Reputation system idea

[Tulip]

I know bosny likes to use maintained addons so here you go:
https://brivium.com/resources/advanced-reputation-system.281/

I am here to present my initiative which will make this reputation system work well:

Why we need this:
MCM is primarily a marketplace forum. It is not focused on discussion. Therefore, we should use some sort of points system to determine the credibility of a seller.

Proposal:
The reputation points would be shown below ratings. Users could give other users reputation by cilcking on it and giving them either positive or negative reputation.

Preventing abuse:
Users can be limited to the amount of reps per day they can give. Let's say, 5 reps per day.

Each user Premium or Supreme would be able to give +1/+0/-1.
Staff would be able to give from +3 to -3.
Admins would be able to give from +10 to -10.

This will prevent abuse, so that people can't make multiple accounts and rep people.

Policies/rules:
We can also implement policies to prevent abuse.

Modification (Rep Kill):
Basically, rep killing would be an efficient way to punish a user for abusing it. This would require a modification. This would mean that all of a user's positive reputation would be removed permanently.

Implement policies of what is considered abuse. False scammer reps is a good example, however what is determined abuse will be fully up to staff.

Potential problems fixed:
Problem: People will ask for rep. What should we do?
Solution: Simple. Implement extremely strict policies which will deter people from doing this.

Problem: There's nothing we can do about people asking for it via skype and other off-site networks.
Solution: True, but they can still be punished if they provide enough evidence.


This is a WIP, I will keep updating it. Ajdin, I hope you take this into consideration in at least some way. It's a good idea and this site needs a reputation system as such. Thanks.

 

[tjrgg]

It kinda does. Reputable means in how legit they are with doing a deal.

I said in my opinion. And my opinion still stands and I disagree with yours.

However, if you'd like to get the dictionary out, let's do it.

According to Google (which I trust, I don't know about you):

• reputable: "having a good reputation"
• reputation: "the beliefs or opinions that are generally held about someone or something"

So, by definition, reputation is not how legit a person is. It's what people generally think about that person.

I've never seen the reaction system as a system that determines reputation. You can still have 2000+ ratings and still be an ass and hard to work with. That's not reputable, in my eyes.

We are heading a bit off-topic now though. Let's try and reel it back into the suggestion at hand.

 

[Jake]

I know people use it as such. However, that doesn't make it so and I refuse to consider a reputation system. At most, maybe a forum reputation system, like I said, but it is far from a marketplace reputation system. In my opinion, you'd be stupid to use the reaction count as a way to meassure reputation.

I mean, just compare my reaction count to yours, Tulip. You have twice as many reactions. Does that make you two times more reputable? This is why it shouldn't be even considered a reputation system, imo, and I will never call it one. Not a marketplace one anyway.

The fact the number is bloody green basically makes it look like a positive rep system alone.

 

[Skionz]

I said in my opinion. And my opinion still stands and I disagree with yours.

However, if you'd like to get the dictionary out, let's do it.

According to Google (which I trust, I don't know about you):

• reputable: "having a good reputation"
• reputation: "the beliefs or opinions that are generally held about someone or something"

So, by definition, reputation is not how legit a person is. It's what people generally think about that person.

I've never seen the reaction system as a system that determines reputation. You can still have 2000+ ratings and still be an ass and hard to work with. That's not reputable, in my eyes.

We are heading a bit off-topic now though. Let's try and reel it back into the suggestion at hand.

Ratings define how people think of you. If your optimistic or creative someone leaves a rating that says that is how they feel and your total reputation as some would call it rises. If someone doesn't like you they aren't going to leave positive ratings.

 

[Renovix]

https://xenforo.com/community/threads/resource-removal.92263/
****** being brivium.

As for the suggestion itself, use the search function, similar things have been suggested before.

That doesn't mean MC-Market can not use Brivium add-ons?

 

[tjrgg]

Ratings define how people think of you. If your optimistic or creative someone leaves a rating that says that is how they feel and your total reputation as some would call it rises. If someone doesn't like you they aren't going to leave positive ratings.

Again, I don't consider reputation a number. I don't consider reputation to "rise" as a number increases. All of us have a reputation. It's just about how many people know about that reputation and how good it is.

That doesn't mean MC-Market can not use Brivium add-ons?

No, but it means it won't.

 

[Ivain]

oh gods not another one....
here we go...

I know bosny likes to use maintained addons so here you go:
https://brivium.com/resources/advanced-reputation-system.281/

I am here to present my initiative which will make this reputation system work well:

Why we need this:
MCM is primarily a marketplace forum. It is not focused on discussion. Therefore, we should use some sort of points system to determine the credibility of a seller.

Proposal:
The reputation points would be shown below ratings. Users could give other users reputation by cilcking on it and giving them either positive or negative reputation.

Preventing abuse:
Users can be limited to the amount of reps per day they can give. Let's say, 5 reps per day.

Each user Premium or Supreme would be able to give +1/+0/-1.
Staff would be able to give from +3 to -3.
Admins would be able to give from +10 to -10.

This will prevent abuse, so that people can't make multiple accounts and rep people.

Policies/rules:
We can also implement policies to prevent abuse.

Modification (Rep Kill):
Basically, rep killing would be an efficient way to punish a user for abusing it. This would require a modification. This would mean that all of a user's positive reputation would be removed permanently.

Implement policies of what is considered abuse. False scammer reps is a good example, however what is determined abuse will be fully up to staff.

Potential problems fixed:
Problem: People will ask for rep. What should we do?
Solution: Simple. Implement extremely strict policies which will deter people from doing this.

Problem: There's nothing we can do about people asking for it via skype and other off-site networks.
Solution: True, but they can still be punished if they provide enough evidence.


This is a WIP, I will keep updating it. Ajdin, I hope you take this into consideration in at least some way. It's a good idea and this site needs a reputation system as such. Thanks.

'points' have no value. they do not tell you what the person did to earn it. they do not tell you who gave it, or how reliable said person was. They're just as pointless as people that say "VOUCH!" and nothing more.

'rep kill'
I don't know how staff would find out about abuse, but it would be all too easy to make false reports.

"implement extremely strict policies" like what exactly? How do you distinguish between a friend vouching without being asked or having made a deal, and a legitimate client doing the same?

Whenever the quantity of something counts over the quality, people will start farming them. I've done it (if relatively little, way back), you've done it, we've all done or at least considered it, back when 'ratings' were considered relevant.

With a number system, quantity will be all that counts. that was also one of the drawbacks of the trade feedback system, but that countered it a little by requiring an explanation to be typed.
Still, abuse for that was very easy both ways, because it could not be moderated heavily enough without over-exerting the staff team.

The current 'system' works for the very reason that it's not a system. People make up their own minds on who is reliable and who isn't. If they want to do that via vouches, fine. If they want to do it by the number of posts/reactions someone has, that's their problem, as long as they don't bandy on about it.

Finally, your reason why we need this: Mcmarket being a marketplace, so we should use points to determine reputation.
While I will agree that as a market we aren't a discussions forum, I do not see why this should mean a points-based system.

IRL business does not have plus or minus points. People learn from their experience and their network who can be trusted and who will try to scam you. They can afford that, because they use contracts.
Of course, our ToS "contracts" don't have nearly as much weight as an official signed contract. But we can still test the waters by 'vouch copies' (though not the retarded thing of asking for vouch copies on a premade, that's BS), by giving away some free stuff, or going first on a small deal.

Business is about risks. It always will be, reputation system or not.
A numerical system like this just adds an additional, unnecessary risk. This risk is that people will start to rely on it again, and someone who's been farming it will abuse that trust.
That, or the regulations will be so strict as to choke the flow of trade here, because clients are afraid to vouch because they might do something wrong.