From: Hermit (virus@hermit.net)
Date: Sat Sep 27 2003 - 00:23:24 MDT
Elven one, perhaps I should whisper that my reply was to Kirk Steele - who has just rejoined us, and who does not know all about the reputation system.... and providing some hints to others that they need to pay attention to their involvement in the rating system, because while it provides privileges, it is also a social commitment that requires attention. Members who don't fulfil their part of the bargain (to keep it relevent) cannot anticipate being favorably regarded by other members who do.
Noticing that nobody else had apparently noticed Kirk's post to the effect that he has joined our reputation system I chose to reply as I did, with a little friendly advice on using the system effectively.
The reputation system has many purposes. One is an attempt to regulate conduct without having to apply the draconian consequences of silencing or disownment which previously were our only remedies. We have established some formal and informal processes, and are in the process of establishing others, to ensure that our BBS, which is not just our church, meeting hall and neighborhood bar, but also our primary advertising of ourselves to the public, stops looking like a drunken brawling pit and serves as a friendly local bar where Virians can meet, teach learn and discuss things. You are welcome to join in that process, formally on the wiki, less formally on the BBS and informally on IRC. Just please don't tread on it.
As for the rest of your post, when choosing to "break the rules", where the "rules" are a necessary social contract, whether for reasons of conscience or otherwise, please understand that part of what you are doing when you do so, is agreeing to accept the consequences of your actions. Making a martyr of yourself is your choice, but should not usually be necessary - and will hopefully become less so as the systems evolve. Complaining about the consequences is just embarrassing - and objecting to the system itself is futile, when the key to changing it is in your hands as much as anyone else's. Note particularly that as I observed to Kirk, it is easier to move down than up, especially during the learning curve hopefully currently underway, as members discover that tit-for-tat, while a theoretically elegant strategy in a zero-sum game, does not necessarily result in an optimum strategy in a non zero-sum social environment - which this is.
My recommendation to you is that beyond rating, and keeping your ratings of others up to date, that you ignore the results of the reputation system except as a source of feedback of the community's reaction to whatever games you may choose to play - as others may well be - indeed probably are - playing different games. This is why the results are no longer in "reputation order.' It is easy to establish which way your reputation is moving, less easy to play hierarchical games this way. However, as you experiment and select your game strategies, you should be aware that the reputation system contains a few members very competent in game theory - and others who are less so - who will react in different ways to varying strategies, introducing a complex, time delayed, chaotic factor into any games you may choose to introduce. This will probably have the beneficial effect of (at least initially) breaking local plateau effects (later less so as active involvement itself will likely plateau). Further be aware that n
ot everyone spends much time looking at the BBS and adjusting their factors - which makes it more dificult for you to establish whether changes were triggered by yourself or other factors. Without a dialog, such as this one, or those introduced by Kalkor, which might happen through the reputation system itself, through the Karma system (intended to rate posts), through the BBS or on IRC, it makes it more difficult to play the game effectively. Communicating (or miscommunicating) a strategy can be helpful in and of itself, and may result in feedback which is even more useful.
The system as implemented is flexible (I in fact feel still requiring too much intervention, but this can be added too as usage establishes preferences) and can handle most any games you choose to try. Don't criticise the system unless you can offer concrete suggestions, and please consider that real people have to spend real time dealing with changes and their implementations. Through the rating system, possibly in communications, including reading and updating documentation, as well as, potentially, at the software level. This burden still falls on to relatively few shoulders, and establishing how to spread the burden is another laborious, time-consuming and very tool and consensus dependent process. And the greater the load placed on those carrying it, the less likely we are to be able to spend time on evolution. One example of how not to do things is to start a project, leave in the middle of it, forcing others to pick up the pieces, and return later with new suggestions. The more predictable - and relia
ble - the players are, the easier it is for everyone else to plan their own time allocations effectively.
Kind Regards
Hermit
---- This message was posted by Hermit to the Virus 2003 board on Church of Virus BBS. <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=54;action=display;threadid=29293> --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Sep 27 2003 - 00:23:30 MDT