| - | . | Low quality posts | . | Ok quality posts | . | Good quality posts | . | Great quality posts | . | - |
| When? | . | Non crypto related topics | . | General crypto topics & News | . | Technical Updates from chains & Detailed analysis | . | In depth technical & Coding | . | status |
| user1 | . | 20 | . | 10 | . | 5 | . | 5 | . | Neutral |
| user2 | . | 20 | . | 3 | . | 1 | . | 0 | . | (https://www.altcoinstalks.com/Themes/default/images/lowqp.png) |
| user3 | . | 5 | . | 10 | . | 10 | . | 10 | . | (https://www.altcoinstalks.com/Themes/default/images/hero.png) |
| user4 | . | 5 | . | 10 | . | 10 | . | 20 | . | (https://www.altcoinstalks.com/Themes/default/images/expert.png) |
| ------- | - | -------------- | - | -------------- | - | -------------- | - | -------------- | - | -------------- |
| Admin | . | - | . | - | . | - | . | - | . | - |
It is normal to have a mixture of different quality posts, but when most of your posts belong to one type, this will grant you one of these badges:
This will lead to the opposite effect of increasing technical spam and having less discussions on General crypto topics.+1 by my side
As if I created all posts in Non crypto related topics, this does not mean that the quality of posts is low or spam.
In short, classifying the quality of posts based on the boards will be bad, it is better to rely on decentralized things like +Karma, quality bar, and voting.
I ask if the thread is open for discussion because it seems to be a very debatable matter.This will lead to the opposite effect of increasing technical spam and having less discussions on General crypto topics.+1 by my side
As if I created all posts in Non crypto related topics, this does not mean that the quality of posts is low or spam.
In short, classifying the quality of posts based on the boards will be bad, it is better to rely on decentralized things like +Karma, quality bar, and voting.
There is only one technical board, all the rest are non-technical discussions, and there is not much activity there.
The method of implementation itself is also a rather bad idea because it is centralized, it will be based on some personal opinions. At the same time, an additional burden for the administration, I assume that you will have to go through all the posts of all active members during the month. That's thousands of posts.
I am very sure that there are much more important tasks to improve the forum that could be devoted to time
Probably is okay to add the expert badge to someone who has proven technical knowledge, but tagging someone because he doesn't know how to sign a message on an address is a pretty bad thing.
Wouldn't it be better to improve the already existing karma system? If it were visible which post received more karma (+ or -) points, it would be obvious to everyone what the quality of the post or the user who wrote it is.
Don't think is a good idea what so ever to be it bluntly similar to what others have suggested. A centralised ranking system is simply not a good idea at all and it would only drive quality users away so I suggest a speedy rollback of this proposal. As examplens said, it'd be better just to improve current karma system, even if complicated it'd be less work in the long-term.sure, freemind gave the go ?
Can we otherwise just launch the senate election already now details have been finalised and discuss forum policy over there with elected reps?
A centralised ranking system is simply not a good idea at all and it would only drive quality users away so I suggest a speedy rollback of this proposal. As examplens said, it'd be better just to improve current karma system, even if complicated it'd be less work in the long-term.
A centralised ranking system is simply not a good idea at all and it would only drive quality users away so I suggest a speedy rollback of this proposal. As examplens said, it'd be better just to improve current karma system, even if complicated it'd be less work in the long-term.
What about if the badges mentioned by the admin, could be added according to Karma count earned in the specific Cryptocurrency board?
Karma is a already a good way to measure post quality.
this is exactly my point,This imo falls under stricter moderation rather than a badge, if there is zero tolerance for low quality content and they get deleted often, people will stop making such content or it will reduce. Reducing the benefits of low quality posts, will also help as there is no motivation to prop up post count.
most users on this forum jump on each opportunity to discuss anything .... except crypto
our forum is flooded with low quality content because of that
if more than half your posts are about something other than crypto > it really indicates you are reaching for the low hanging fruits
~snip~
sure, freemind gave the go ?
I think incentivizing technical conversations with Karma or additional tokens (or a combination of both) would be more stimulating than "flagging" users with those badges. I know they are different ways of pursuing the same goal, but I think we can say that it is somewhat aggressive. In any case, before having a better formed opinion, I would like to know what more users think and read their opinions.You have quite a nice point here. From my experience so far on forums like this , technical board are always the best and have the most contributions most of the time. Anyone here that frequently visits the technical board will definitely agree to the fact s that technical post are very engaging and actually helps members slot in different ways and this includes both the person probably asking the technical question and those contributing too.
A centralised ranking system is simply not a good idea at all and it would only drive quality users away so I suggest a speedy rollback of this proposal. As examplens said, it'd be better just to improve current karma system, even if complicated it'd be less work in the long-term.
What about if the badges mentioned by the admin, could be added according to Karma count earned in the specific Cryptocurrency board?
Or even disable +Karma to posts which are not crypto related.
Imo, more transparency to Karma should be top priority. Knowing which posts received Karma, and who gave karma to that posts, would fix most abuses and highlight best posts.
Karma is a already a good way to measure post quality.
This index will be updated every now and then, by me, global mods and president / vice presidentIt is a bad idea to give so much power to admin and moderators, and I don't see how this can improve quality of the posts in any way.
Each time the last 20-50 posts will be taken in consideration
This index will be updated every now and then, by me, global mods and president / vice presidentIt is a bad idea to give so much power to admin and moderators, and I don't see how this can improve quality of the posts in any way.
Each time the last 20-50 posts will be taken in consideration
If you want to reduce number of posts unrelated with crypto than you should delete and unite some boards and topics in Further Discussions.
I am against this proposal, and I think this would only create more confusion in forum.
If admin disable signatures in boards not related to crypto, we will see an increase in activity in crypto related boards for sure.
This could be an idea to reduce posts about offtopic discussions
If admin disable signatures in boards not related to crypto, we will see an increase in activity in crypto related boards for sure.
This could be an idea to reduce posts about offtopic discussions
Correct, but that would not solve the problem, that would only move the problem from one place to another, from my point of view. If the administrator disables signatures on a given board, many users will stop posting to that board. As you know, there are some sections of the forum where posts are not counted and are not used to increase ranks, but eliminating signatures to "move" traffic to certain boards does not seem like the solution to me. As I said in my previous post, incentivizing with Karma (if it is possible to automate the process it would be much better) and forum tokens could be another possible solution to this.
Those low quality threads should be locked or deleted even if nobody has reported them and if a moderator sees them. And if you go ahead with this content then you restrict users from many boards because not everyone can discuss fluently in those designated boards and once they are force to make comments in those boards then you will see garbage posts in those boards. Therefore the best way is to allow everyone to post around the forum. And let those who are good in specific boards should also post and that is the liberty you have been preaching.I ask if the thread is open for discussion because it seems to be a very debatable matter.This will lead to the opposite effect of increasing technical spam and having less discussions on General crypto topics.+1 by my side
As if I created all posts in Non crypto related topics, this does not mean that the quality of posts is low or spam.
In short, classifying the quality of posts based on the boards will be bad, it is better to rely on decentralized things like +Karma, quality bar, and voting.
There is only one technical board, all the rest are non-technical discussions, and there is not much activity there.
The method of implementation itself is also a rather bad idea because it is centralized, it will be based on some personal opinions. At the same time, an additional burden for the administration, I assume that you will have to go through all the posts of all active members during the month. That's thousands of posts.
I am very sure that there are much more important tasks to improve the forum that could be devoted to time
Probably is okay to add the expert badge to someone who has proven technical knowledge, but tagging someone because he doesn't know how to sign a message on an address is a pretty bad thing.
Wouldn't it be better to improve the already existing karma system? If it were visible which post received more karma (+ or -) points, it would be obvious to everyone what the quality of the post or the user who wrote it is.
this is exactly my point,
most users on this forum jump on each opportunity to discuss anything .... except crypto
our forum is flooded with low quality content because of that
if more than half your posts are about something other than crypto > it really indicates you are reaching for the low hanging fruits
yeah sure, let's discuss a forum policy, it's much easier than learning and discussing what mainnet was launched, or what regulation or license was done concerning crypto ..
when i created the shit post badge i wanted to give it to many users, but reconsidered as that would penalise them signature wise.
If admin disable signatures in boards not related to crypto, we will see an increase in activity in crypto related boards for sure.But you know what kind of post increase we are going to see... certainly not anything constructive and good, if they all just move from those boards to crypto related.
If you want quality discussion you need to have different opinions, and people that don't agree, not everyone writing nice things.
If admin disable signatures in boards not related to crypto, we will see an increase in activity in crypto related boards for sure.I agree that disabling signatures would only move spam to another part of the forum. It's not a solution. I am not even in favour of any kind of "punishment" or labelling of those who did not write about technical matters.
This could be an idea to reduce posts about offtopic discussions
You also need knowledge people participating in the discussions.I think inflow of new quality members stopped a while ago, and good discussion is harder to find in any forum these days.
I think we have that here, and more reputable members from bitcointalk are still coming.
Tell me what is that new D.TEAM badge in your profile, and in some other members?
You have some fancy new role in forum? 8)
This is a new fancy role ;)Interesting, decentralized team role 8)
People who makes lots of reports of some kind of useful tools for the forum