We should get rid of vote's on the forum!

[SilentShadow 104]

This feature, overall, would be fine if it were not so easy to abuse, which is not possible, because voting relies on the maturity of the voter to decide if the content is worth the vote or not.

 

Given that many of the commenters here are below the age-16 requirement, I would say that many of them were not ready for the responsibility of voting based on content rather than author.

But I will not judge the entirety of the under-16 community, some of them are even more mature than most adults I know :P

There is no need to remove the vote-down feature, since there will always be instances where certain content proves it is worthy of such negative criticism and voting, and that can't be shown with only 0 votes to it.

 

Really, I repeat myself, it is a matter of who is doing the voting, and why.

That is why we must let time decide whether the vote feature stays or leaves; if there is an abnormally high instance of abuse, it means that the community at large isn't quite ready yet for this.

And we will wait a few years.

 

That is all that there is to understand. :)

 

Edit: I also agree to the suggestion to be able to view who has voted, whether positively or negatively; with this we can remove the anonymity that many "trolls" use to grow powerful.

Edited June 20, 2013 by SilentShadow

[HichigoShiiro 4,378]

Cyber-bullying?

Pffft!

[semyonkirov 29,038]

Dear players, we've made one more change to the voting system.

You still can vote posts of other players and administration, but now the overall forum carma is not displayed on the page of your profile.

[skitee 555]

:wub:

[jonathanjoseph 71]

Dear players, we've made one more change to the voting system.

You still can vote posts of other players and administration, but now the overall forum carma is not displayed on the page of your profile.

+1 (I ran out of positive votes :unsure:)

[GoldRock 6,165]

My opinions on the vote feature as it is:

1. Voting on Mods' posts should be fine. I hated, as a reporter, getting any special treatment, and I'm sure a lot of the staff do too. Giving them special treatment is insulting - it looks as if they are so weak-minded that they can't take any criticism/insults and so need to be "wrapped in cotton wool".

 

2. The limit is a bit meh. How about, to avoid trolls, a limit of five downvotes and ten upvotes on the same person but overall no limit, or at least a limit of 30 and 20?

 

3. I don't like having overall karma on profiles. It makes us seem as if it's a competition. Karma on posts is great, it's a way of showing support and/or disapproval without wasting space by replying and saying "+1" or "I disagree". But on profiles it just seems like a competition and one which will be stupid and will, as people above me say, encourage the wrong type of trolling and be a pain in the neck.

 

In short: Karma on Profiles suck. Karma on posts is great. Karma on posts should include mods too, the limit on giving karma should be applied to a certain amount on one person and the overall limit should be increased dramatically.

 

Disagree, agree, agree.

 

I disagree with your first point for reasons already given, mods would get a lot of hate just for doing their jobs. For mods, I don't think it's a case of special treatment, I just think that the feature would be taken advantage of by trolls and so on in their case rather than being used constructively.

 

However, I really don't understand why as a reporter, I can no longer be voted. Now that's just unfair... I liked to see how my posts were received by the community, and I liked the fact that it applied to me as it does to the rest of the community. Mods I can understand, but not reporters...

 

I'm not a mod so I don't know how they feel about this, but in the case of reporters, I agree that it's 'special treatment', and it's really annoying.

 

(EDIT) Good change, Semyon!

Edited June 21, 2013 by GoldRock

[splitterpoint 10,986]

Indeed, very nice change. ^_^

[Meliora 1,652]

Not that much point in having it now, is there?

[GoldRock 6,165]

Not that much point in having it now, is there?

 

Disagree. You can see how posts are received by the community, whilst removing the pointless incentive to get more votes.

[gocac 17]

:wub:

skitee you resigned?

[peanutgallery 1]

I was quite a bit suprised when I saw I could vote people's message's. I seemed funny to me and nice to have. But then realising the trolling and the emotions it will bring I think Tanki should immediatly shut it down. Think about the abuse it will have. The chat is full of it. 'Will you vote me?', 'I have voted all your posts' and 'I am gonna give only negative vote's to (**). This is one of the worst ways of cyber-bullying. In this world of trying to be the most popular (even if you use someone else for it) it is just not a good idea. Just give that person you hate all your negative vote's, call your friends and let them also vote negative that person and that person might feel sad. That is no problem for the biggest trolls here (who'll create even more accounts just to vote). An example:

And the forum-vote-system doesn't even exist for 24 hours and these kind of messages are already posted. I have nothing against Supernick, but this is just an example the negative effect it gives us.

Is it actually really necesarry? Why should we have it? I don't really see the point, and till now there has been a lot of abuse. That's why I think Tanki should just remove it as soon as possible.

 

Joost

(You can dislike me for this, go ahead, I don't care :P )

well everyone is allowed to have their own opinion and yes you make a hard argument but everyone is allowed to have their own opinion and mine is that if everyone here is how old they're SUPPOSED to be then they can handle it and should be able to get over the fact that someone hates them

You're just an over-sensitive person. No cyber-bullying of any sort will occur...

this is wrong I do agree with the topic maker there probably will be some small cyber bullying but not enough to actually take action so I guess you could say that it's a neutral topic.

[KiwiZaphod 53]

_{Voting/Liking is problematic on sites that allow you to edit posts indefinitely; the post can be changed after votes are cast. Some sites allow a time window for edits, after which the post is "locked", which avoid this issue.}

Edited June 22, 2013 by KiwiZaphod

[joostcool 5,942]

They have taken away the stats on your profile page, that is already a difference for me because players won't do it for the most votes but take it more serious.

About the cyber bullying, someone said anywhere in this topic left tanki because he was not really appreciated. And think about bk. He was not appreciated, people didn't like, even before we knew csl was rigged. He was in the tanki staff and we should do whatever he says. If your government does something wrong, will you offend them so they leave their position? (No offence, please don't take me wrong, but in arabic countries they did...) in my opinion it is possible to make someone leave tanki.

[joostcool 5,942]

*someone said anywhere in this topic that someone left tanki because he was not appreciated*

Sorry, being at mobile phone

[SilentShadow 104]

Overall the system is doing fine, I do not see any instances of abuse so far..

 

The people have nearly proven themselves.

I believe that it should stay ;)

Edited June 23, 2013 by SilentShadow

[High 773]

>:-(

[joostcool 5,942]

Abuse happened before, when you were able to look how many votes someone had, but now they removed it, it is better, and it seems even that people forgot it. I have never voted anything, but that doesn't matter I think.

[Desperado1996 21]

I would like to discuss this old topic again.

As we saw, here was group who wanted to see total carma and one who didn't. 

Now one side have won and total carma isn't displayed. So others maybe now are sad...

I have some offers:

1. I think that there should be option to choose would you like to show your carma or not.

2. To avoid giving negative votes just because he don't like me or just for trollingm I think there should be time limit for that. As example, you can give negative/positive vote to one exact profile once in 48h. Trolls don't like to wait so long...

3. This actually don't like me, but it is possible to make rule that you can not give all your negative/positive votes for one player without reason. If you get caught about that, then there should be some kind of penalties.

Then all would be winners.

Edited August 11, 2013 by Desperado1996

[Lankbouv 6,347]

What I don't get is when Tanki says "We have spaces for mods etc, apply if you have clean Karma," is this the same Karma or not, I assume it isn't?

[FederalBureauFBI 2,881]

What I don't get is when Tanki says "We have spaces for mods etc, apply if you have clean Karma," is this the same Karma or not, I assume it isn't?

It means your ban history.