# Why Have You Disabled Experience Points?



## TarionzCousin

Many people have disabled XP. Why have you done this?

If I give you (Mr. "Disabled XP Person") XP, does it just not show? Or does it not award XP to you?

Can you give out XP if you have disabled XP?


Second, why aren't more people giving out XP? When I see someone quote a post and say "Awesome!" but notice that they didn't give the awesome post any XP it makes me feel sad.


----------



## jaerdaph

I often find myself getting the "You must spread some more XP around before giving it to so-and-so again" message, so I'm trying to spread it around more.


----------



## redboxrazor

I wasn't even aware that awarding XP was something real. I thought when people mentioned giving someone XP, it was just a cultural way of saying "great post". Which it is... Except it's more than that, I realize now.

How does one do this? I post from my phone, which may be why I don't see the option. Forum Runner and all that.


----------



## Starman

I will now begin a Google search for all forum posts containing the word "awesome" and I will add XP to each and every one. Be sad no longer for this oversight will soon be rectified.


----------



## Nagol

This post would probably be better of in the meta forum.

I think of the XP system as a silly, potentially clique-building subsystem, best disregarded.

What made me disable the system though was the new "in-line" XP comments.  I find the comments being attached to the original post to be annoying.  Since the comments are not conducive to replies, they don't offer anything to continue the conversation and allow for misattribution of meaning, pile-ons, and a host of other bad-faith uses.  Note I said allow for, not being used for.

I was hoping that disabling the xp system would literally prevent the award of XP and thus the comments appearing on my posts, at least.  Alas, it does not.


----------



## Nagol

redboxrazor said:


> I wasn't even aware that awarding XP was something real. I thought when people mentioned giving someone XP, it was just a cultural way of saying "great post". Which it is... Except it's more than that, I realize now.
> 
> How does one do this? I post from my phone, which may be why I don't see the option. Forum Runner and all that.




A small thumbs-up icon appears under the poster's name normally.  Clicking that awards XP.


----------



## Alzrius

Starman said:


> I will now begin a Google search for all forum posts containing the word "awesome" and I will add XP to each and every one. Be sad no longer for this oversight will soon be rectified.




Very awesome of you.


----------



## TarionzCousin

Nagol said:


> This post would probably be better off in the meta forum.



Yeah. Perhaps a mod will move it there.



Nagol said:


> What made me disable the system though was the new "in-line" XP comments.  I find the comments being attached to the original post to be annoying.



Understood. I find it fascinating to see what people award XP for. So I enjoy the immediate feedback.

Nagol, et al., can you still award XP?


----------



## StreamOfTheSky

1. We can still see our XP total and who gave it to us.  Further, if someone gives us xp, their comments show in our posts (give me xp to test that if you want, I don't care).

2. We can still give xp, and our comments likewise show up in those people's posts.

3. Why do we disable it?  I can't speak for everyone who does.  I do it because I dislike having the xp system.  I think even with the 50 person limit it, it still causes cliques, just larger cliques.  It also seems like another post count, some big number to flash in your posts to gain some sort of "cred."  It's supposed to reward people for helpful and informative posts, but that could already be done with a post or PM of "Thank you," and I don't need a person's xp count to tell me I should listen to his/her advise over someone else's (since with such a high xp amount, surely many others have found this poster a wellspring of knowledge in the past, right?).  I value certain poster's inputs more than others, both based on the quality of an individual post they make and their history of making great posts.  I don't need the xp system to help me with this.  Finally, I find that too often, xp is "abused," not given for helpful/infomative posts, but rather as reward for slams on other posters or edition warring, or perhaps most annoyingly, on insipid "awesome" posts that add nothing to the conversation.  But then, OP, it seems that is what you think XP should reward.


----------



## StreamOfTheSky

Oh, when I said that we can see our xp totals, I meant under settings and "XP Recieived" specifically.  On forum pages on the left sidebar of my posts, it displays the same "has disabled experience points" message I presume you see when viewing it.


----------



## redboxrazor

Nagol said:
			
		

> A small thumbs-up icon appears under the poster's name normally.  Clicking that awards XP.




Ah. That doesn't show up in the app I use, so that clears it up. Thank you. :  )


----------



## Abraxas

Because it is one more thing that i do not want or need in an RPG discussion board.


----------



## TarionzCousin

StreamOfTheSky said:


> It's supposed to reward people for helpful and informative posts, but that could already be done with a post or PM of "Thank you," and I don't need a person's xp count to tell me I should listen to his/her advise over someone else's (since with such a high xp amount, surely many others have found this poster a wellspring of knowledge in the past, right?).  I value certain poster's inputs more than others, both based on the quality of an individual post they make and their history of making great posts.  I don't need the xp system to help me with this.



Actually, I find that the posters with the highest XP tend to be the posters who have presented the most useful and helpful stuff, like Stalker0's alternate Skill Challenges. When I see someone with a high XP rating, I sometimes track down their posts just to find the good stuff.



StreamOfTheSky said:


> Finally, I find that too often, xp is "abused," not given for helpful/infomative posts, but rather as reward for slams on other posters or edition warring, or perhaps most annoyingly, on insipid "awesome" posts that add nothing to the conversation.  But then, OP, it seems that is what you think XP should reward.



I wasn't clear enough, apparently. I want people to reward the post that is awesome, not the post that simply says "awesome." Thanks for pointing that out.


----------



## Asmor

I didn't award xp for a long time because, at first, it was just too damn slow. You'd click the button and wait...and wait...and wait... And so I just got in the habit of not clicking the button.

It's a habit I'm starting to break out of.


----------



## Pseudonym

TarionzCousin said:


> Second, why aren't more people giving out XP? When I see someone quote a post and say "Awesome!" but notice that they didn't give the awesome post any XP it makes me feel sad.




I don't give XP as a rule because if I agree with some post or think it especially noteworthy, I'll quote the relevant portion and ad my thoughts to continue the conversation.


----------



## Sammael

I try to give out XP as often as I can, but, interestingly enough, most of the time I want to award it to the same 10 or 15 people I've already rewarded. Because they are awesome!


----------



## Haffrung Helleyes

*Well*

I don't have it disabled but am thinking of doing so.  Forgive me for saying so, but it seems to me like xp correlates more with volume of postings, rather than the quality of their content.  I am not sure I think the xp system makes enworld a better place.

Ken


----------



## Piratecat

Starman said:


> I will now begin a Google search for all forum posts containing the word "awesome" and I will add XP to each and every one. Be sad no longer for this oversight will soon be rectified.



Please don't do this. XP is useful for rewarding good posting; spamming it accomplishes nothing and is nothing more than annoying.


----------



## TarionzCousin

Haffrung Helleyes said:


> I don't have it disabled but am thinking of doing so.  Forgive me for saying so, but it seems to me like xp correlates more with volume of postings, rather than the quality of their content.  I am not sure I think the xp system makes enworld a better place.



No need to ask forgiveness. Yours is a valid point and deserves a place in this discussion. Thanks for contributing.

XP does, to a certain extent, correlate with volume of postings; it's normal that someone who posts more will generally receive more XP than someone who posts less often. 

However, there are plenty of exceptions, and some posts/threads where people have received 10 or more XP for one post. I find great value in that as the XP system helps me to find those "great" posts and that helps me become a better gamer.

And, honestly, becoming a better gamer is the main reason I come to ENWorld--although making snarky comments is a close second!


----------



## weem

*@Haffrung*


> I don't have it disabled but am thinking of doing so. Forgive me for saying so, but it seems to me like xp correlates more with volume of postings, rather than the quality of their content. I am not sure I think the xp system makes enworld a better place.
> 
> Ken




As has been said, no need to apologize at all - opinions do not need to be apologized for 

With that said, I think Tarion makes a good point - sure, the more you post, the more opportunities you will have to receive XP. But that is not a flaw in the system - it doesn't have to do with the system. It simply means, you are in front of people more often and the chances of you saying/doing something that others will appreciate increases.

And just to put some numbers up. This is the list of top XP earners, followed by (in parenthesis) their rank as far as total # of posts ("not listed" means they didn't make the top 100 list)...

#1 weem (not listed)

#2 Steel_Wind (not listed)

#3 Piratecat (#6)

#4 Mark (#21)

#5 Nifft (#13)

#6 Kamikaze Midget (#67)

#7 Obryn (not ilsted)

#8 Morrus (#25)

#9 Celebrim (not listed)

#10 RangerWickett (#45)

Based on what you said, you would think at least the top 5 posters would make this list, when in fact only 1 poster from the top 20 does. 4 of the top 10 xp earners do not even make the top 100 list of posters.

Anyway, I'm just saying that they are not as directly related as some people think.


*@StreamOfTheSky*


> It's supposed to reward people for helpful and informative posts,




Actually, they are a way of (and I quote) "_showing your appreciation to other users depending on the quality of their posts_." The quality of the post is in the eye of the reader. Often times, these will be helpful and informative, but that's not what they are "supposed" to (in some strict ruling sense) be used for.

They are for "showing your appreciation" - and just because you (anyone) might not appreciate the same thing I do, that does not make it any less valuable, or of lower quality.

I think that's one of the problems is that people have their own ideas about what this system SHOULD do.


*@StreamOfTheSky*


> but that could already be done with a post or PM of "Thank you,"




A PM of "thank you"? - That requires copying the content you like, hitting their name, hitting "Send a Private Message", pasting in the content, and finally telling them you like it.

Or... you could (using the XP system as it is intended) hit the thumb - say "thanks!" and hit enter. They are then notified (like a PM!) that someone liked something they had to say, and they are linked right to it, all automically. Plus, it does not use any of your limited number of PM's.

It's MUCH easier/faster to give someone XP (appreciation) than send them a PM.

You also mentioned responding in the thread, but often times I just want to let them know I liked what they had to say, but not really say anything more than that. I would rather skip over 5 stacked XP comments (which would equal the height of a banner ad approx) of "thanks" than have to scroll over 5 whole posts that only said "thanks", "that was awesome" etc.


*@StreamOfTheSky*


> ...and I don't need a person's xp count to tell me I should listen to his/her advise over someone else's (since with such a high xp amount, surely many others have found this poster a wellspring of knowledge in the past, right?)




No one said you needed it to tell you that (I hope).

Why would you listen to someones advice based on their XP count instead of the merit of the advice itself and how it relates to you?

I am (at the moment) #1 on the XP Earned list and I can tell you right now I am FAR FROM a wellspring of knowledge. If you get advice from me please, by all means, get a second opinion - not that I don't try, but my XP count (like everyone elses) is not a measure how closely you should be following my advice (again, it was never meant to be that). I know that this is kind of making your point (when your point was that these should be "helpful and informative" posts) but again, that expectation is flawed (imo). I did not earn them because of some clique I am part of, or for posting a lot. Most of the XP I received are from creating and sharing things I think others would enjoy or find useful. They are not always helpful, and they are almost never informative, but people appreciate them.

I read a thread recently that had zero replies. It was long, but I had some time and I like to read those things that get zero responses to see why that might be. Anyway, by the end I was thinking, "_yea, I see why there were no replies. It wasn't bad, it was just that he presented a lot of info that is specific to his situation that does nothing for me... I can't use anything from it, and I don't have anything to say_". But you know what? I gave him XP anyway for taking the time to articulate so much info and share it with others.

I appreciated his effort and that is the point.


----------



## TarionzCousin

@weem: Whoa! Numbers and actual facts to back up your point. I begin to see why you are at the top of the XP ladder.


> You must spread some Experience Points around before giving it to weem again.


----------



## fba827

TarionzCousin said:


> Whoa! Numbers and actual facts to back up your point.




numbers and facts? On the interwebz?  surely this is a sign of the coming apocalypse.


----------



## Fifth Element

weem said:


> And just to put some numbers up. This is the list of top XP earners, followed by (in parenthesis) their rank as far as total # of posts ("not listed" means they didn't make the top 100 list)...



The problem with this analysis is that XP has not been accumulating as long as posts have. Someone with 10,000 posts, all before 2007 (for example), would have 0 XP but rank highly in posts.

But that's a grain of salt, and doesn't entirely invalidate the numbers.


----------



## Asmor

Haffrung Helleyes said:


> I don't have it disabled but am thinking of doing so.  Forgive me for saying so, but it seems to me like xp correlates more with volume of postings, rather than the quality of their content.  I am not sure I think the xp system makes enworld a better place.
> 
> Ken




Certainly the highest XP earners are also the most prolific posters... But consider that, all other things aside, someone who posts twice as often will have twice as many "XP-worthy" posts.

Of course, one could then question whether prolific posters are themselves more or less likely to have any individual post really be worth XP. I could see arguments for either side.

For what it's worth, I pay almost no attention to who posts what. In fact, the only person I recognize right away is PirateCat thanks to his distinctive and eye-catching avatar. Everyone else remains anonymous until such time as I need to cite them or otherwise make note of their name...


----------



## Asmor

TarionzCousin said:


> @weem: Whoa! Numbers and actual facts to back up your point. I begin to see why you are at the top of the XP ladder.
> 
> 
> 
> You must spread some Experience Points around before giving it to weem again.
Click to expand...



I was going to give Weem some exp on your behalf, but apparently _I_ need to spread it around too. lol.


----------



## LightPhoenix

weem said:


> And just to put some numbers up. This is the list of top XP earners, followed by (in parenthesis) their rank as far as total # of posts ("not listed" means they didn't make the top 100 list)...
> 
> Based on what you said, you would think at least the top 5 posters would make this list, when in fact only 1 poster from the top 20 does. 4 of the top 10 xp earners do not even make the top 100 list of posters.
> 
> Anyway, I'm just saying that they are not as directly related as some people think.




That list is a little misleading, since the way top posters are calculated is not representative of prolific activity.

First off, top posters are only listed by the number of posts they have made, which is not a good indicator for a number of reasons.  The main reason is that number of posts is not representative of prolific activity.  For example - if a new member signs up and makes 100 posts in a day, that is prolific, but not enough to be a blip on the top posters board.

Obviously, the next choice is post rate as a measure of prolific activity.  Unfortunately this also has a fundamental problem - the calculation is too simple.  The boards just take number of posts over days of membership as a calculation.  That's too coarse to really say whether someone is prolific or not.  For example*, you have a rate of 0.46 messages a day; but you became a member way back in 2002.  Looking at your profile, your _current_ activity is more like 2 messages a day.

Even if we calculate rate from when XP started, that's _still_ not a good enough metric.  Simply put, there's the issue of -for-tat.  That is, who _gives_ the most experience may influence who _receives_ the most.  Unfortunately "XP Ratio" is not something that can, to my knowledge, be measured except individually**.  I can estimate; for example, Steel_Wind gave 2 experience and received 4 on May 7th.  However, as that's obviously an estimate it's not terribly reliable; it's too fine-grained.

XP Ratio is getting there, but still not quite good enough.  While XP Ratio addresses random give and take, it doesn't address the question of group give and take.  What you'd really need is a list of the top ten XP granters for each of the top ten XP receivers, and see if names pop up regularly or not.  If XP Ratio can only be estimated, a measurement like that would be right out of the question.  It would also be informative in answering a fundamental question - is there a situation where XP is artificially increased amongst the top receivers based on a social circle?  Not to say that's any sort of bad, but it would answer the concerns of those that think it promotes cliques.

So in short, while interesting, a comparison between post count and XP received means very little.  Unfortunately, everything else is pretty much out of our hands to calculate, unless Morrus, or possibly one of the mods, chooses to do so.

* Not picking on you, but you're an excellent example of the reason why post rate is not a good metric.

** In actuality, I think a better calculation would emphasize XP Received, so that someone with 149/149 and someone with 1/1 are not equal.  Also, for those wondering, my XPG/XPR is 0.59.


----------



## Alzrius

weem said:


> #3 Piratecat (#6)
> 
> [...]
> 
> #5 Nifft (#13)
> 
> [...]
> 
> Based on what you said, you would think at least the top 5 posters would make this list, when in fact only 1 poster from the top 20 does.




Two from the top twenty, actually.

Not that that really changes anything; it's still a very valid point.


----------



## Starman

Piratecat said:


> Please don't do this. XP is useful for rewarding good posting; spamming it accomplishes nothing and is nothing more than annoying.




Even if this wasn't a joke (as Fifth Element mentioned), I really don't have the time (or inclination) to comb through the 13,400 hits a Google search for "awesome site:enworld.org/forum" returned and add XP to all of those posts. So, don't worry. Won't happen.


----------



## Piratecat

Starman said:


> Even if this wasn't a joke (as Fifth Element mentioned), I really don't have the time (or inclination) to comb through the 13,400 hits a Google search for "awesome site:enworld.org/forum" returned and add XP to all of those posts. So, don't worry. Won't happen.



Oh thank God. I am so, so glad you have a life!


----------



## Stormonu

What's wierd is that the "give XP" thumb still shows up for your own posts...so seemingly, you could give yourself XP...

<Edit>  And then again, it won't actually let you do it.  Someone was thinking ahead.


----------



## Piratecat

Alzrius said:


> Two from the top twenty, actually.



Yeah, but I threaten to ban everyone who doesn't give me xp. You'd be _amazed_ how much that helps.


----------



## weem

LightPhoenix said:


> So in short, while interesting, a comparison between post count and XP received means very little.




Exactly the point I was making 

Haffrung had said, "but it seems to me like xp correlates more with volume of postings" and I was essentially saying that this was not a good way to look at it 



Alzrius said:


> Two from the top twenty, actually.
> 
> Not that that really changes anything; it's still a very valid point.




Hehe, that's what I get for responding in a hurried manner (as I do with almost all of my responses) - but as you said, the point remains the same.



Piratecat said:


> Yeah, but I threaten to ban everyone who doesn't give me xp. You'd be _amazed_ how much that helps.




I threaten to ban as well... it just hasn't done anything for me yet


----------



## Starman

Piratecat said:


> Oh thank God. I am so, so glad you have a life!




Well, I wouldn't go _that_ far.


----------



## Hussar

I would like to thank everyone for giving me the opportunity to spread around much xp.


----------



## Abraxas

weem said:


> Or... you could (using the XP system as it is intended) hit the thumb - say "thanks!" and hit enter. They are then notified (like a PM!) that someone liked something they had to say, and they are linked right to it, all automically. Plus, it does not use any of your limited number of PM's.




Sorry for the thread-jack but how are people notified when someone has given xp? Does it require some other account option be turned on?

I was doing a quick scroll through this thread and found out someone gave me xp - but i would normally never know because I seldom reread my own posts and have never bothered checking who has given me xp in my account settings.


----------



## weem

Abraxas said:


> Sorry for the thread-jack but how are people notified when someone has given xp? Does it require some other account option be turned on?
> 
> I was doing a quick scroll through this thread and found out someone gave me xp - but i would normally never know because I seldom reread my own posts and have never bothered checking who has given me xp in my account settings.




Up at the top right-hand section, where you would be notified of a new Private Message it will show you have 1 unread. Right under where it says "You last visited:" etc.

<edit> Though, I just noticed you have the XP system disabled and I'm not sure if it notifies you in that way still. It might though. </edit>


----------



## Abraxas

Hmmm - it just shows Unread 0, Total 0 - and I never would have known to look there either.


----------



## TarionzCousin

Stormonu said:


> What's wierd is that the "give XP" thumb still shows up for your own posts...so seemingly, you could give yourself XP...
> 
> <Edit>  And then again, it won't actually let you do it.  Someone was thinking ahead.



But can you report your own post?


----------



## Maggan

LightPhoenix said:


> XP Ratio is getting there, but still not quite good enough.  While XP Ratio addresses random give and take, it doesn't address the question of group give and take.  What you'd really need is a list of the top ten XP granters for each of the top ten XP receivers, and see if names pop up regularly or not.  If XP Ratio can only be estimated, a measurement like that would be right out of the question.  It would also be informative in answering a fundamental question - is there a situation where XP is artificially increased amongst the top receivers based on a social circle?  Not to say that's any sort of bad, but it would answer the concerns of those that think it promotes cliques.




Reading your well reasoned post set into stark contrast my own take on the XP system, namely that to me it's just a bit of fun.

/M


----------



## LightPhoenix

weem said:
			
		

> Though, I just noticed you have the XP system disabled and I'm not sure if it notifies you in that way still. It might though.




It doesn't, if your not a Supporter (need to get on that... ugh, money).



Maggan said:


> Reading your well reasoned post set into stark contrast my own take on the XP system, namely that to me it's just a bit of fun.




No, no fun!  When I've conquered ENW from the future, XP is now the first thing to go!  MWAHAHAHAHA... hem.  Sorry.

Sorry, I let the engineer in me take control.  Believe me, I hate statistics too.  However, anyone that's going to invoke numbers (for or against, sorry weem) needs to be made aware of what really qualifies for claims like elitism or volume or rate or what not.

To actually answer the original question - I turned it off initially because I thought it was a bad idea.  If I recall correctly, XP was introduced right around the time there were a bunch of people spamming for Post Count.  So I was already against tracking posts pretty strongly.  I _still_ don't believe it's worthwhile to track Post Count _or_ XP; I've seen many, many situations (unfortunately from both sides of the coin) where such systems lead to elitism and snobbery against newer members.  However, as per usual, the ENW community never ceases to surprise in how much it _isn't_ like other communities as much as it is.  So really the only reason I have it off right now is that I haven't turned it back on.


----------



## Morrus

LightPhoenix said:


> It doesn't, if your not a Supporter (need to get on that... ugh, money).




Nothing to do with being a supporter.  It doesn't if you've disabled rep.


----------



## Jdvn1

This is getting silly.

And I like silly.


----------



## Abraxas

Is the ability to toggle showing the xp comments on or off (along with status + other things that make 1 sentence posts take up so much vertical space) a possibility in the future?


----------



## Morrus

Abraxas said:


> Is the ability to toggle showing the xp comments on or off (along with status + other things that make 1 sentence posts take up so much vertical space) a possibility in the future?




All of these things are in the pipeline.


----------



## Abraxas

Great, Thanks.


----------



## stonegod

weem said:


> And just to put some numbers up [Snip]



Good analysis, though a few folks have already noted the flaws. For example, Rystil hasn't posted for about a year in a half, but his/her 22k posts aren't going to be beaten soon. I'd be curious if a post activity rate since XP inception/XP gains metric would show some correlation, but I have neither the time nor access to do so.


----------



## Pseudonym

Hussar said:


> I would like to thank everyone for giving me the opportunity to spread around much xp.




So if I get XP from someone, is it because they find merit in what I posted, or is it because they need to spread some XP around and mine happens to be a convenient post?


----------



## Morrus

Pseudonym said:


> So if I get XP from someone, is it because they find merit in what I posted, or is it because they need to spread some XP around and mine happens to be a convenient post?




I think you'd have to ask the individual member in question.


----------



## TarionzCousin

Somehow, I don't think we're providing Morrus with any useful scientific data here. 

But I'm okay with that; he's a benevolent dictator, not an algorithm.



_Edit:_ I love the comments herein, but I'm skeptical about that mop.


----------



## Asmor

Here's a question... What does the amount of green boxes next to our title/level indicate? It's non-obvious to me. There appears to be a correlation with higher levels having more green boxes, but it is non-linear. I also noted that one person had a grey box, a "level 1 kobold" who only had 7 posts in total.

I'd have guessed that it's your "experience point power" for giving exp to other people, except I wouldn't think Morrus would only have 3, and I thought that the power was tied to subscription status, not level.


----------



## weem

Usually in forums such as these, you set the XP value for additional box (or star, or mug of beer, whatever the image is) so in this case it is probably independent of the XP titles.

I could be wrong of course.


<edit>

EX:

<>   50xp
<><>   150xp
<><><>   300xp

etc

</edit>


----------



## El Mahdi

deleted


----------



## TarionzCousin

Asmor said:


> Here's a question... What does the amount of green boxes next to our title/level indicate?



It is your "Relative Testiclosity Scale." The more green boxes, the more XP you have.


----------



## Stormonu

I don't want to sound like a meanie, but I have to wonder why there isn't something where you can award _negative _XP.  Not something that actually takes away from your XP, but indicates a disagreement with someone's statement.  Tracked separately from XP.  It'd be a quick way for people to state "I don't agree with this" without having to throw out a whole post out.  I guess some people might call them "troll points", but hey, it'd point out whose argumentative on the boards, if nothing else.

_Maybe_ it would stop some of the threadcrapping that derails or get threads locked around here.


----------



## jaerdaph

Stormonu said:


> I don't want to sound like a meanie, but I have to wonder why there isn't something where you can award _negative _XP.




Sorry, but I think NOT having neg rep is one of the things that makes EN World the best online gaming community, and I hope we never see it.


----------



## Nifft

Stormonu said:


> _Maybe_ it would stop some of the threadcrapping that derails or get threads locked around here.



 Could you stop people from using it to say "I don't agree with this person, and I have no valid counter-argument, but UNGH DAMN IT SCREW YOU"?

Because if you can't stop people from using it like that, you won't get the behavior modification that you're looking for. You'll just get a new way for trolls to antagonize people.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## StreamOfTheSky

The only thing worse than have pos rep in a forum to me is having neg rep.  The former just creates self-seving cliquishness.  The latter openly creates (more) hostility.  All IMO.


----------



## Morrus

StreamOfTheSky said:


> The only thing worse than have pos rep in a forum to me is having neg rep.




Oh, I'm sure I can think of other things worse than having posrep!


----------



## Hussar

Yeah, I've participated on sites with negrep and it just promotes way too much hostility.  I noticed when the posrep comments first started out here, people were using them to crap on someone's post rather snarkily.  Fortunately, that seems to have stopped.

I have no problem with someone stopping in, seeing something they like, and saying, "Yeah, good point".  It's positive and generally leads to people being a bit less hostile to each other.


----------



## StreamOfTheSky

Morrus said:


> Oh, I'm sure I can think of other things worse than having posrep!




Well, I was talking about the reputation system itself, not getting a positive rep point, if you were confused.  Getting positive or negative points themselves, I really don't care either way, especially when they're private (the xp comments function annoyingly removes such privacy).

As for the system of having positive xp to give out, though?  Sure, it's not the worst thing a forum could have.  Diabetes is also far from the worst illnesses a person could have, I'd still rather not have it, though.


----------



## Hussar

I dunno.  Positive reinforcement is a good thing.  If I make a post and six people step up and give me a pat on the head and say, "Wow, that's a smart thing to say", hopefully that will get me to say more things in a similar vein.

Not letting the same people continuously pat you on the head stops much of the mutual self manipulation that goes on when people keep making the same point over and over again.


----------



## Morrus

StreamOfTheSky said:


> Well, I was talking about the reputation system itself, not getting a positive rep point, if you were confused.




I wasn't confused; I was making a joke.  Unsuccessfully, it seems!


----------



## Mathew_Freeman

I'm very amused that Morrus' current XP status shows that he is a Troll. 

I like the XP system, and I'm happy that people can disable it if they want. I know it annoys some people. 

One thing that's funny about the total post-count figures is that if you remember a few years ago a whole bunch of Hivemind threads got deleted and it hit some frequent posters in there very hard in terms of postcount. I think I lost about 4000 posts myself.

It makes me wonder what Crothian's postcount would be if he still had all those posts...


----------



## Jdvn1

Mathew_Freeman said:


> One thing that's funny about the total post-count figures is that if you remember a few years ago a whole bunch of Hivemind threads got deleted and it hit some frequent posters in there very hard in terms of postcount. I think I lost about 4000 posts myself.



I believe threads and posts were lost from just about every forum and subforum--the boards had to be reverted to a date some months prior, and everyone was affected. The Hivemind was just affected most, due to the activity at the time.


----------



## Nagol

Mathew_Freeman said:


> I'm very amused that Morrus' current XP status shows that he is a Troll.
> 
> I like the XP system, and I'm happy that people can disable it if they want. I know it annoys some people.
> 
> <snip>




Unfortunately, we *can't* disable it.  All we can do is disable the public view of earned xp.

I'd be very happy if I could disable it completely in relation to myself (i.e. no ability to grant or receive xp with all that implies).


----------



## Piratecat

Mathew_Freeman said:


> One thing that's funny about the total post-count figures is that if you remember a few years ago a whole bunch of Hivemind threads got deleted and it hit some frequent posters in there very hard in terms of postcount. I think I lost about 4000 posts myself.



 By "a few years ago" you mean about seven years ago"!


----------



## Asmor

Piratecat said:


> By "a few years ago" you mean about seven years ago"!




Wow, has it really been that long since the last time the boards had to be rolled back? Or was that not the last time they were rolled back?

Definitely doesn't feel like it's been 7 years...


----------



## Piratecat

Posts currently date back to Jan 2002. I thought the rollback happened in 2003. I could be mistaken, though.


----------



## Jdvn1

Piratecat said:


> Posts currently date back to Jan 2002. I thought the rollback happened in 2003. I could be mistaken, though.



I think the rollback happened after I got here (seeing as how I'm pretty certain I was affected)... so, 2005 is more likely.


----------



## Asmor

Piratecat said:


> Posts currently date back to Jan 2002. I thought the rollback happened in 2003. I could be mistaken, though.



Well, the 2002 figure I thought was when it was switched over from Eric Noah's site to ENWorld...


----------



## StreamOfTheSky

Piratecat said:


> Posts currently date back to Jan 2002. I thought the rollback happened in 2003. I could be mistaken, though.




I recall a rollback of posts myself, I'm pretty sure it affected me, though not much since I was fairly new when it happened.

Then again, I lurked on here for almost a full year before actually joining, so I could be remembering simply reading about it happening.  Something in the 2005 range sounds about right to me, though.


----------



## stonegod

There may have been one in pre-2005, but I joined 2005 and there was a big board crash (DB-backup) and everything in the 2006-2007 timeframe. Lost a lot of PBP posts.


----------



## Mathew_Freeman

Piratecat said:


> By "a few years ago" you mean about seven years ago"!




I'm not old, honest. Seven years ago sounds about right, actually. That's kind of scary.


----------



## Mark

StreamOfTheSky said:


> I recall a rollback of posts myself, I'm pretty sure it affected me, though not much since I was fairly new when it happened.





There were several posters who were hit so hard they couldn't make the margin call.  They are still posting in negative space to get out of the hole.


----------



## TheYeti1775

Piratecat said:


> Posts currently date back to Jan 2002. I thought the rollback happened in 2003. I could be mistaken, though.






Jdvn1 said:


> I think the rollback happened after I got here (seeing as how I'm pretty certain I was affected)... so, 2005 is more likely.




There have been a couple.  The 2005 one was the one that affected myself.
02/03 was the changeover year from Noah to EnWorld.

I remember there was a huge uproar over the '05 one.


----------



## Piratecat

TheYeti1775 said:


> 02/03 was the changeover year from Noah to EnWorld.



Nope. I buy the '05 date when we lost so many posts - good correction - but I believe Eric turned the site over to Morrus almost exactly one year after 3e launched. That would put it as summer of '01.


----------



## LightPhoenix

Piratecat said:


> Nope. I buy the '05 date when we lost so many posts - good correction - but I believe Eric turned the site over to Morrus almost exactly one year after 3e launched. That would put it as summer of '01.




Indeed.  2002 was the year the site switched to vBulletin.  That's why many of the posters who have been on the site since Eric's days have a join date of early 2002.  I think the vB boards went live in late-January/early-February, if memory serves me correctly.

(EDIT: Changed for clarity that I was agreeing with PCat, not being contradictory)


----------



## Jdvn1

You geezers.


----------



## Lanefan

Question:

If someone has XP disabled and earns XP anyway, then later re-enables XP, do all the points earned while XP was disabled suddenly show up in a great big batch, or are they lost?

Lanefan


----------



## Jdvn1

Lanefan said:


> Question:
> 
> If someone has XP disabled and earns XP anyway, then later re-enables XP, do all the points earned while XP was disabled suddenly show up in a great big batch, or are they lost?
> 
> Lanefan



I'm fairly certain the XP is always tallied--even for people who have disabled XP--but the system just doesn't show the results if it's disabled. So, when enabled again, it merely shows the total it's been tallying.


----------



## weem

Yea, it's all stored, just not displayed (until you enable again).


----------



## TarionzCousin

Lanefan said:


> If someone has XP disabled and earns XP anyway, then later re-enables XP, do all the points earned while XP was disabled suddenly show up in a great big batch, or are they lost?



What is the sound of one hand clapping?


----------

