stormed for walking up to someone and saying "hi". It happens, and it'll continue to happen. And I'd like to hear a well-thought explanation as to why it should continue to happen by those here who believe that it should continue to happen.

You may not, Francis, but you can't say that others don't.

You are aware, by the way, that there are LSL script calls to retrieve ratings, correct? IT's possible to restrict people from using items, buying things, and even remaining in structures due to their ratings. It hasn't happened yet. But the functionality is there.

At what threshold are received-negs given weight? Should this or does this change from you to another person? Does that threshold go up after you've been here for a year? After five years?

They're permanent, after all. In this permanent, cumulative, unending scale, where are the breakpoints?

I pretty much agree with Talen's points. Set a static stipend, get rid of the entire ratings system, and don't replace it with anything.

i'm just waiting for the messes this is going to cause honestly... sell something that won't activate for someone with more than 10 negs, or that can only be used by people +300 or more

there is *NO GOOD REASON* to expose the ratings system to LSL at all... only bad things can come of it

for money purposes yeah.. i would rather see a stipend boost, say to $100/750 or something across the board.. and totally unhook ratings from money.

At that point yer MUCH more free to start expiramenting with creative and useful ratings systems that there really wouldn't be an incentive to game... i've long been an advocate of 'trade' oriented ratings, say for builder you change it to 'skill' and let there be a dropdown box, people could say +1 skill, particles, or +1 skill, clothing etc so people could really actually get an idea of who someone is in SL based off the profile

I would like to see the system posted where players check a box to say what they think your skills/attributes are.

BUT please do away with the link to L$ rewards.

I gain as much as many in SL from ratings. I am in the 'Top 10' in some areas but only because in SL terms I am old.

I understand the thrill of seeing your name in the 'Top 10'. Personally I get a kick from it too.

I understand that ratings and bonus are used to get L$ into players hands, part of the economy, so why not just add to the basic stipend? Why leave it linked to ratings / reputation / some other idea, where it can be abused so easily?

To be honest I feel the same about dwell, too easy to abuse and too great a temptation to open a lagtastic dwell gathering build. Why not just add to stipend and let players build what they enjoy? Again why link it to how many players hang out on your land?

I also love to see Taber Tudor Village or Tilitr on the popular picks (if you uncheck mature). But the dwell payments are not the reason, it just gives us a kick to see that players like the areas.

It was my understanding that neg ratings went away if that person was no longer subscribed to SL.

I have found I use the part of a person's profile that lets you leave comments that only you can see quite a bit. That way if I don't remember the person later on, I have a note in their profile to remind me.

I'd like to see no ratings system at all. I agree with Talen's notion that its just hindering SL from its full potential. Any system that is introduced which ties in with the stipend bonus will create a game mechanic - and thusly be "gamed" like the current and previous one have.

Reputation should work in SL as it does in RL - you figure it out by interacting with someone, word of mouth, media coverage, the forums. It shouldn't be a game mechanic.

More social networking kind of features would be interesting, but not as part of a reputation system, and definitely opt-in.

As for the issue of those who depend on the bonus for spending money - here are a couple thoughts:

- LL could bring up the base stipend as some have suggested. I do think a certain amount of allowance is necessary for new people especially so they can buy a few fun things.

- If you want more... get creative about ways to make money. The possibilities are limitless. Invent a new service that you can provide to the community. Become a tour guide, teach a class, become a security guard at a club, or a private detective. I think a lot of possibilities are still untapped in SL. Perhaps a lack of stipend bonus from ratings would make the economy of SL more interesting. In this way people are rewarded for concrete things they provide to the community rather than nebulous and arbitrary ratings.

Maybe we can somehow create a text-based reputation system. Where people can add written comments to a person's reputation. I've no idea how this could be implemented honestly, but I'd like to read about a person rather than note their "400 behavior" rating, which isn't really indicative of their ratings.

I have been very exasperated lately by the amount of 'instant rating' that goes on when you go to an event. You know, you walk in, people rate you. Sometimes even with messages like 'rate me back pls' -- for goodness sake!

It's all meaningless. I've had my first thousand dollar plus rating bonuses over the past few weeks, much as I like the cash, I really don't deserve it.

There should though be some way of giving kudos to people who impress you, but I don't think it should be linked to cash. Rating is fine for quick, in world bigging-up. But when someone does something above the call of duty, perhaps something like a "kudos ticket" could be sent to Linden saying why you wish to commend that person. You can report negative bahaviour that way too.

If rating did nothing for cash and was just another stat, much abuse of it would stop. It's a lot more effort to actually fill something out saying why someone is worthy, and abuse of such a system would be easier to stop.

Until a new system is worked out, I'm going to make a Tshirt saying 'Don't rate me... unless you really mean it.' I'll stick it up as a freebie at Thinkers' (Tawhaki 200,200) if anyone wants one.

The free T-shirt is now available next to the Thinkers' stage.

Ok what the hell. Here's one. Since to me, the underlying meaning behind ratings is to promote social interaction among SL'ers. It's flawed since it allows people to end up as sad pandas by abuse of the system. Since they feel we need rewards for our exchanges in ratings, it's also tied in L$ which leads to an easy path to whoring cash. Resulting in more sad pandas.

So let's use the thumbs up icon.

Everytime you interact with someone different you get a thumbs up automatically. It could be a good interaction.. or bad. Doesn't matter. It just happens. So all these thumbs up are tallied each week into a total which then turns into LINDEN CREDITS. With these credits you can exchange them for SL t-shirts and golf shorts.
This solves the whoring aspect since it's not dealing with L$. All you get are dorky clothes you wouldn't even go to sleep in. The socialites are happy since they got to the top of the leaderboard knowing that wow, they met a lot of people!

How about a composite system?

Part 1: Lordfly's system of having many different categories, with a "rating" consisting of someone choosing which category they think you fit best in. This rating doesn't have any effect on your stipend. Yes, it can be gamed, but what's the point?

Part 2: Friends list. List up to 10 people you think deserve a bonus on their stipend. Stipend bonuses are given out to people on an above-average number of lists. Yes, it can and will be gamed, but not as thoroughly as the current system can.

Hmmm wow alot of thoughts on this topic..

What about the same stipend for everyone. That way everyone gets some.. even though some do not need it.
But this makes it fair.

At one time you stopped getting payday after a certain Net Income...whats so wrong with that.

Or what if everyone recieved 2000$ lindens every week..up to say...20000L$ Cash. then 1000$ a week till say... 40 or 50000. Cause really by then your either making alot by whatever means..or your buying it. And still can afford land and most things at the current levels.

If you think about it ..why does someone with 100000 need a stipend? I know, why should they be left out ...but alot of people just sell thier money for RL$ so why add to it with free money when at least they should have to earn it.

Ratings...why not keep a ratings system... Reset everyones to 0... no bonuses at all and refund the given amount in the money it costed..

That makes everyone even and then if a person rates you or you rate them it actually or could mean somthing... Cause if its not a contest or a means of making more money then not everyone would mine it or whatever.

I mean yes it was alot of work perhaps and events or time in SL to get high ratings but if everyones at 0 noone can really complain. (Not that they won't)

I've stated my opinions in the past, on other numerous threads... but ideas I liked that I saw here would be a combination of a few...

Take into account what the person has checked in their profile under skills, then anyone else can only check those for the rate... better explained in an example:

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.

Then say Bob Smith goes to rate/whatevernewname Oz Spade, Bob Smith can then only choose out of the skills Oz Spade thinks he's good at. It would work as Lordfly suggested or something like it, where you either check or don't check what you think the person is good at.

This allows everyone to decide what they want to be rated on.

Ratings when given are annonymous, no popup says "so and so rated you x", however in your profile you can see "this many people think you are good at this" etc.

The leader board would be replaced with who has been deamed best in what catagory by the users, every catagory gets its own place. Think of it like a industry listing, so you could see who everyone thinks is the top in the building industry, texturing industry, etc. The system would be opt-in, so that you don't have to be swamped by IMs because you are on the board if people like your work.

Ratings cost 1L$ to give for each check, that money is added onto the users stipend. Unchecking a catagory would not cost any L$ and would not subtract any.

Socializing would be a viable catagory, as would something like Helpfullness.

I would not have ratings degrade or drop off over time.

I like the idea of ratings being able to be given from a users profile regardless if you have their calling card or not.

I like the idea of no negative ratings.

I like the idea of a social network, but I'm not sure if I'd like it to be tied in with a rating/industry/whatever system or not.

The problem with messages being visible to everyone, or say each person gets their own mini-comment board in their profile, is then you'll get comment griefing, i.e. "This person is a cheat and a liar! Do not listen to what they say!". The only way I would be for this idea is if each person could delete whatever messages they wanted from their own board. I just think this would open the door for Profile Flaming.

I like the idea of a user who is lesser in their field not having as much influence on rating someone, however I don't see how that could work out if no monetary value is associated with the ratings the way it currently is. Maybe if someone checks your box for a field that they are high in, it adds more to your rating in that catagory...

For example: If AwsomeBuilder Bob who is top in the building industry checks my building box because he likes my work, I would get double the rating points than if NewbieBuilder Bob checked by box.

These are just suggestions based on ideas posted here, I'm sure if I went and read everything (I admitidly didn't read all the posts) and read everything I have previously posted on this subject I would have more to say and a better thought-out suggestion.

In short I think some rating system should exist and it should have a slight impact on the stipend, there should however be no negative ratings and no way to make a person lose money other than not giving them any.

If money based on ratings is devalued I do think the stipend should be raised.

I like the idea of a rating system. It lets me try to earn more stipend.

I think there needs to be negative ratings too. There are some people that are rude or whatever but don't really deserve to be reported to the lindens. A negative rating is small punishment. I have used it to change peoples ratings from time to time.

Whilst I still think we should have no ratings at all... I wouldnt actually mind this, because I would simply not check any boxes in my profile, therefore I would be opting out of a ratings system. So if we have to have one... I'll go with this one

How about setting it up based on time played in game, vs any complaints issued to LL. No one knows who did this and the decision of the repremand based on the situation. I.E we are all given a certian amount of stipen and or bonus a week.

Any abuse harrassment complaints would be a permently deduction from stipen. If that person goes a certian amount of time with no, REAL reports issued against them, then they can start working there way back to the stipen, they were at. Some kind of service work could be offered as a redemption.

Maybe a reward for positve reports also. Of course and sorry about this but it would mean CS would be bombarded.

You could use the amount of reports of one person or group, to set up the critera. 5 neg reports for behavior loose 100 for each VALID report after the first 3 as a warning. But good behaivor should be also rewarded.

NO I dont think it should go to player based courts. There is favortism everywhere weather we want to see it or not. It will be used against each other. People are just that way.

As it is Scriptors and Designers dont have a specific catagory, I hope ppl are using build to rate them on that.

I haven't had the time to read all the posts, so maybe this has come up before, but I feel the rating system is too "cheap". Nearly anyone can afford to rate just for the hell of it - hence the rate parties, etc.

I'd like to see them zero the thing out to start fresh and make a rating cost a "significant" amount of L$. That will severely cut down on the number of frivolous ratings flying around. Mind you, it won't eliminate the problem as there will always be people with more money than brains, but it will sure take the edge off. You can bet I'm gonna think twice before rating someone if it costs me a couple hundred L$ per rate.

Good suggestions all.

A problem though, when you get into the 'stipend' issues, is that totally mucks with the SL economy. A lot of people use the stipends as a way to keep the economy going (via purchases, services, and so on). If you remove the stipend entirely, you're going to get massive deflation, as less money is being brought into the world every week.

If you INCREASE the stipend too much, you're going to get rampant inflation, pushing prices of goods up.

Perhaps if we grandfathered in a tiered average system?

Let us assume that any new system that the lindens introduce is going to sever the tie between stipends and ratings. Just for this example

For instance, let's say the average stipend for users 0-3 months old right now is $506 a week. If/when the new system pops in, everyone that is 0-3 months old would get $503 a week.

3-6 month folks might get an average of, say, $734 a week. So, when your account passes into that area, you get $734 a week.

And so on. 6-9 months, $1054, 9-12 months, $1200 or so... as you go up the ladder of time, the average stipend difference is going to go down, because even the oldest people around only have $2000 or so a week, and that's with 1000+ ratings.

This lets people still have a weekly income to draw off of, it keeps the economy relatively stable (in the midst of a major change), it keeps the rating parties down to a minimum (if not deleting them entirely), and it fixes problems of gaming the system in general (what's the point if there isn't any reward?)

LF

Whats the point of the reward?

I didn't join to get money every week ...matter of fact no one did. We all joined because of the possibilities. You can be anyone, build anything, do what you want with no structure guiding you towards goals like everquest.

There are also rewards that go way beyond monetary gain. Being proud of something you made or how you helped a newbie get the box off his head.

My parents stopped giving me an allowance when I was 14...I had to earn my own spending money. So why should we depend on the lindens for our money after the first few months here?

I can see the stipend staying and possibly being raised but the ratings have to go because they mean squat and the only arguments I've seen for keeping them have revolved around money or popularity.