Should We Add a Reputation System?

[Bill284]

Kind of, we're exhausted from getting reports in the back about people giving wrong advice. Sometimes we get long winded people that send us page long dramatic situations and demand us to investigate, or else. After half a dozen of us spend a collective 12 hours working on investigating and discussing what to do, then the member has a temper tantrum and leaves the site and we not only lost the member, but that 12 hours that 6 of us will never get back. There are a thousand examples I could give, this is just one. The list is endless.

So I figured if we put that responsibility on the community itself, and remove us from the picture, you all could police yourself in that regard, saving us a thousand hours a year from stuff we never should have been forced to deal with to begin with.

In my mind I see this helping the person looking for help, and the community as a whole, and my staff from wasting valuable time energy and money on somebody's drama from a misunderstanding on how to water a plant or if you should balance your pH or flush or not.

We spend almost all of our time dealing with drama from trolls, tattletales, crybabies and trouble makers. If we could limit some of that, weed have time to create content and take us to the next level. Otherwise, we just keep spinning wheels while the rest of the industry takes off without us. We are not social workers or psychologists, we are activists, entrepreneurs and volunteers on a mission to change international laws.

So really this is the issue your trying to solve.
Complaints about an interaction not going as the O.P. would have liked?
Or the outcome not satisfactory?
Grading the people answering won't improve the complaining I'm afraid.
Regardless of the experience of the member replying the onus is on the O.P.
Improper or incomplete information is common and instructions are sometimes not understood or followed.
Thus creating the complaint issue.
So the member giving advice will get a bad review, without any errors on their part.
This could lead to people not helping for fear of a poor review.
As with the voting system possibly a system where you need some experience on the site before you can go to the admin with a time consuming issue or complaint.
Someone with 3 posts shouldn't be taking up 12 hrs of admins time.
Not to diminish the value of a new member.
It's a difficult situation with no clear answers.
I don't see the complaints so I'm not really qualified to vote.
But the question and answer system has a good percentage of correct responses with mostly favorable results.
Improving it will be difficult without us knowing exactly what to do to be more compatible with new members.
Or existing members with issues.
I am sorry I don't have an answer to fix the issue.
Unfortunately we all pitch in trying to help, it's our nature.
Believing what we are saying will help, that's all just trying to help.
Unfortunately it's not always 100 applicable to the situation and may be complained about.
I'll finish reading the rest in a bit.




#Vivosun #Love What You Grow
Bill284

 

[Peat Phreak]

I think still this would be misleading... I've seen posts get tons of likes that are flat out wrong or bad advice, but got a lot of likes because the person who made the post was popular.

This happens a lot in every weed forum. The like system is often a popularity contest.

I can think of many times when a technical comment is highly upvoted on Reddit or anywhere else and the comment is either completely wrong or partially wrong.

And when someone comes along with actual facts backed by actual science that refutes what the hivemind has been preaching, they tend to get their feelings hurt and put the refuter on ignore. Awww...

 

[The70’s]

I think over time good advice always surfaces, not sure if this age ol’ process can be structured…..

I do think that anything that would help the collective would be good

 

[Icemud]

"needs more cal-mag"

 

[HopHead]

Reputation system:

From my perspective it kinda already exists. It appears in the threads as members chime in. Members agree, disagree, point out flaws, explain, give links, acknowledge other member's advice, etc. I think a member seeking advice has a responsibility to weigh what members suggest. If they follow the wrong advice then maybe they'll learn and adjust. Nothing in this world is perfect.

By giving a star system or other means of elevating one member above another would cause problems IMO. In essence it would say 'these members are worth listening to more than those members'. A member who hasn't been recognized with a star might have the best advice on a particular query but may be ignored because they don't have a star. And a star holder may give advice which is less beneficial than a member without a star.

I think adding how long members have been in 420 could be beneficial in working towards the objectives expressed by the founder. It wouldn't guarantee anything other than experience. It may instill trust.

IMO this is the best forum I've seen. Compassion and respect permeate this site. If members intentionally undermine then they should be barred. They don't belong here.

 

[Savvage61]

seems to me the answer would be a disclaimer when you join the forum something like. here at 420 mag we have a variety of growers who are will to share and help new growers HOW EVER FORUM MEMBERS ARE NOT PAID EXPERTS USE ANY SUGGESTIONS OR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE NOT OFFICIAL OR GUARANTEED RESULT 420 MAGAZINE IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR FORUM ADVICE well not exactly like this but something along the line I agree that if we start rating members it will rip the forum apart and we have something special here as it is

 

[BeezLuiz]

Someone made mention of the post itself receiving the rating and not so much the member themselves. That's sounding keen. Then again any member who has given those recognized answers aren't represented as such a member when they chime into answer a new growers question, but that new grower would be able to see on their own post what answers collectively have been judged to be the best.

I voted "no" on the original question about implementing a "reputation system", but I could get behind this idea of rating the post itself. Something like having a question at the bottom of the post asking "Was this advice helpful?" with a thumbs up or thumbs down response.

This way, folks giving the specific advice can also get some feedback without being branded as such everywhere else. Seems like it would be fairly straight-forward to implement.

 

[OGpapa]

@420 Imagine!

420 mag University!

Where users and guest come to educate themselves. Just like we already do!

But. While learning...

@420 users can test on the section or subject.

Adding some kind of insignia, to show at what level they understand the material. Like bronze star to gold star

I would keep next to the user name basic, but the user profile would show what level of understanding they have for subjects ie.

Soil
Hydro
Pest control
Organics
Plant health
Etc
I would include sub sections that go more in depth about each.

If users ask a direct question to someone they feel comfortable asking. Both should be able to rate the experience...Quality of information given, and how users took the information.

I see so often. The same user, the same issue, getting all the same answers. Doing nothing with it, even arguing back.

I understand sometimes it's hard to hear your wrong. But I hate trying to help others who can't help themselves.

But how many of us kept trying? 420 is full of life.love. and respect.

And maybe the occasional disagreement.


But can't we agree. We could all continually educate ourselves?!

 

[420]

Thank you for everyone's feedback, I really appreciate it.

Although we've had a reputation system in the past, we never used it in connection with rating answers to questions.

I can see now that it would just open up a can of worms and create division in our community.

What a bummer, thought I had the magic answer, yet again you guys prove me wrong.

Pat's suggestion of rating the answers instead of the members is brilliant, maybe that could be a solution? If everyone else agrees, we can look into the possibility of our software and resources being tweaked to achieve this.

Maybe we can also experiment with trophies to highlight worthy members, without dissing others who may not be at the same level yet. This could be setup so that trophies would be earned automatically by certain actions, which would remove the task of us having to be involved in the process, unless there are problems.

 

[Mudballs]

Yay social engineering!
If you keep it so posts cant go negative like reddit and then it gets hidden, I dont see a problem with a post getting high honors.
Trophies are from battles won or sporting achievements..sigh, is there another wording perhaps, lol. Yeah i cant...immediately find a flaw in that.
No post hiding or negative rep and i wont fight.

 

[Icemud]

Honestly why change anything. The forum is fine how it is.

A simple disclaimer for all members which says

"posts and information here is merely opinions of others and may be rooted in fact, or can be completely false. You as a independent thinking human must take all posts and information with a grain of salt and use your god given logic to research things yourself before trying them on your grow. 420 Magazine and its members are not responsible, liable or even concerned with uneducated decisions you choose to do to your grow that may cause harm, or ruin your plants. Click the X if you agree".

Really not a fan of how everything is going full "nanny" mode.. government, internet, forums... Let people be people. More lessons are learned from mistakes than from spoonfed answers.

 

[Mudballs]

Honestly why change anything. The forum is fine how it is.

A simple disclaimer for all members which says

"posts and information here is merely opinions of others and may be rooted in fact, or can be completely false. You as a independent thinking human must take all posts and information with a grain of salt and use your god given logic to research things yourself before trying them on your grow. 420 Magazine and its members are not responsible, liable or even concerned with uneducated decisions you choose to do to your grow that may cause harm, or ruin your plants. Click the X if you agree".

Really not a fan of how everything is going full "nanny" mode.. government, internet, forums... Let people be people. More lessons are learned from mistakes than from spoonfed answers.

Yes but...this is his house...and change isnt always a bad thing...and he wants change So i try to be helpful..helpful to growers...helpful to admins...just a character flaw. Plus, i like this joint

 

[420]

Honestly why change anything. The forum is fine how it is.

A simple disclaimer for all members which says

"posts and information here is merely opinions of others and may be rooted in fact, or can be completely false. You as a independent thinking human must take all posts and information with a grain of salt and use your god given logic to research things yourself before trying them on your grow. 420 Magazine and its members are not responsible, liable or even concerned with uneducated decisions you choose to do to your grow that may cause harm, or ruin your plants. Click the X if you agree".

Really not a fan of how everything is going full "nanny" mode.. government, internet, forums... Let people be people. More lessons are learned from mistakes than from spoonfed answers.

I've already covered the disclaimer issue several times, we have that covered.

Trying to digest what you said, are you saying you think we should stay stuck in the past and never evolve or try to add new features?

Not to be a smarty pants, but are you still on a flip phone or blackberry or do you have an android or iphone?

What's wrong with awarding members for doing outstanding things?

 

[Pat Puffer]

It really wasn't my idea. One of y'all mentioned something like that and I reiterated it.

If it doesn't work, it's always easy to revert back to what did work.

 

[Jose Tall Grass]

If it doesn't work, it's always easy to revert back to what did work.

If it ain’t broke don’t fix it

 

[Mudballs]

Need to add incentives...get 20 trophies a year and you win a free 100w light or some shit...incentivize the minions for good behavior lol
Bet yall get onboard then huh

 

[VetSmoke85]

Why aren't people grasping that whilst we may not see a problem, the backroom staff obviously are? They deal with the nonsense so we don't have to. So much that we don't even notice it. They're just trying to find ways to improve things for them and us. If it doesn't work and has a negative impact on the forum do you really think they'll keep it and nosedive into the ground? That's my perspective anyway.

 

[Graytail]

It seems to me that the flaw in a rep system is the users, isn't it? If everyone respected the worth of reputation points, they wouldn't give them casually, or for competitive reasons.

But ... it's the interwebs, so ...

And we don't want reps given by administrators, 'cause we see how that goes ...

I liked reps before, so I see no good reason not to have them (as long as there aren't negative points). But it doesn't look like that solves the expertise issue.

As far as titles, I always liked the idea of Librarians. Some people just know where to point you. Maybe someone (admins) could award a Librarian title under their name, and advise people to find one of them. Could even be Hydro Librarian, or LOS, or Lighting, etc.

But who's judging and awarding? Us or the admins? We're not that reliable, and admins have responsibilities already.

 

[Pat Puffer]

Envision a completely hypothetical situation where a completely novice/fledgling grower happens upon this site while looking for some answers.

They use the handy dandy search bar that we have and they are then flooded with info and sift through one thread to arrive at an answer. The thread is old so there isn't any real traffic on it. They are just browsing and find some information regarding their issue.

In reference to the threads contained in the vast archive that is 420 Magazine, there sometimes are valid points made and answers given, but still at times there are some erroneous claims that have been purported to work for an individual. Even sometimes we make mistakes responding by skimming over some valuable information regarding a person's particular grow.

This system in turn would help all to decipher and give discernment to see what posts and info are actually helpful and which ones aren't. This would aide the new grower to determine what posts/answers they should focus on, and perhaps which ones to take with a grain of salt.

And to touch on the matter, there are obviously issues that have arisen that even I am unaware of given the impact to an individual and it's ramifications.

This in no real way is going to impact the site to a point it will be rendered unusable. It is just going to be implemented to further reveal what relevant answers and info are posted to any given thread.

The voting (I believe) is going to be accomplished by the community as a whole. That way there are no favorites being played for or to, and it is like a self governing role granted to all members with 50 or more posts.

 

[Graytail]

So it's not about the poster at all ... ? The point is to validate the post itself - if it's trustful or not.

That makes the focus easier.

The onus is still on the viewer - can't be a dumbass - can't just take the first advice you get.

I go by likes or product reviews when I'm searching for info. The likes on our posts can show that. A lot of likes is different from a handful. I still get likes on posts I made 7 years ago, and that's gotta mean it was helpful years later. So we have that already ...

Dunno. I can't think on the systems level.