Tokens System

[OccamsRazor]

Does anyone else think that the tokens system is essentially flawed?

My main problem is that the tokens system and by implication the title system should be a measure of the debating talent of the user.
I am a little bothered by someone whose entire argument is "No you're just wrong" can be described as 'Sage'.

I think that a better system would be for tokens to be provided by other users (not donated from their own collection) as a reward for a well thought out argument. I guess that has its own problems though.

Ah well...back to hearing someone who argues from the philosophical stangeof "Well you are just stupid" being described as an 80,000 token 'Guru'.

[otseng]

Of course, I am hoarding mine so that I can get into the top ten as soon as possible, so you can all keep your grubby hands off.

As of right now, you are in the top ten.

And I just noticed that I'm down to #9. Boy, some people have really posted a lot.

So I will sit back and wait for you site owners and admins to update the php

If anyone is willing to write this mod, I'd be willing to install it and give it a try.

[Bro Dave]

Okay, what about this; Each post could have two sets of arrows, one pointing up, and the other down. One set would be titled "agree/disagree", and the other set would be "presentation". If the reader is so moved, they vote up or down on each. The up arrows would be worth +1 pt, and the down arrows worth -1 pts. Only one vote per member per post would be allowed. The totals would take the place of the tokens, and titles would be optional. That way it would not "cost" anything to vote.

Any thoughts?

Bro Dave

( and I'd better not get any "down arrows on this post!"

[OccamsRazor]

Good idea Dave. I have seen forums which only have agree/disagree buttons, which I think causes a problem in that people only score if other members agree with their overall philosophy. I think that you mitigate this with your presentation buttons.
I think that the problem with the agree/disagree one is that it may just score based on the numbers in each different theological group.

The other problem I can think of is, which score (i.e. either presentation or agree/disagree) do you derive their title (e.g. Sage, Apprentice etc.) from?

Nice idea none the less . I'll give you +1 agree for your post.

[Bro Dave]

Good idea Dave. I have seen forums which only have agree/disagree buttons, which I think causes a problem in that people only score if other members agree with their overall philosophy. I think that you mitigate this with your presentation buttons.
I think that the problem with the agree/disagree one is that it may just score based on the numbers in each different theological group.

The other problem I can think of is, which score (i.e. either presentation or agree/disagree) do you derive their title (e.g. Sage, Apprentice etc.) from?

Nice idea none the less . I'll give you +1 agree for your post.

I think maybe "presentation" is not sufficient to award titles. Maybe it ought to be "presentation" & "content" together. I'd like to keep it simple, but ignoring either distorts too much. Acutally, whether one agrees or disagrees, is not relavent! It is, however, a nice easy way to comment, for those who are uncomfortable generating responses.

Bro Dave

[otseng]

Any thoughts?

Sounds good to me. The trick though is that someone would have to write this program.

[Bro Dave]

Hey! I think there's a rule that the guy who thinks up the solution, doen't have to worry whether or not it actually can be done!

Oh well...

Bro Dave