Greenlighter---> Bluelighter (thoughts about changes)

Mugz

Mugz

Bluelighter
Joined
Apr 6, 2004
Messages
15,449
Location
You fucking know, I post it enough
There has been a massive influx of new members recently, especially in the 6-APB thread in PD.

I know reputation points for bluelight has been discussed and decided against but I am thinking of something a bit different.

I was thinking that it might be a good idea to have something similar to reputation points for greenlighters that bluelighters can vote on.

Say a greenlighter breaks a forum rule, or contributes off topic chat in one of the focus threads or forums he could get a negative point. But if a constructive post is made then they get a positive point.

There could even be a way to fast track to being a bluelighter based on the points system, and penalties for greenlighters getting negative points being that it would take them longer to become a bluelighter.

Instead of the number of posts made being the deciding factor, a target amount of positive points could be the decider.

Maybe this would make greenlighters think twice before blatently breaking the rules that they most likely haven't even read.

Even if all it did was encourage them to make constructive posts while they were a greenlighter then even that would be of benefit to the site.

Was just a thought that I had,

What do you think?
 
I think that member's different interpretations of constructive and off topic would be to variable for such a system to be fair or useful. Also I think new members can feel over-scrutinized already as things are. Setting up a rating of them might cause the loss of people with a good potential.
 
What about if the positive and negative points could only be voted for for specific reasons such as

Negative reasons
- against forum rules
- against sub forum guidelines
- flaming
- trolling
- Totally off topic post (only for focus threads such as big and dandy threads)

Positive Reason
- Constructive post (constructive to the thread in question)
- Funny Post (in social threads)
- Informative post


Then you could also just get a point for every post made too.

Make it something like 40 points needed to become a bluelighter

Every post that they make with a negative point on it deduct a point from their total, and every positive point add one onto their total, then every other post also add one to their total.

E.g

Greenlighter1

30 random posts + 30 30
10 posts against bl rules -10 20
4 Informative posts +8 28
5 more random posts +5 33
4 Funny posts +8 41

Greenlighter1 becomes Bluelighter1

I don't think that it will make greenlighters feel overscrutinized.
 
Its an interesting idea, however I'm not sure that the system is capable of something like that... however, imagining it was, how would we enforce the rating system? Would there be a way to keep track of who voted for what? Would there be a punishment for abusing the system? What if someone decides they dont like a particular greenlighter so they start voting them negatively for everything, how is that person delt with, or even kept track of?

Its an interesting idea, but again I dont think its something our system can do, and theres all those other questions that would come into play.
 
Around BL a lot of positive feedback happens already and negative feedback as well. Will formalizing this all really be much of a help? IMO greenlighters with an inclination and capacity to "learn the ropes" will be learning aside from this proposed system and people disinclined won't likely gain much from it either.

Reason I am relatively sure it won't happen is that when the staff evaluates your proposal they will see more work & complications for not much gain. Just my guess though.
 
Could it not be done via some sort of extension on the report system. Where people could report a greenlighters post for positive or negative points.

I think that it would be in everyones best interests to keep who voted for what private, as people might abuse the system to get some sort of voting fame.

But maybe the mod that deals with the report of the positive or negative post could edit the post and add on the reason for the point.

I know the moderators have enough work as it is and this would have to be policed by the moderators too.

My opinion is that it would most likely reduce future instances of rule breaks, if people start off posting one way then they are likely to continue in that manner. So in the future it could conceivably reduce the work for the moderators.
 
Taking the 6-APB thread in PD as an example, there is an influx of new members who have made 20 or 30 posts, and none of those posts have been constructive, most of them breaking the rules.

If a system like this was started for greenlighters then it would encourage all members to report more posts that were against the rules more often, and may even deter greenlighters that are constantly breaking rules as they would be getting a notification every time they broke the rules or did something to obtain a negative point.

I think that this can only be beneficial to the site.
 
Thats what the report system is there for already, and we encourage people to use it. Have you reported these rule breaking posts you've seen? That would be the biggest benefit to the site. If they break the rules and it gets reported, they already do get a notification that they've broken a rule. Also, some moderators do send PMs for particularly good or outstanding posts already... so this really just sounds like a lot of extra work for something we pretty much already do.
 
I think we'd see a lot less people joining Bluelight if such a system was put in place. If I was a newbie greenlighter I wouldn't like the thought of having to be judged "worthy" of becoming a bluelighter.
 
The main reason of Greenlighter status is to discourage people abusing the PM system right?? I have had 2 or 3 people over the last fortnight signing up specifically to send pm's (for unknown reasons, probably dodgy)...


Apart from the inability to send PM's I can't think of any other reason to reach Bluelighter status apart from the image the person would project across the board.

Just a few thoughts :)
 
What about a change to what happens when you are a greenlighter too. Maybe if in some forums their posts have to be moderator approved before they are visible. This could be helpful in the focus forums. Would also make it harder for shills to sign up and then make a couple of shilly posts and never come back.
 
With good intentions, you've created a very cumbersome system to maintain :\ As to the :
Taking the 6-APB thread in PD as an example, there is an influx of new members who have made 20 or 30 posts, and none of those posts have been constructive, most of them breaking the rules.
Click to expand...

If a staff member removes the thread, it deducts from their post count, which encourages proper posting and discourages proper posting to obtain BLer status. Furthermore, if they are breaking rules, we do have warnings and infractions to more firmly send the message to the n00bs, but it hinges a lot on staff knowing the violations are occurring, which comes back to:

Thats what the report system is there for already, and we encourage people to use it. Have you reported these rule breaking posts you've seen? That would be the biggest benefit to the site.
Click to expand...

as a final comment, I'll address this

What about a change to what happens when you are a greenlighter too. Maybe if in some forums their posts have to be moderator approved before they are visible. This could be helpful in the focus forums.
Click to expand...

and say we've entertained various forum access based on member level (ie, GLers and unregistereds only see certain forums whilst others are hidden) but it has always come back to the entirety of BL being our main selling point to get new members - both our social forums AND our harm reduction forums, so limiting visibility or access to those has consistently been shot down.



I'm, personally, very sympathetic to the desire to limit the amount of n00b noise in forums - especially places where key harm reduction information is being discussed....but a big part of why we're here is to get new people to learn more about these things, and having them join and learn the ropes is part of the cost to educate them and spread the word.
 
TheLoveBandit said:
I'm, personally, very sympathetic to the desire to limit the amount of n00b noise in forums - especially places where key harm reduction information is being discussed....but a big part of why we're here is to get new people to learn more about these things, and having them join and learn the ropes is part of the cost to educate them and spread the word.
Click to expand...

I think ED is one of the biggest areas where noobs post and yes often there questions are silly or have answers that are easily found BUT its better to accept and help them and in turn educate them (including education about our directory so they know where to look in future) than to stop them posting and not have them educated.

Stopping noobs from posting would be a very bad step imo.
 
I am really not suggesting that we stob noobs posting, I would never have made it if that was the rule. I am only suggesting that the first five ever posts from greenlighters be "moderator approves" and that maybe the other posts be looked at a little closer than normal posts :\

Really don't want to alienate anyone, just trying to think of ways to encourage people to follow the rules from the very start
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top