BKGaming: I have a feeling that will come eventually, kind of hard to have Galaxy and not have some form of a profile system. Would defeat the purpose.

Cyraxpt: Uhm, i think that will be something like game library, wishlist (already available), amount of time played and reviews.

yyahoo: LOL. You're persistent. I'll give you that...

BKGaming: It would probably include that too, but also integrate with the site. Like the Steam profiles. No reason it can't also include forum post, ect.
BKGaming: It's not worth wasting time with it man, him bringing up George Orwell's 1984 says all you need to know right there. Raising the minimal rep to vote is a practical solution and it can be combined with other practical solutions to better enforce it like blocking voting to only those who have posted in the thread, ect. Everything else is just fluff to find fault that could happen but it's not right now.

IAmSinistar: As someone who both is and has been a moderator on other sites, I can tell you accountability is what works, ideally coupled with a minimum threshold approach. If people are held to account for their up/down votes, it increases civility among regular users, and outs trolls (be they actuals or alts). Adding a minimum threshold, such as the suggestions here of needing a certain rep in order to rep others, is also a low-cost and effective gateway. It is highly unlikely to lead to the "insular elites" that some people fear, as the GOG community is not monolithic enough for that to really take hold. Nor do I think most long-term members here have an agenda that way.

These two changes would fix 90%+ of the current problem, and at no administrative cost to GOG. I know the system already tracks votes, because it prevents multiple upvotes from one user to another from counting in the same day. And the threshold code is in place because it handles the link-posting permissions. So the code changes needed are minimal.

I would add that one further feature needed is a "Hide Post" button, because some folks use the downvote button for that purpose. It would be ideal to separate those so that folks don't need to hide posts by derepping them.

itchy01ca01: See and this is what im talking about. Bullying. You don't like that I have a differing opinion, so you attack it, attack me, gain allies that think like you and insult me :)

BKGaming: Then you have a very absurd view of bullying and attacking someone. Good day. :)

IAmSinistar: As someone who both is and has been a moderator on other sites, I can tell you accountability is what works, ideally coupled with a minimum threshold approach. If people are held to account for their up/down votes, it increases civility among regular users, and outs trolls (be they actuals or alts). Adding a minimum threshold, such as the suggestions here of needing a certain rep in order to rep others, is also a low-cost and effective gateway. It is highly unlikely to lead to the "insular elites" that some people fear, as the GOG community is not monolithic enough for that to really take hold. Nor do I think most long-term members here have an agenda that way.

These two changes would fix 90%+ of the current problem, and at no administrative cost to GOG. I know the system already tracks votes, because it prevents multiple upvotes from one user to another from counting in the same day. And the threshold code is in place because it handles the link-posting permissions. So the code changes needed are minimal.

I would add that one further feature needed is a "Hide Post" button, because some folks use the downvote button for that purpose. It would be ideal to separate those so that folks don't need to hide posts by derepping them.

BKGaming: [...]

Personally I would just make it like every other forum, post count raises rep. More post you make, more rep you have. Simple. [...].

BKGaming: This... as someone with nearly 10 years of admin/moderator experience this works best.

HypersomniacLive: I can't see that work well here. Just lake a look at how many posts this user with the multiple alts is making, based on this system, their rep would sky-rocket in no time. Would that mean that they're a positive presence on the forum?

itchy01ca01: And I was there in beginning with BBS's, gopher, etc. My experience differs greatly from yours, obviously, but yours is the "right one" because you have the rep i guess.

BKGaming: This is the normal system on forums. But the way GOG handles rep, not every post = 1 rep. I believe you only get 1 rep per day by posting. Obviously you might need to play with the formula here to find balance.

Typically rep type systems are is not about who is awesome or who is horrible on many forums, rep is about who is active and part of the community. Like I said they could use other systems like the Like/Dislike post to say if we like what the user post or not. You could then include something under there name like "Generally Positive" or "Generally Negative" to dictate what type of post this person is known for using a formula based on how my likes/dislikes received. Rather than some number that doesn't matter.
BKGaming: That your view of it. I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, there is some truth there. Rather that your opinion is based on stuff that is not currently happening therefor it's nothing something that should be focused on right now. IF and when it does, then we can deal with it. Right now this issue is alt accounts down voting, not senior members ganging up on the little guys. This change can stop that.

itchy01ca01: Im also a moderator on a few forums as well, and I've helped bring in the rep system you were talking about. It created elitism, oligarchy and eventually people got so fed up with the community regulars controlling all aspects that they left and the forum was left with 4 people, talking in circles to themselves. It was funny, but very sad. I don't want to see Gog become that.

itchy01ca01: And I was there in beginning with BBS's, gopher, etc. My experience differs greatly from yours, obviously, but yours is the "right one" because you have the rep i guess.

Luned: Also, an "Ignore All Posts by This User" button would be useful. People could simply choose not to have posts from users they dislike shown to them.