ratings reform revisited

I DO NOT understand the Linden obsession/fascination with the concept or rating. Yes, get rid of neg rating since it is just a vehicle for abuse, but why keep positive ratings? They are meaningless.

Look at the leaders for building for example..some in the top 10 dont build a damn thing. The system is too flawed and open to abuse to have any meaning other than a popularity competition.

Bring back vote machines if you want to acknowledge a great build.

GET RID OF RATINGS ALTOGETHER!

If this has been mentioned before, please ignore, but I don't have time to read 12 pages of postings.

As far as getting rid of neg ratings because they are abused:
I use an online video chat program that had a similar rating system with positive and negative ratings. They got rid of the negative ratings for similar reasons given for getting rid of the negative rating here.

The overall effect was a significant INCREASE OF GRIEFING (Most of which are in direct violation of the TOS). So much so that large numbers of people are leaving or setting up their firewalls to disable the vido portion, which kinda defeats the purpose of a video chat program.

My point: Getting rid of neg ratings may cause more problems than it solves. Apparently for whatever reason, many would be griefers would risk getting their accounts revoked, but are afraid of the neg tatings. Go fig. Makes no sense to me, but I've seen it happen.

Cris, do you not think society has an obligation to protect its citizens from predators? I do. I think it right and just that I can find out about sexual predators in my area and if I'm thinking of buying a home and the house up the street looks a little dodgy I can pull a police activity report on it. I think it fair that I can check out a contractor that I'm about to hire with the BBB and local licensing board.

I guess when I was agreeing with Aimee's original idea, I was thinking in terms of SL's predators (the few that cause 90% of the problems here), not in a general "loser" type identification. I was thinking of those who think it's jolly fun to blow everyone off a sim or who use the WA as their behavioral toilet. With negative ratings gone, the citizenry has no way of knowing who the predators are. I do agree with you that telling people explicitly what they have done wrong would go a long way and being allowed to present "the other side of the story" would keep good people from getting harmed. There is a big dividing line between disagreements between residents and true predators looking to cause harm. It is one thing for you and your neighbor to have a noisy argument over a fence and quite another when that neighbor decides to shoot your cat in retaliation.

One is a disagreement; the other is an aggressive attack with intent to cause harm.

People reveal their true selves by their behavior. Words are cheap, watch how another person behaves and that will tell you everything about them....

Fair enough.

C'mon, after all, we're all adults.

You're funny! I know a system like this would get misused because I'd be first up doing it

Since the Lindens invited replies, here's mine:

After reading through this thread (quickly), I'll do what I've always done: ignore the ratings system completely, or any formal "social approval" system that follows.

It has no merit as rule enforcer through peer pressure, it doesn't really function well as an economic check, and it sure doesn't indicate anything substantive about the character or talent of the person being rated - such as whether they're predators, good people, good builders, or creative. It's a relic of the game origins of SL, and while I haven't decided whether SL is a "game" or not, I'd be a lot more interested in it if it wasn't.

I'm getting the feeling that there is an overwhelming desire to scrap the ratings system completely.

Most of the people (with some exceptions) who oppose scrapping ratings seem motivated by preventing the loss of income rather than defending the system itself. Can some of these folks confirm this? Xtropy, Magnum? If the Lindens separated your weekly stipend from the ratings and promised that you would get the same amount of money as you are getting now, would you still oppose tossing the ratings out?

At this point I think the Linden's love affair with game rating systems needs to come to a melancholy end. People are clamoring for many other high profile bug fixes and features right now. If LL developers spend their time making yet another ratings system, they run the risk of creating a customer relations scenario similar to the one that came with "video on a prim"

I only read the first post of this thread, but all I can say is...


I AM SO SICK OF RATINGS AND ABUSE OF NEG RATINGS, GET RID OF EM, PERIOD!

I'm not against having a ratings system, but these minor changes to a system that's going to be scrapped anyway barely seem worth opining about. Until we get some details on the new system in the works most of this seems pretty moot. I will say this though... having more than a single neg for the first time ever thanks to finally crossing paths with Prokofy in world I say great timing on getting rid of negs! <G>

Excellent post, Aimee. I agree with you completely. The ratings system has languished for so long as a failed attempt at what is arguably a bad concept to begin with. Ratings in other games, like There and TSO, were something earned through actually doing something - being a great hoverboarder or making your sim paint until its little hands fell off to get your creativity rating up). They were never a consensus on the positive or negatives of a person - and that is why any "ratings" system is doomed to fail here. It is all so subjective, and thus, completely pointless. The only measure we have is our own personal interactions with people. What someone else thinks of someone is meaningless.

I would hope the only development efforts put forth regarding ratings will be to disconnect the current system for good.

As much as I enjoy the theoretics of a "down and out" style economy, I really dont think anything close to the currrent system is going to be acceptable. there needs to be some way check references, though. how about a seperate notes section thats publicly viewable? like a testimonial system in one of the online friend systems. you have an offer from someone, you flip over to their testimonials tab and it has all of their contacts saying nice things about them... It would still be abusable, but it would be a little easier to gauge the quality of their ratings.

It's interesting that you brought this up, because I almost mentioned sexual predators in my post. What I was going to say though is, it's not like this were a matter of sexual predators that don't even get branded enough in real life, due to legal concerns, (though they should) to keep the rest of us safe.

We don't really need that kind of branding - by Lindens - here. On the other hand, what someone said earlier, about when they stopped doing negative ratings in his environment, the percentage of griefers multiplied rapidly - I'm willing to decide that just on that anecdotal basis alone - which I believe and accept totally - negative ratings probably should stick around.

Can't finish reading this thread now, or respond any further, cause I gotta take my kid to the store, lol.

coco

I'd like to see it scrapped. Or have it be a record of TOS infractions.


I'd write more but I have to go water my plant and eat a kit kat.

Personally I don't believe in the current rating system, but I just want to remind you all that there seem to be many people out there who enjoy rating and being rated like many of the oldbies probably used to back in the good old days.

But then again, I don't think there's much point in the current system which is more like a means to exchange goodwills, to grief or to get some extra L$, rather than to give the credits the person deserves.

What I do need is a way to show appreciation and respect for what others do. I pos-rate people like Live Helpers who take their precious time to help me, the instructors of classes I join, the creators of helpful tutorials and budding builders whose builds make me proud of being a part of this wonderful world. If it's a friend, I would be able to show her/him how much I'm grateful in many other ways but it's not possible in such cases as stated above. So I'd say NO to scrapping the current system for now, until there is an alternative way to repay such people for nonmaterial things.

That reminds me... I ran into a new player the other day who paid me 50L$ for just telling him how to pull items out of the box and giving him pointers to tutorials and noob-friendly places. I paid him back on the spot because it felt really weird, which convinces me that there are people other than me who want to show gratitude in a visible way, and that direct payment doesn't always work...

...Yeah, call me a commie, and a naive one at that. I'll go eat my bowl of borscht

This always amused me. People who speak as if Linden bannings and reprimands are -common-, and that you just *can't* have any fun in world without getting in trouble with a Linden.

Two years for me, and I haven't been in trouble. Why? Because.. there's really no reason to break the rules; the rules are all common sense, and unless you're hell-bent on being an asshole, you probably won't even come close to bending them.


... As far as the ratings go:

Positives; whatever. It shows how many friends you have who are willing to drop a dime on you. that's it.

Negatives? They're a weapon for petty people, and that's it. I really believe that neg rates have caused a chilling effect on socialization in SL. Some folks are afraid to go into new areas for the fear of being randomly negged. (Yes. That's right. EVEN IF you think they shouldn't be bothered by it, they are. And it causes social chilling. Get over yourself.)

The ratings system fills NO void and NO need except for an artificial one: some folks somehow thinks it magically "produces" money. As if stipend and bonus is somehow inherently a property of what it is to be rated.

Of course, this isn't true. Ratings affect stipend and bonus *now*; and having them gone, or having them not tied to money, does not mean that "teh ways of making moneys is gone". It's not like there are various L$ wells around which are formed by the decaying fluids of six month old ratings. It is an artificial connection and people need to realize that.

If LL does something that will lower everyone's stipend: they aren't stupid, they know this, and will find some way to compensate for it. It may not raise all ships, but I don't think it'll lower the water, either.

.. In two years, I have never, ever gleaned useful information from received negs. Only from givens - as many say. I've also never met someone with more than -40 givens who wasn't a complete and utter asshat.

I have, however, seen week-old newbies with -18 -18 -18, because they wore the wrong avatar in the WA once.

So I'll throw my hat in for getting rid of the wretched thing.

Don't panic, though, socialites. Ratings dont "make" L$. They're just tied to them.

Its not that they get something for nothing, they get something for hanging out online and keeping the population above 24, and buying aimee's clothes and ingrid's plethora of housewares! (give them losts of money to do that!)*

They also get something for participating in the forums and offering the opinions and drama and otherwise participating in the forum community (maybe a bonus of $1L for ever forum post!). And of course asking me questions! Especially ones that make me seem sagacious.

And they get money for supplying ready made drama for people in the world: its not free money, they are entertainers paid to provide a service-Drama!

SL is a game, its fun, its not a job. at least not for everyone.
And hey really if everyone who doesn't create stuff leaves, or quits buying from the GOM the economy wouldn't be any stronger.

The sad thing is, those who create need those who spend to have money. Why not hand it out for free?

Oh and scrap the ratings!

The real troublemakers are not afraid of negative ratings either.

On a further note: aren't those the kinds of people that should be seeing disciplinary action from the lindens instead of the slap on the wrist the ratings system is at best? People that are truely disruptive to the game environment really need to be removed from it.