ratings reform revisited

May be a good idea to get some trial feedback before commiting to a new system.

Seems so simple, sounds so right.

I personally think LL should raise the Stipend and reduce the Dwell Bonus.
It would bring up the median balance while inducing the economy to focus on new products instead of just packing clubs.

TOP POSTER! A SHINING STAR! A TRUE ASSET TO SL! A++++++++++++++++++++

I guess some of those "Angels" who play this game and love it only because you can neg rate are going to have to find something a bit more productive to do - or, continue their tantrums through ToS violations and get banned. Either way, I'm hip.

I agree. It's also difficult to have an opinion when there is this possible future replacement in the wings about which we currently know nothing at all.

.

I am new and don't know a lot about the abuse of this system but I am not too happy about seeing this happen.

I don't build, script or sell items. I socialize and meet people which I rely upon to get even a few precious L$'s. I don't come to SL to build and have no desire to create a second job here. One thing I liked about SL was that socialization was rewarded, encouraged and if enough effort is made, some L$'s to purchase others items that take the aforementioned approach to SL. Without knowing what the "new system" is, what I do see is the one small way I can get 100L or so a week through a lot of hard work is being taken away. What motivation is there now for people to be socialites? It seems more and more that unless you run a club or dedicate your land to Tringo/Slingo or a storefront you are in the poor house.

Our land is consistantly in the 1200+ in traffic, I get maybe 5-6 positives a week meeting new people and this is my sole source of income. I really don't understand why people that focus on the social side of SL seem to be the ones that keep getting hurt with all the changes made. I can only assume that there are people abusing this system but I would like to get some acknowledgment that social players are still worth investing in.

The Lindens have usually refused to punish residents who capriciously negrate because "Residents may rate others for any reason they like, or for no reason at all."

How is it possible to abuse a system that everyone is free to use however they see fit?

The only area of abuse that I can imagine is coordinated rate-attacks, and residents who participate in these are already disciplined.


I tend to agree with Merwan; leave it as-is until you're ready to put the new system in place. Don't waste time and resources (yours AND ours, because I guarantee you that you're going to hear complaints if you make changes to the rating system, THEN scrap it a few months later) that could be much better spent on other areas of improving SL. You're proposing to work on a system that is already broken but doesn't cause very much trouble, and which you're already preparing to replace before very long anyway.

Temp-fixing the ratings system right now would be like me fixing the AC system for my house in January, even though I'm planning on buying a new one in May, just because it makes a funny noise now and again. It may not work properly, but it's January; its broken status isn't really hurting my life or my house, and it'll be taken care of in a few months anyway.

Why? Over and over again lately I am hearing about all these secret plans for features no one can know or talk about. What is the point of even talking to the community if you are just to come up with all your ideas in secret, without input from the people they actually effect? You have hundereds upon hundreds of feature request ideas, that you requested from the community, that just sit there gathering dust without even the slightest comment from you.

With your customer approval track record with sudden unexpeteced added features I would think you would want as much real input in the early stages as possible.

Don't waste time on this purely social interim change, just lay out what you want to see happen with any future system and let the community provide input and come to a consenus.

The current rating system is totally useless imo. Personally, I see no value in it at all and am in favor of doing away wif it. All I see is that it causes bickering, dissention, griefing opportunities, and a host of other crap. If you wanna know if someone is a good or bad egg then how about this revolutionary idea... talk to them n get to know them n make up yer own friggin mind.

If you HAVE to keep a rating system for some weird reason then how bout limiting the neg ratings that someone can give to 1 per category per month. How many peeps have you met that you really feel the need to neg rate in a month anyhoo? This would do away wif the griefer problem altogether... that is if you HAVE to have a rating system at all.

These are your decisions but I support the transition plan, and hope that some consideration for the new system is based on the worthy suggestions of my forum copatriots!

It goes without saying that the present system is not adequate as an incentive system or as a dispute buffer. In-world recognition for good acts, great builds, community development, or iconic behavior would be nice but is not fundamental to a full user experience.

I would prefer not to think of the Lindens as in-world "police", so I'm less sanguine about Aimee's suggestion. Mediation and arbitration in some form might be a reasonable process instead since it would be dynamic and not a static snapshot.

I think there are two issues here, one is reforming a deeply deeply flawed rating system, the other is figuring out how a player can earn an income without providing a product or service. I think it would be good to keep them separate. If someone is earning income as a result of a high build rating even though they don't build, I don't think the loss of that income is a sufficient reason to stop reform.

Instead, lets reforum the rating system such that it makes SOME kind of sense, and then open a separate issue about how you can get money from the Lindens by being social.

Ratings are awesome because it is like:



-3 HAHAHA I PISSED YOU OFF

-3 BACK TO YOU I PISSED YOU OFF BACK IN REVENGE HAHAHA

_____________________________________________

+3 YOU ARE HAWT

+3 BACK AT YOU BUT I AM A GUY LOLL HAHAHA

While I agree with Amy's idea for a point system displaying a disciplinary curve, I really doubt they would consider this.

They are notoriously tight lipped about discipline. As it stands now, and has been since the beginning, you are never even informed if the person you're reporting was disciplined or let off the hook. You get just those vague emails saying they are looking into it, and then that it has been resolved, the latter being curiously devoid of any real info. I would really like to see something public, like you see in local newspapers - "so and so was found guilty of <x>" - I think if people knew that their name and the offense they were found guilty of would be made public, most people, save for maybe the most hardcore griefers, would quit probing the edges of the ToS, but I am pretty sure they would never consider that either. It seems protecting the "bad guy" is paramount.

I am very happy to hear that the system is drawing nearer to being revamped - the way the system stands right now, it is nearly meaningless, and as Amy said, positives are used as a friendship symbol and negs are abused severely by a small contingent of people who should be playing single player shooter games. I have no idea what people with 100s of negs given are even doing in a social setting, they are obviously misanthropes.

I want to thank Jesse and LL for giving us a heads up. Surprises are bad, as we have seen in the past, even if the eventual outcome of those surprises were good.

Why go through the trouble of doing this? Just drop the entire ratings system. They mean nothing, and few people use them. LL"s time would be better spent on figuring out either another system, or working on other areas.

Negative ratings were the only ones I ever checked really, to see if the idiot I'm dealing with has been enough of an idiot to other people to get neg rated alot. Without negs, the rating system would mean even less than it does now.

Better yet, just scrap the idea of a ratings or reputation system altogether. We don't need y'all wasting your time on such a feature. It'll never actually do anything useful for us.

Take ratings out of the system and have done.

Agreed - remove the ratings system and be done with it. No matter what system you come up with, it won't overcome human nature. One down side would be it gets rid of yet another L$ sink in the economy - are there any left really?

I say throw out the current system now and stop wasting resources trying to fix it.

I like Aimee's idea about the disciplinary guage - though it would have to be explored more in depth to really evaluate it.

Anyway - I appreciate that Lindens are communicating about this stuff before implementing it.

Thanks, Jesse and LL staff for listening and for your consideration.
Jesse, what is your favorite color?

I rarely rate, and I can't even remember the last time I looked at my own.

I say just scrap the whole thing until the new system is ready. Rates without a stipend tie-in are pretty useless.

Thanks for the reply Aimee and you are right. I admit I am ignorant of the abuse that happens because I don't associate with those kinds of people so what other people do is of little concern of mine unless it effects me. I have never been NEG rated and if I was I doubt I would really be losing sleep over it. From an outsider coming into a new world, it seems that only people with a high post count here seem to have a problems with this and are more then happy to voice their opinions. High post count and a history in SL does not make others needs and approachs in SL irrelevant which I was trying to convey. I personally don't care if I get a rating or not, but I think that there should be a system in place to reward the people helping and being involved with others in SL. The current system meets my needs for the approach I take in SL, but it doesn't work for others obviously.

Considering that I am trying to salvage 100-200L$ a week and people are posting that make 1000's of L$ a day/week through their firmly planted history and business ventures is a bit unnerving. If the Linden's were playing around with your income (ie: tax on product sold) I bet there would be a mass exodus. Right now 100L is over 10% of my weekly income and I will post in effort to retain that.

So if ratings and income from ratings are two seperate issues, how are each being handled in this new system?

Agreed also. Just get rid of them.

I say Drop the ratings system all together and give every one $100 a week bonus for being good. if someone is disiciplined they lose the bonus for a month.

I'm all for it so long as it includes a wipe of current ratings. If you're going to do it, do it right and get a clean slate up for everyone.