Quote:
Originally Posted by kipperfan
I have held back saying anything about this "skill system" for a few months as I wanted to see how everything shook out, and attempt to understand what drives the system. Frankly I dont really care that much, although I do care a little, thus me taking to time to write this. I think it has been mentioned earlier by another poster that it seems some of the skill givers(whomever they may be) seem to be showing some favouritism.
Now the last thing I want is to sound like a whiny bugger who is upset he has a blue square, its not about that. But....the post I recieved negative skill for was so amazingly trivial its kinda funny. I can understand the arguement that my post didnt add anything to the board, and if that was the going standard for a blue square then I would have to quams with the blue. In fact why not just put it out there.....I highlighted a portion of someone's post(someone I wasnt having an arguement with or anything of the sort) and used a laughing smiley as the poster had said "tossing so and so's salad". And sure enough I got a blue. The problem I have with this lies in the fact that this was in a game thread, I could go through any GT this year and find 30 posts in everyone that are the exact same lame attempts at lightening the mood...and sure I dont know for sure those posters never recieved skill, but I can see their skill stays grey after the post....it doesnt take a brain surgeon to put two and two together. The thing that is very curoius about the entire incident is that before this post which I got negative skill I was engaged in a long argument with a few posters in the same thread, doing nothing that deserved blue skill, but definatley pissing some people off with my oppinions. Is it a coincidence that I recieved negative skill right afterwards for a post that really did not harm the board....maybe....but I find that a bit hard to believe.
All of that happened a month or two ago and I didnt want to publicly aire a grievence, I did PM a mod but never heard back. But the biggest problem I have lies in the fact that in these past months I have made(in my oppinion) many well thought out and solid posts and have recieved no positive skill, IMO these posts added far more to the board then my one lame attempt at humour in a crowded game thread took away. I may be out on a limb here but it seems to me that those posters(such as myself) that tend to disagree with another group of longtime posters on a consistant basis, have to do a heck of alot more to get into the red, and a heck of alot less to get into the blue.
The reason I posted this now is after reading Antithesis post, I got to thinking there should be some kind of accountability for the skill givers. I understand they have been identitified as long time trusted posters by the board admins, but that doesnt mean they arent human, and it doesnt mean they are always objective. I can think of a few other posters(no need to name names) off the top of my head that are in the blue, despite the fact they are always providing knowledgable level headed insight, and I dont think that is very fair and I am having a hard time seeing this "skill system" as an accurate evaluation of the posters on this board.
My 2 cents.
|
I have a decent skill level and I have had the same seemingly arbitrary treatment. Once, long ago, I posted a sarcastic, joking response to a post regarding some spelling issues. It might have been in a game thread as well, with the same cryptic:
"doesn't really add anything" and then -7 or -9 in rep.
If anything, gamethreads should be exempt from such requirements. Gamethreads are a real-time jungle of emotion and quick posts in response to game action or feelings and frustration. You cannot apply the same standard there. Gamethreads are even locked right after each game is done so there is little issue with problem posts spilling over into a innapropriate discussions or arguments. They should be exempt from anything but the most severe issues being moderated.
Also, there needs to be some leeway for sarcasm/humour, and the value of a short succinct post or reply. Sometimes it's better to say little, add an emoticon, etc. than a long post that "adds something" or is simply judged on the basis of the percieved qualitative or quantitative aspects of a post. You need those things to lighten the mood, especially if the team is doing badly. I feel that this might be lacking in the consideration of the current system. In my opinion, a witty jab at somebody (if intelligent, tasteful, and hilarious) or quirky character (Where is Polly Peena these days?
) and flair do "add" to the board. This also includes calling out somebody or teasing them for claims or guarantees they made in the past, etc. In my view, spelling habits should fall under this as well.
I understand the feeling that many people seem to be expressing - that something they posted, considered by the poster to be relatively casual and innocent - is in effect sort of criminalized without prior warning or explanation. It's just not a good feeling having that stigma or being told you did something wrong and not understanding the aegis or justification behind it. If you've ever recieved a negative feedback on ebay, you know it hurts. There needs to perhaps be wider discretion on casual posts or conversations that are going on...or relatively innocent comments, etc. Focus the negative skill more on the severe problems such poor behavior but don't subtract from a post just because of a lack of percieved qualitative value or value-adding substance. What's happening might impose a chilling effect, in which the sometimes seemingly arbitrary treatment of posts leads to people choosing not to post at all because they don't know what's permissible or not or have no idea how something might be interpreted.
But whatever, it's all posts on an internet message board. Chill out people.