# Experience points



## Bullgrit

I know there was some contraversy or hesitation about the forum experience points concept, but I gotta say, now that I've given and received some, I like the function.

Giving xp is a good way of giving a quick acknowledgement that someone made a good point or made me laugh or some such without having to add a new post to the discussion.

Receiving xp is good because it's simple positive feedback.

I give the concept of forum experience points an experience point click for being a good idea.

Bullgrit


----------



## Nifft

I think they're terrible.

I get far more XP for what borders on "threadcrapping" than I do for thoughtful contributions. People reward quips, slogans, and the easy laugh -- which often means a cut-down, or putting someone in his place.

If my behavior were to be influenced by the XP given on this forum, it would be to the detriment of this forum.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Obryn

Nifft said:


> If my behavior were to be influenced by the XP given on this forum, it would be to the detriment of this forum.



If you're getting XP, you're amusing someone.

I come to a forum to be amused.

It's a win-win, in my book!

-O


----------



## StreamOfTheSky

I disagree with the OP.  I didn't want them when they were implemented, I still find them detrimental at worst and insignificant at best.  I sometimes give people xp for good posts, but that was mostly a habit borne out of guilt, because people were giving me xp for my posts they liked despite me using the hide xp opt-out option (and I'm thankful it's an option), and I felt like I was a jerk if I didn't give out the pointless things myself.

Aside from my original objections, I also noted not far into starting the xp system that it "rewarded" (it's a pointless award, hence the quotes) people who had larger interest groups.  The most noticable being that there's a larger group of 4E posters than 3E, so there's a larger group of people on the forum who agree with you, thus a larger pool of xp givers.  Two posters who posted equally helpful posts with equal frequency would likely have different xp totals, probably by a large margin, based solely on where they happened to liek posting and how many like-minded people are also on the forums.  Which destroys any semblence of "merit" a high xp count might otherwise mean.  I wouldn't be surprised if the "hive" clique had similar xp groupings.  Which goes back to one of my main reasons against xp: the reinforcement of cliques.



Nifft said:


> I think they're terrible.
> 
> I get far more XP for what borders on "threadcrapping" than I do for thoughtful contributions. People reward quips, slogans, and the easy laugh -- which often means a cut-down, or putting someone in his place.
> 
> If my behavior were to be influenced by the XP given on this forum, it would be to the detriment of this forum.
> 
> Cheers, -- N




Well said.


----------



## LightPhoenix

I fall into the camp of them being mostly inconsequential.  For one thing, there's no overt mention of how many experience points a user has.  Sure, you can hover over the green box, but I have to wonder how many people actually do that.  On the other hand, I mostly don't use the XP system, so perhaps that's my own bias on the whole thing showing through.

My second thought is that, despite XP, I can still tell who among the board posters is not worth listening to (no names).  On the flip side, I generally read all of the posts in a thread, and posts are judged on the merit of whether or not they contribute something useful.  There are, of course, posters who I note tend to post things interesting to me, and I know who they are (again, no names).  I suppose my natural tendency is to judge a post by its own merit, and not that of who posted it.

While I thought it was a bad idea, and I'm mostly indifferent to it now, there are a couple of downsides.  Like StreamOfTheSky, I would be very surprised if there were no "cliques" that emerged from analyzing the XP given/received.  I think the XP system is most likely used as a Digg-style "I agree" button, versus an actual receptions to a post.  That lends itself to precipitating out groups of like-minded posters.  I think it would be even more pronounced if there were a negative-XP button.

I also have a theory that XP is directly related to post count.  At first blush, that seems like a dumb statement; of course people who post more will have more XP, because they have more chances to receive it (ie, have posted more quality posts).  I don't think that is the reason though.  My suspicion is that XP in reality has nothing to with the inherent quality of posts and everything to do with post count.  It could possibly be due to posters basically giving XP randomly (due to XP giving limitations).  I'm not sure as to the why because we don't have any data to analyze.


----------



## MichaelSomething

Well I like the EXP system.  It's something cool to play with.


----------



## Umbran

StreamOfTheSky said:


> Aside from my original objections, I also noted not far into starting the xp system that it "rewarded" (it's a pointless award, hence the quotes) people who had larger interest groups.
> ...
> Which goes back to one of my main reasons against xp: the reinforcement of cliques.




The system is tuned specifically to make cliquisness.  You cannot give a second XP to the same person until you've given points to _fifty others_.  A group has to be very large before it can sit around reinforcing itself.


----------



## Bullgrit

Maybe my positive view of it is because I don't ever look at my or other's total xp count. (I just did in this thread out of curiosity, after it was mentioned here.) My support of xp comes mostly from simply getting the virtual thumbs up or pat on the back, and secondarily from the note left with the xp.

Here's examples of notes left with my xp:
"Nice work"
"Great idea for a thread"
"lol-nice"
"Thanks for sharing"

I've even gotten xp and notes from people who generally disagree or argue with me. I've also given such xp:
"Although I disagree with some of your interpretations, you make me LOL with your phrasology. 'the Yoko factor' LOL!"

Bullgrit


----------



## jaerdaph

I really enjoy getting some XP for helping someone out ("thanks for the info/link") or giving them a laugh in their day ("LOL! "). It makes me feel useful and connected to the community.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Personally, the only problem I have with the system is that I think 50 is too big a number to have to pass out.  I've had to pass on giving XP to people who deserved it- be it for being funny or helpful or both- more times than I can count...or remember.


----------



## Alzrius

Nifft said:


> I think they're terrible.
> 
> I get far more XP for what borders on "threadcrapping" than I do for thoughtful contributions. People reward quips, slogans, and the easy laugh -- which often means a cut-down, or putting someone in his place.
> 
> If my behavior were to be influenced by the XP given on this forum, it would be to the detriment of this forum.
> 
> Cheers, -- N




A well thought-out post like this deserves some XP!

...oh wait. Nevermind.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Did you just _not_ give Nifft XP...out of spite?


----------



## StreamOfTheSky

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Did you just _not_ give Nifft XP...out of spite?




I just gave Nifft xp out of spite of him giving me xp out of spite.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

What is this...Spite Club?

(Never talk about Spite Club.)


----------



## Aus_Snow

Dual wield spite clubs or 2-handed though, that's the question.


----------



## Nifft

Alright, if we're all going to focus on my XP and my XP comments, let's make an example of them. Here are two posts I made around the same time of day on Nov 22nd. They remained in my mind because I just knew I was going to pull in XP on the first one, and not the second.

The first post took about 2 seconds of thinking, and may border on threadcrapping:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/genera...creatures-do-31-dead-goblins.html#post5005727

The second post took about 45 minutes of research, and is very much on-topic:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/268335-magic-items-quick.html#post5005774

Same forum, same day, same time of day.

- - -

I have some further thoughts on why XP are a poor reward mechanism, but at least this forum doesn't have the "neg rep" drama associated with certain other places.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## StreamOfTheSky

Nifft said:


> I have some further thoughts on why XP are a poor reward mechanism, but at least this forum doesn't have the "neg rep" drama associated with certain other places.




Thankfully we don't, indeed.  I'd give you more xp just for adding that note, but...can't now.


----------



## LightPhoenix

Nifft said:


> Alright, if we're all going to focus on my XP and my XP comments, let's make an example of them.




It's all about you, isn't it?  



> Here are two posts I made around the same time of day on Nov 22nd. They remained in my mind because I just knew I was going to pull in XP on the first one, and not the second.




I take it you got XP for the first and not the second?


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Nifft said:


> The first post took about 2 seconds of thinking, and may border on threadcrapping:
> http://www.enworld.org/forum/genera...creatures-do-31-dead-goblins.html#post5005727
> 
> The second post took about 45 minutes of research, and is very much on-topic:
> http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/268335-magic-items-quick.html#post5005774
> 
> Same forum, same day, same time of day.




Just because you expressed something witty, doesn't make it threadcrapping.  Someone in a different time zone than you might find that bit of wit a nice respite...as might someone reading it at 4:30AM.

Besides, I can see something from Far Realms doing just as you suggested...just not naming it as such.  I can also see someone using that as an inspiration for another idea.


----------



## MichaelSomething

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Personally, the only problem I have with the system is that I think 50 is too big a number to have to pass out.  I've had to pass on giving XP to people who deserved it- be it for being funny or helpful or both- more times than I can count...or remember.




Well I have a solution that will reduce your problem by two percent.  You can always give me some experience just to get yourself closer to rerewarding those people who really inspire you!  I'll gladly provide this service to the Enworld community!


----------



## Nifft

LightPhoenix said:


> I take it you got XP for the first and not the second?



 Right. I meant to say that.

4 xp for being useless-but-witty, 0 xp for being helpful.

*The nature of "wide appeal"*: the audience interested in a thread's chosen topic is smaller than the audience amused by an amusing disruption. Thus, humor at the expense of any topic will be more popular than the topic. XP is a popularity metric.



Dannyalcatraz said:


> Just because you expressed something witty, doesn't make it threadcrapping.



 Expressing something witty *and useless* is borderline. He was looking for something creepy, not something funny. The reason I say "borderline" and not just flat-out "threadcrapping" is that indeed it could be useful for someone running a more lighthearted game... at least, that's my self-justification for having posted such useless wit.

(BTW, the point of the "same time of day" stuff was to point out that "time of day" is controlled for in this "experiment". As in: it has been expressly made into a non-factor.)

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Oni

I personally like the XP system.  It's encouraging to know that people care enough about what you posted it make note of it.  The comments I've received have ranged from "lol" and "agreed" to "I don't agree with all of that, but it was actually nuanced, which is a quality much rarer in fact than in attribution." and the occasional compliment about my PbP characters.  

Anyway I've appreciated them all and don't see the feature as doing any harm to the community.  

Also I like that I can shoot someone a little easy recognition for saying something I thought was particularly intelligent.


----------



## Nifft

Oni said:


> "I don't agree with all of that, but it was actually nuanced, which is a quality much rarer in fact than in attribution."



 If I'd seen more like that, I would think better of the XP system.

Thanks, -- N


----------



## darjr

Uh, just for the record, Nift, I found it creepy.

And just the thing for some types of games.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Y'see?

Snark & sarcasm is hard to pull off sometimes when your medium is words on a screen.  Someone may just take you seriously!


----------



## wedgeski

I'm a fan of the XP system. I've received points for several different types of post, but yes, more for the quip or drive-by-joke than for posts which actually expand the discussion. I'm okay with this. It's not for me to decide what people find interesting in what I post... and maybe what *I* think is interesting or useful is a view not shared by the readership. 

Personally I rarely give XP for a quip or joke (although I have done); more often I reserve them for posts which basically say the same thing I want to, but in better language, or for posts which are particularly arresting and thought-provoking.

Nifft, although the second post you cite was certainly helpful in the context of the thread, the only person who would ever really have given you XP for such a thing, IMO, would have been the OP, and there are various reasons why he/she might never have done so. To the rest of us, it was a list of magic items, nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## Bullgrit

wedgeski said:
			
		

> I've received points for several different types of post, but yes, more for the quip or drive-by-joke than for posts which actually expand the discussion.



Maybe this is a good function for the xp feature? Instead of adding another useless post to the thread just to say "LOL!", the reader can click the xp button.

Bullgrit


----------



## Nifft

wedgeski said:


> Nifft, although the second post you cite was certainly helpful in the context of the thread, the only person who would ever really have given you XP for such a thing, IMO, would have been the OP, and there are various reasons why he/she might never have done so. To the rest of us, it was a list of magic items, nothing more, nothing less.



 Well, that's kind of my point. Being on-topic is *relevant to a minority*, while borderline threadcrapping is appealing to the majority.

Now, I've been hilarious since long before EN World's XP system came along. It's not something developed in reaction to XP. But as a DM, I know the way to get more behavior of any given type is to reward that behavior, and that's what I see the XP system doing: rewarding a behavior which, while fine in moderation, doesn't really need to be encouraged.

This is certainly just my opinion. It's based on the XP I've gotten, which may be more or less than other folks.

- - -

IMHO would be more interesting to see per-post XP (i.e. XP tags on individual posts rather than on a poster as a whole). That way you could reward good posts without assigning any lasting merit to the poster.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## LightPhoenix

Bullgrit said:


> Maybe this is a good function for the xp feature? Instead of adding another useless post to the thread just to say "LOL!", the reader can click the xp button.




"Me-too" posts are always going to be a problem on any message board.  The only way to convert the XP button to prevent that is to adopt a Digg/Reddit style system where XP actually has an effect on how the posts are read.  That is (IMO) completely contrary to how a message board, and specifically this community, works.



Nifft said:


> IMHO would be more interesting to see per-post XP (i.e. XP tags on individual posts rather than on a poster as a whole). That way you could reward good posts without assigning any lasting merit to the poster.




I think part of the problem with that may be a technical issue.  That's additional data (possibly a sheet, not sure as to vB's system) you have to attach to every post, versus attaching it to every user.  The latter is much less load on the system than the former.

Aside from that though, I'm not certain I see a point to adopting a per-post XP system.  That doesn't really solve the problem you've stated regarding on-topic versus off-topic posts getting XP.  Presumably, there would be a way of monitoring high-XP posts in a per-post system.  It would be impossible to separate the post from the poster, and such an index of high-XP posts would include poster information, even tangentially (say, by clicking the link to read the post).  

Of course, all high-XP posts could be monitored completely anonymously; that is, an index of high-XP posts has the user information (poster, thread links, etc) stripped from it.  I would argue that defeats the purpose of _any_ XP system, which is to reward good posting behavior.  It still does nothing to change XP-granting behavior (on- vs. off-topic) while removing any positive benefits of the XP system.  In which case, why even bother using it?


----------



## Nifft

LightPhoenix said:


> "Me-too" posts are always going to be a problem on any message board.



 I think his point was that the XP system reduces the number of "Me-too" posts, since users will either post a "me too" or click to add XP.

IMHO, this is a good point, and a good thing to have happening.



LightPhoenix said:


> I think part of the problem with that may be a technical issue.  That's additional data (possibly a sheet, not sure as to vB's system) you have to attach to every post, versus attaching it to every user.  The latter is much less load on the system than the former.



 I know that every XP is permanently associated with a specific post already, but I don't know how the data is stored or indexed. So you may be right in assuming technical impracticality.



LightPhoenix said:


> Aside from that though, I'm not certain I see a point to adopting a per-post XP system.  That doesn't really solve the problem you've stated regarding on-topic versus off-topic posts getting XP.  Presumably, there would be a way of monitoring high-XP posts in a per-post system.  It would be impossible to separate the post from the poster, and such an index of high-XP posts would include poster information, even tangentially (say, by clicking the link to read the post).



 The point of per-post XP would be:
1/ Act as a disincentive to cliques; and
2/ Remove focus on "good poster", put focus on "good post".

This last bit reduces the potential for rep-drama greatly, since people are way less touchy about "stuff I did" vs. "stuff I *am*".



LightPhoenix said:


> that defeats the purpose of _any_ XP system, which is to reward good posting behavior.



 I think we do agree about this. My original point was that, of all my behavior on this forum, the stuff I'm rewarded for most is not the stuff I consider my best posting behavior.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Bullgrit

I just gave a round of xp to the folks giving great answers in this thread:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/off-to...legomenon/269348-there-warm-places-space.html

I love these kinds of discussions, where I learn something.

Unfortunately, there's a limit to how much you can give in 24 hours. So I didn't get to reward every person who contributed good information.

Bullgrit


----------



## SkidAce

Nifft said:


> ...My original point was that, of all my behavior on this forum, the stuff I'm rewarded for most is not the stuff I consider my best posting behavior.
> 
> Cheers, -- N




Exactly, it's what other people consider rewardable.  Which can be infuriating when you get rewarded for something you consider nothing.

I understand your point.  Perhaps by keeping your standard per the rewarding of xp, your behavior will sway others by way of example.  But until then their xp rewarding habits show what they value in the conversation.


----------



## Blackbrrd

I have only gotten XP for helpful posts, but no XP for funny posts. My humor is maybe a bit dry?


----------



## Rel

Nifft said:


> I have some further thoughts on why XP are a poor reward mechanism, but at least this forum doesn't have the "neg rep" drama associated with certain other places.




Ha!  Not for you maybe!

When the rep system was first put in place here the various mods wanted to see if they had the ability to negrep.  Guess who they tested THAT on!

I only recently got out of the negatives.

Oh the dramaz!


----------



## LightPhoenix

This is all my opinion of course, I thought I'd preface my post with that.



Nifft said:


> I think his point was that the XP system reduces the number of "Me-too" posts, since users will either post a "me too" or click to add XP.




Except, I don't think this is happening at all right now.

I think a good example is any of the various rules discussions.  Not so much the tendency for them to digress into the message board version of two people past each.  However, before that happens, usually there are several people who basically state the same thing without adding anything new.

The nature of message boards is to post messages, even if nobody else reads them.  That lends itself to "me-too" style posting, especially if XP doesn't affect the way messages are read.  The reason it works for news aggregation sites like Digg/Reddit/Slashdot is because you can filter and sort based on the "XP."  We can't do that here, so I'd argue that it would show very little reduction in "me-too" posts.



> I know that every XP is permanently associated with a specific post already, but I don't know how the data is stored or indexed. So you may be right in assuming technical impracticality.




My guess is that this is incorrect.  XP is attached to the _poster_ as a data sets of XP Giver, Comment, Time, and Post Number.  That way, each poster has a table for this, versus every post having information.  It only ever gets called when someone looks at a poster's experience page.



> The point of per-post XP would be:
> 1/ Act as a disincentive to cliques; and
> 2/ Remove focus on "good poster", put focus on "good post".




So long as XP is identifiable with a poster, you can't solve either of these.

Heck, so long as you have posters, you're going to have these.  Hence, threads like The Hive.  There are certainly in-jokes between members of the boards.  I'd say most of us here in Meta form a clique, by virtue of us discussing site policy, separate from anyone else posting on the boards.  I guarantee when someone like Piratecat or Morrus posts in a thread, they're recognized as good posters, in the same way certain people are recognized as poor posters.



> I think we do agree about this. My original point was that, of all my behavior on this forum, the stuff I'm rewarded for most is not the stuff I consider my best posting behavior.




I certainly think you have a valid point in that.  I'm just not sure where a per-post system differs from a per-poster system, when posts and posters are intimately linked.

The more I think and post about this, the more I'm wondering why ENW has an XP system at all.  Since there's no real way to filter posts based on XP, it's basically a meaningless stat.  I suppose that's the point though.


----------



## Nifft

LightPhoenix said:


> Except, I don't think this is happening at all right now.
> 
> I think a good example is any of the various rules discussions.



 Well, in a rules discussion, "me too" can actually be valuable. If a large number of people read a passage and take from it the same meaning, that meaning gains credibility by the sheer virtue of volume.

That's a feature of language. It's quite different from "I like jello" + "me too".




LightPhoenix said:


> My guess is that this is incorrect.  XP is attached to the _poster_ as a data sets of XP Giver, Comment, Time, and *Post Number*.



 ... and Post Number = a specific post. So they are associated with a specific post. You're not contradicting me here. Or am I reading you wrong?



LightPhoenix said:


> I guarantee when someone like Piratecat or Morrus posts in a thread, they're recognized as good posters, in the same way certain people are recognized as poor posters.



 I'll grant you Piratecat, who is also a very handsome man, but Morrus 100% troll.

The clique thing explained below.



LightPhoenix said:


> So long as XP is identifiable with a poster, you can't solve either of these.
> (...)
> I'm just not sure where a per-post system differs from a per-poster system, when posts and posters are intimately linked.



 Well, I posted the per-post XP idea in response to some ideas on this thread. What it's supposed to solve is:
1/ Clique threads (like "Hivemind") will never express XP generated inside the thread to the outside world.
2/ Prolific posters (like me) will have our higher XP spread out over more posts, so we won't look disproportionately awesome.



LightPhoenix said:


> The more I think and post about this, the more I'm wondering why ENW has an XP system at all.  Since there's no real way to filter posts based on XP, it's basically a meaningless stat.  I suppose that's the point though.



 Yeah, it's pretty meaningless, and it's not something that even I get very worked up about.

But my point is: if it were to have an effect, IMHO that effect would not be positive.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer

Anyone think that having a hurdle of 50 posts may be an incentive to giving out XP for "junk" reasons?

If it take 50 posts to give xp again to someone who often contributes quality, well-researched posts again, then some might think they need to flush through waves of amusing/pithy/snarky posts just to be able to reinforce that quality poster again.

If this is occurring at all . . . would that be an intended or unintended consequence?


----------



## LightPhoenix

Nifft said:


> ... and Post Number = a specific post. So they are associated with a specific post. You're not contradicting me here. Or am I reading you wrong?




No, I'm thinking over-technically, and missing each other.

(Tech stuff)
My supposition is that each user has a linked table that lists all of their XP.  The table lists all the stuff I listed above, but the table itself is attached to the user.  The post is only referenced by the post number, but the table is attached to the user.

A true per-post system would have each post linked to a table, listing the same stuff.  You'd have one table for every single post, instead of one table for each user.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Eric Anondson said:


> Anyone think that having a hurdle of 50 posts may be an incentive to giving out XP for "junk" reasons?
> 
> If it take 50 posts to give xp again to someone who often contributes quality, well-researched posts again, then some might think they need to flush through waves of amusing/pithy/snarky posts just to be able to reinforce that quality poster again.
> 
> If this is occurring at all . . . would that be an intended or unintended consequence?




1) If its happening, its probably an unintended consequence.  Ah, who am I kidding?  I've done so myself!

2) That is an excellent observation.


----------



## MichaelSomething

Dannyalcatraz said:


> 1) If its happening, its probably an unintended consequence.  Ah, who am I kidding?  I've done so myself!




Yes you did.

If the 50 person cycle is removed, that leads to the problem of a very small group making an EXP feedback loop.  No exp system is perfect.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer

MichaelSomething said:


> If the 50 person cycle is removed, that leads to the problem of a very small group making an EXP feedback loop.



Not perfect, but could a smaller benchmark be a bit _better_? 40, 30, 25?


----------



## Nifft

Eric Anondson said:


> Not perfect, but could a smaller benchmark be a bit _better_? 40, 30, 25?



 Nah. Giving out random XP isn't a problem. Actually, it could be the solution to my issue with XP.

See, if people were to give out "random XP", I bet they would still have standards regarding post quality. I hold that people giving out "random XP" would not reward bad behavior.

So long as they're rewarding behavior that is merely average (or slightly above), then the reward system would work tolerably well.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Obryn

...or they could be like me and hand out rep accidentally while trying to report a post. 

I am the saddest turtle.

-O


----------



## Rel

Obryn said:


> ...or they could be like me and hand out rep accidentally while trying to report a post.
> 
> I am the saddest turtle.
> 
> -O




Aw, poor little guy.  Here, have some +rep.


----------



## vagabundo

Obryn said:


> ...or they could be like me and hand out rep accidentally while trying to report a post.
> 
> I am the saddest turtle.
> 
> -O




You might have been the only one to ever give him rep - EVAR.. 

You should feel proud.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Obryn said:


> ...or they could be like me and hand out rep accidentally while trying to report a post.
> 
> I am the saddest turtle.
> 
> -O



I suppose Christmas is the time of forgiving, family and friendship and all that, so ... 

But I'd be wary of the Krampus if I were you.


----------



## Pbartender

Nifft, allow me to back up the discussion for a moment...



Nifft said:


> The second post took about 45 minutes of research, and is very much on-topic:
> http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/268335-magic-items-quick.html#post5005774




I'll be honest with you...  I could have sworn I gave everyone who contributed to that thread XP.  Especially since I used quite a few of the items off of your list.

I try really, really hard to give out XP for good, useful, helpful, thoughtful posts.  It was, though, mere hours before my game session was scheduled to start, I was in a terrible hurry, and it must have slipped my mind.

Sorry about that.  I know it doesn't really mean that much, but let me go back and do what I'd intended to do in the first place.


EDIT:

I also notice that there is a hard limit on how much XP you can hand out in a 24 hour period (I could only give XP to 3 of the 4 posters who helped me in that thread).  Both this and the 50 person cycle make it really hard to reward the people I want to reward.  And if I can't reward them immediately, the chances of me remembering to come back and reward them at a later time is exceedingly slim.

That may be why I didn't give you XP for that post that day, Nifft...  I now notice in my "Latest Experience Points Given" I had already given out several XP the night before and the morning of posting that thread.  I was probably already past my quota for the day.


----------



## Nifft

Pbartender said:


> I'll be honest with you...  I could have sworn I gave everyone who contributed to that thread XP.  Especially since I used quite a few of the items off of your list.
> 
> I try really, really hard to give out XP for good, useful, helpful, thoughtful posts.  It was, though, mere hours before my game session was scheduled to start, I was in a terrible hurry, and it must have slipped my mind.
> 
> Sorry about that.  I know it doesn't really mean that much, but let me go back and do what I'd intended to do in the first place.



 Please, it's not that big a deal, though I do appreciate the thought.

It doesn't really change my stance that XP is just not very meaningful. I'm happy to help, and have been since long before the XP system came into play.

(And it doesn't really change the statistics enough: if I were to optimize for XP gain, I'd have to skip making thoughtful, time-consuming posts like that one... so if XP were to influence my behavior, it would not be for the best.)

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Bullgrit

MichaelSomething said:
			
		

> If the 50 person cycle is removed, that leads to the problem of a very small group making an EXP feedback loop.



I’m finding the 50-person cycle damned annoying. I keep hitting the “You must spread some experience around” thing so much it’s aggravating.

I give a poster some xp for a good post. Over the next few weeks, I give out 35 xp to various other posters (that's very generous, I would think). Then the first guy informs/entertains me again (three weeks later, maybe dozens more posts by him), but I can’t give him xp yet. Really? 

What, really, would be the harm even if someone did work the system to get a lot of xp? So what? What’s the fear of xp awards?

I don’t get it. XP is very restricted – we’re afraid someone will spam experience points. But post count is wide open – we’re not afraid someone will spam posts. We’re afraid someone may build up undo xp, but there’s no problem with someone posting a bunch of crap to build up their post count?

Bullgrit


----------



## Umbran

Bullgrit said:


> What, really, would be the harm even if someone did work the system to get a lot of xp? So what? What’s the fear of xp awards?




In a word - cliquishness.

You've seen factionalism on these boards and elsewhere, right?  We didn't want the XP system used to support such.  We didn't want smaller circles of people getting into self-supporting XP cliques.  As it is set now, in order to gain significant levels of XP, the appeal of your writing has to be pretty broad.


----------



## Thornir Alekeg

Umbran said:


> In a word - cliquishness.
> 
> You've seen factionalism on these boards and elsewhere, right?  We didn't want the XP system used to support such.  We didn't want smaller circles of people getting into self-supporting XP cliques.  As it is set now, in order to gain significant levels of XP, the appeal of your writing has to be pretty broad.




So what is the intent of the XP system as those of you running the boards see it?  

If I get XP, I know that [Sally Field] you love me, you really love me [/Sally Field].  If I don't get XP, then it is clearly a message that I am not worthy and should strive to do better.  

Actually I don't really care all that much about XP. While it is nice to get some along with a message about why,  I find that I care more about people responding to what I say in a thread, feeling like I am a part of a conversation, than getting kudos from somebody.

Last note - anybody see the irony in Nifft not liking the XP system and yet having one of the higher totals that I have noticed on the boards?


----------



## Bullgrit

Umbran said:
			
		

> In a word - cliquishness.
> 
> You've seen factionalism on these boards and elsewhere, right? We didn't want the XP system used to support such. We didn't want smaller circles of people getting into self-supporting XP cliques. As it is set now, in order to gain significant levels of XP, the appeal of your writing has to be pretty broad.



In a shorter word - so?

In [too] many, many words - 

What benefit does someone get if a bunch of sycophants boost his xp up to 5,000 points? What if I sat here all day just giving you continuous xp. What good does it do you to be a level 21 Terrasque, or whatever? Does this hurt or hinder someone else? Is there a limited number of xp? Does seeing someone's xp level under their name in some way give their posts more weight?

What benefit does someone get for a huge post count total? Does having 40,000 post count give the poster some value over a poster who only has 40?

If we're not afraid that someone is going to spam the boards just to get their post count high, why are we afraid that someone is going to work with others to get their xp high? And even if they do, _so what?_

Heck, take away the level under our names, and will anyone know (other than the poster and the xp awarder) anything about anyone's xp?

I'm just not seeing a problem, potential or realized.



> As it is set now, in order to gain significant levels of XP, the appeal of your writing has to be pretty broad.



I don't see it this way. As it is set now, in order to gain significant levels of XP, the persons awarding XP have to be pretty free and easy with awarding to lots of people.

You could post one really great post, with broad appeal, each week, and because of the 50-cycle and the daily limit, you wouldn't get XP for the post but every couple--few weeks.

I'm going to give you XP for the post I'm responding to, to make a point. 1- to show it doesn't help you or hurt anyone else. 2- it doesn't mean anything valuable to you or to me if the XP is just thrown at you. 3- it gets me closer to being able to give XP to someone else again.

Edit: LOL! I can't give XP to you until I spread some around.

Bullgrit


----------



## Nifft

Bullgrit said:


> I’m finding the 50-person cycle damned annoying. I keep hitting the “You must spread some experience around” thing so much it’s aggravating.



 Huh, I've never actually run into that.

Maybe try reading more forums? Story Hour writers deserve plenty of non-material rewards.



Bullgrit said:


> there’s no problem with someone posting a bunch of crap to build up their post count?



 People have been permanently banned for pretty much exactly that.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Umbran

Bullgrit said:


> In a shorter word - so?




That works both ways.  You can't give a second point for some longish while.  So?   

You've already told someone you've liked what they wrote.  Doing it again, ("I really like your posts" or "I really really liked your posts") isn't adding a whole lot of new information to the system.  



> If we're not afraid that someone is going to spam the boards just to get their post count high, why are we afraid that someone is going to work with others to get their xp high? And even if they do, _so what?_




I can think of cases where spamming the boards did become a problem.  One earned the person a permaban.  While infrequent, it has been a concern.




> I'm just not seeing a problem, potential or realized.




When we were instituting the system, Morrus asked among the mods for input.  A few of us had noted cases in other forums where, through abuse, the system had become meaningless, and had promoted behaviors that are not really in line with EN World's _raison d'etre_.

And anyway, that argument goes both ways.  We went for years without any such feature, and there was no "problem".  Nobody was harmed in any way by not being able to give XP.  No "problem" arises from having it be handed out slowly, either.  



> I don't see it this way. As it is set now, in order to gain significant levels of XP, the persons awarding XP have to be pretty free and easy with awarding to lots of people.




Depends on what you call "significant" I suppose.  Or, more accurately - what counts as "significant" depends on the limits in the system.  If we raised the frequency with which you could give XP, the whole system would just rescale.  Why bother?

Consider it this way - EN World is set up with slow XP awards, as a way to keep things in the Heroic tier.  Being 10th level is very meaningful in this campaign world.  It's the GM's style choice.


----------



## RangerWickett

The heroic tier thing made me laugh, and I was going to rep Umbran, but I can't.


----------



## Bullgrit

Umbran said:
			
		

> That works both ways. You can't give a second point for some longish while. So?
> 
> You've already told someone you've liked what they wrote. Doing it again, ("I really like your posts" or "I really really liked your posts") isn't adding a whole lot of new information to the system.



But the xp function is attached to a post, not the poster. Giving xp isn't saying, "I like your posts" [plural, general], it's saying, "I like this post" [singular, specific]. I figure the Friend function is for the poster.

As for "You can't give a second point for some longish while. So?" -- The so is: I can't give a second point for what is for my xp-awarding-rate a very long while. I can't say, "Good Post" to someone twice in a month. (Unless, of course, I make a post saying that, which is borderline spamming.)

Side effect: Plus, I've sometimes found an old thread/post that I find good, and I find I can't say "Thanks for the info" without thread necromancy.



> I can think of cases where spamming the boards did become a problem. One earned the person a permaban. While infrequent, it has been a concern.



So spamming is a problem, yet we still have the post counter. (For the record: I have no problem with the post counter.)



> When we were instituting the system, Morrus asked among the mods for input. A few of us had noted cases in other forums where, through abuse, the system had become meaningless, and had promoted behaviors that are not really in line with EN World's raison d'etre.



What resulted from the abuse? That's what I'm asking in all of this: What benefit can an abuser get, and what harm can an abuse do with this xp system? What bad behavior would be promoted?



> And anyway, that argument goes both ways. We went for years without any such feature, and there was no "problem". Nobody was harmed in any way by not being able to give XP. No "problem" arises from having it be handed out slowly, either.



Well heck, that argument can be made for anything. We went for years without ENWorld, and there was no "problem." Nobody was harmed in any way by not being able to read news on a 3rd-party Web site.

Then we got ENWorld. We liked it. But what if we could only access the site once a week. Or only after visiting 50 other Web sites. When someone says, "We like this site, and want to visit a couple or so times a week."



> Depends on what you call "significant" I suppose. Or, more accurately - what counts as "significant" depends on the limits in the system. If we raised the frequency with which you could give XP, the whole system would just rescale. Why bother?
> 
> Consider it this way - EN World is set up with slow XP awards, as a way to keep things in the Heroic tier. Being 10th level is very meaningful in this campaign world. It's the GM's style choice.



You could increase the XP needed to level, and then let people give XP more often.

It's like with D&D. The PCs need 2,000 XP to level up. The DM likes awarding XP, the Players like getting XP. But the designers say, "We don't want the PCs leveling up too fast, so you can only award and get XP for every 10th encounter." The Designers could simply have raised the level up number to 20,000 XP, and let the DMs and Players continue with their fun rate of awards.

Overall, I'm just saying, the XP system ENWorld has is a great thing. But its use is so restricted that it's near useless.

So, I ask, what bad happens if the restriction is lightened or removed?

I won't make any more comments on this subject. It's not that important to me. I just think it's a waste of a really good idea. 

Bullgrit


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Well, if we can't persuade you shorten the cycle, perhaps we could get you to add a smiley for "my head is going to swell" for compliments given_ in thread?_

Don't ask me what it should be, though.  I'm just a simple country lawyer, and lack the sophistication of y'all city folk.


----------



## MichaelSomething

Well one thing about the exp system is that I would like to know the total amount of EXP I given out.  This way I can keep it even with the exp I gain.  I'm OCD like that


----------

