Why I miss old clickies: a lament...

[The Coil]

Prolly because it's plastered on the left of every post you make.. :whis:

LMAO

Shhh...don't tell everyone! People are going to figure out you're my inside man, and you won't be able to hack the website any more like you did the last time.

Ummm...perhaps I've said too much.

[Koen]

Have you been drinking koen??

I don't even have to ask you 'when?'

I can answer with a short 'YES' !

[McIvan]

I liked the old clickie system better too. :whis:

[Copper]

The old one was better but I prefer the fact that people are answerable to their posts on this one.

[The Coil]

The old one was better but I prefer the fact that people are answerable to their posts on this one.

Agreed...my only gripe is the 'no multiple clickies' aspect of the new system.

I liked the old clickie system better too. :whis:

Um, the fact that McIvan (noted clicky scrooge and all-around possesor of sound judgment) thinks the old system is better argues powerfully for reinstating it. About the only plus of the 'no multiple clicky' system I can see is that now I no longer have a reason to pester McIvan to increase the 3 per day limit - can't remember the last time I gave out 3 in a day.

[The Coil]

By the way, this is exactly the kind of amusing thread that has been missing from the Blitz lately...all catalyzed by clicky talk, you might note. Check out the view count on this vs. almost every other thread recently. It's what the people want.

Edit: And before some wise guy suggests it, I'd like to point out that I'm only responsible for about half of those views... ;)

[McIvan]

The old one was better but I prefer the fact that people are answerable to their posts on this one.

I sort of like that too, being able to see who gave you what, but then again anonymity has its good points too.....ie no targetted ill-feeling (because there's no one to direct it against) and people can leave their name in the comment if they wish to. Any abuse could be looked into by RD or Raz (as they had the ability to see who posted what (I didn't)).

The best thing about the old system was that you could tie to the specific post.....for example I could red rep a post of Spikes that was out of control, and then later on give him a couple of greens for some of his stunning tactical posts™. It was a nice counterpoint and did a much better job of conveying your actual feelings than the present fairly blunt instrument.

Let's keep the opinions coming...

[RedDevil]

I'm of the opinion it's fine the way it is now, as the previous version allowed one to abuse the system by giving clickies simply for the sake of giving them without regards to the underlying purpose of the system. Giving multiples of them over a period of the day or week even, is also abusive of the system in the respect for which it is representative of.

Green reputation clickies should be given for a post of worth, honor and notable acts of good samaritan-ship, not simply for making someone laugh or mentioning another posters post in a thread.
Red Rep points are for posts of poor attitude, dishonorable acts and arrogance, not simply for showing up or because it's Sunday.

By limiting the number of votes you can give a person to 1 and making it only go up or down depending on "their behavior" as you see it, I think this is actually spot on. This justifies the fact that in order to achieve a high reputation, you need to influence more than your "circle of friends" and get around more than just hanging out a small area of the club.

Spread your good around and you get more greenies, stick to one area and basically you get all you're going to get from the people you see every day, only. You would need to maintain your good character to keep those same few people in good graces, lest you begin to drop in points as your actions lower how much those same people feel about you over time.

By taking away the multiple giving of clickies, I would think the effect would be to see MORE good graces from members as they now have to influence MORE people to get those Rep points, rather than bump their pals for a few points because of a good joke today, and just for the hell of it tomorrow because you're my pal.

[The Coil]

Heh...I didn't mean to touch off a debate about old vs. new clickies, was really just musing on the role of clickies in encouraging posting.

But, a few thoughts, RD...In principle I agree with just about everything you are saying. In practice, I think there are a few other factors in play which lead me to think a bit differently on a few points...

I'm of the opinion it's fine the way it is now, as the previous version allowed one to abuse the system by giving clickies simply for the sake of giving them without regards to the underlying purpose of the system. Giving multiples of them over a period of the day or week even, is also abusive of the system in the respect for which it is representative of.

True...and I readily admit to being a wanton clickie giver. But I think the rep system (old or new) is only marginally functional as a rep system, and furthermore I think a true rep system is of limited usefulness (not no usefulness, mind you, but limited usefulness...I guess it's kinda nice to see what the aggregate board opinion is of someone...but I'm not sure why). I think the true usefulness of the clicky system is (ok, maybe I'm reiterating here...) as a behavioral response system...it provides a small reward encouraging good/entertaining/thoughtful posts, and a small punishment for posts people find annoying/offensive/whatever. As such, it serves to moderate extreme behavior and encourage that which the community finds worthwhile. So the clickie system in reality was (and I would argue is better off as) a good posting inducement system, which only was really a rep system in as much as one who posted clicky-worthy posts is viewed as having a good reputation (somewhat ironically, if you called it the "meaningless reward system", which is what it amounts to, I think it would be less effective...).

Now, I understand that the rep system is meant to be a rep system, and what I (and others) were doing with it falls outside of what it was probably intended to be. My main point is this: I think the clicky system is way more useful as a stimulator for interesting posts, and to insist it be a strict rep system robs it of that function. Again, I hope I'm not arguing...just pointing out a dynamic I saw at work.

Green reputation clickies should be given for a post of worth, honor and notable acts of good samaritan-ship, not simply for making someone laugh or mentioning another posters post in a thread.
Red Rep points are for posts of poor attitude, dishonorable acts and arrogance, not simply for showing up or because it's Sunday.

Again, that may be what the intent of the system is. But in practice people will use it however they see fit, unless you make people start justifying their clicky requests in writing or something. I think the new system is just as open to this sort of clicky mis-use. I myself have given several new clickies for really superfluous reasons...

By limiting the number of votes you can give a person to 1 and making it only go up or down depending on "their behavior" as you see it, I think this is actually spot on. This justifies the fact that in order to achieve a high reputation, you need to influence more than your "circle of friends" and get around more than just hanging out a small area of the club.

Spread your good around and you get more greenies, stick to one area and basically you get all you're going to get from the people you see every day, only. You would need to maintain your good character to keep those same few people in good graces, lest you begin to drop in points as your actions lower how much those same people feel about you over time.

By taking away the multiple giving of clickies, I would think the effect would be to see MORE good graces from members as they now have to influence MORE people to get those Rep points, rather than bump their pals for a few points because of a good joke today, and just for the hell of it tomorrow because you're my pal.

Once again, I agree in principle - when I first heard the new rules, I thought, sounds reasonable. But, in practice, I think it works out differently. What has happened (as I've argued previously) is that people have just stopped caring about clickies. For me, it's just too much trouble wondering if I've already given someone a clicky or not. I don't really scroll through everyone on the boards sliding the scale up and down in response to my feelings about them at a given point. The fun of it was: Hey, your post amused/informed/entertained me, here's a little pat on the back. Only being able to do that once per person renders that effect useless. The person who posts one click worthy thing gets the same reward as the person who labors hours to post informative tactics, run tests, or write AARs.

Now again, I think you're right, that the new system might be better as a strict guage of broad reputation. But again, it robs the clicky system of it's most important function, encouraging interesting posting (but if you didn't buy that argument previously, I probably won't persuade you now...).

You might insist that it is designed to be a rep system, and so that is what it will be. And I guess I wouldn't really argue with that. But I think it's pretty much useless as a rep scale right now, because of the whole "old clickies count multiple times" problem. It's like you started building a house doing some of the measurements in centimeters and some in inches, without knowing which were which, and then decided, well, we'll do all the measurements in inches from here on out, without going back to change the old ones. If the rep system is supposed to measure "how many people are impressed with me right now", it doesn't. Some people are walking around with 80+ reps because someone repeatedly repped them in the past. Meanwhile, for someone new to come in and earn even a 50 rep would require impressing a whole lot of people. Again, I'm not really crying about it, just pointing out that if it is intended to be a rep scale, I think the way it currently works fails in that attempt.

Hmmm...hope that all makes sense. I know I've devoted waaaaay too much thought to all things clicky. I hope I'm not coming off as argumentative, I just find the whole clicky phenomena kind of interesting to analyze. It would be a good topic for someone's sociology dissertation, I think - "Virtual rewards and their effect on the posting habits of wargamers" would be a nice title, if someone were so inclined. Like I said, my interest is kind of academic at this point, since my posting days are numbered...

[Copper]

FYI, my posting days at the blitz are numbered here as well. No more stunning DAR's and tactical posts.

There is really no point anymore, for personally, my enjoyment came from the feedback, interchange and fun value of the clicky system.

This is no indictment of the mods, as the clicky decision was a general forum move.

C'ya all, it's been fun.

Cheers!

Leto