| PAGES: «prev 1 2 |  REPLY TO THIS THREAD  START NEW THREAD |
 Topic: [Suggestion] Wiki Points
| |
 Relmutsie AN
|
 Nov 02, 09 at 12:27am |
|
I used to think you were cool. To me, it sounds like you're butthurt about CRS/GG getting "no recognition", and using them as an example to say they're more important than the wikis.
I think you need to sound much more professional than you are now, because it sounds like you need a pacifier. They're all important jobs; CRS, GG, neo news team, moderator, wiki staff, the like. To say one is more important than the other, or this deserves more than the other, is bullshit. You have your neopoints and your gamegrep points outshining your post count (sometimes), you have your approval jobs and whatever. It's bullshit to say you're not recognised. Your job is important to the site. To wiki contributors and staff, it's as if we're on a different website altogether, like we're aliens or something. All we're suggesting is a nice little feature to showcase our work a little more. The section in our profiles doesn't really make people want to contribute, thinking that their work is going to be for shit (I'll get to this later). Something like the neopoint system or the gamegrep point system, for wikis, would be nice. Isn't it a little bit ironic that you say we get a feeling of warmth or accomplishment for doing our work, yet you're crying about CRS not getting recognition? That's beyond bullshit. ------------------- | |
 quote quick quote  edit quick edit  del  posts in thread  report
| |
 Dark Arcanine(neocrs) | (gamegrep)
Permanently Plugged In       total posts: 14586 neopoints: 5441 GameGrep pts: 9372 since: Apr 2007 |
 Nov 02, 09 at 12:36am |
|
I'm sorry that members get childish when someone says they're against their suggestion. All I said was that other things are different, shouldn't be compared and that there is more important circumstances where things aren't fair.
They're all different, yet you want to treat them like they're exactly the same. I just said that you need to come up with a way for this to work and all you're doing in your post is trying to downgrade me. Makes you ask yourself the question, who here is being the baby? I don't need to prove myself or make myself feel big, what I am saying though is that at the current point in time this suggestion won't work. I get a lot of enjoyment working for my positions. CRS for example is voluntary and I like to think I show some initiative to help out the team. It has nothing to do with this suggestion, again I think you're the one with a problem here, for you are a very rude member to many people. You're acting as if I've called you all idiots for wanting this, though I would call you one for the way you're acting. Such behaviour isn't going to get you anywhere I assure you. I've said my part, I said this will not work unless it's changed. So don't you go try and be rude to me when I've done nothing wrong and you clearly have an attitude problem. I will say nothing further here. I clearly expressed my opinion and have no wish to engage in a long and pointless argument with people that harbour social issues. Trust me, if I didn't care about what I do, I wouldn't be doing the work. As it is, I do my best to do work for this site in several ways, more than you in fact. So yeah, I am not remotely bothered. ------------------- Gone Fission: Blog Centaurus-A | Decrepit Birth | Gorod | Necrophagist | Nile | Psycroptic | Revocation | |
|
quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report
| |
|
Relmutsie AN
|
Nov 02, 09 at 12:49am |
|
(This is a slightly hypocritical post)
Slow down mate. I swear so many people have this amazing ability to take a few words and blow them out of proportion. First off, if I was flaming you, it was well hidden. I never tried to insult you; all I was saying was that you appear to be on a high horse right now. I wasn't saying that you were calling us all idiots. However... quote Dark ArcanineHmmmmm. You make it sound as if we're less important, and that we don't know what we're talking about. This is not the case at all. There is a review process. We call them wiki staff. See we actually know what we're talking about, and we do go through each edit to check for accurate information. Is this not good enough for you, DA? I think what makes this funnier is that you think my entire post was just intended to be a direct insult to you. Get real, please. As for my attitude, I know I have a problem. But if you read my post as a complete insult, something is wrong with you (NOT AN INSULT GUY). quote Dark ArcanineOOOOOOOOOOH LOW BLOW. LET'S INSULT THE GUY WITH 4 TAGS WHO APPEARS NOT TO BE DOING ANYTHING.  EDIT: I'm out for tonight...feel like shit...will reply/edit in the morning  ------------------- | |
|
quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report
| |
|
Dark Arcanine (neocrs) | (gamegrep)
Permanently Plugged In total posts: 14586 neopoints: 5441 GameGrep pts: 9372 since: Apr 2007 |
Nov 02, 09 at 1:07am |
|
I apologise if you're genuine, because I take my actions around here seriously and won't stand around to be insulted by them.
All I said was that this idea wouldn't work and I've had to endure member-after-member. I think everyone is missing the big picture here, that I said it's a fine idea if you can make it work. I never said you don't deserve it. Though I did say don't make comparisons of different systems because they are different systems, that goes without saying. If I could be forgotten for two seconds and just one sentence of what I said actually taken in, I'm merely asking people to come up with a way for this to work in a system where there is no review process. I'm not saying you lot are wrong because there isn't one or that it's less important, as you seem to be taking it. I also never said I have a problem with Wiki Staff either. I will say, however, that they are not on every Wiki and that many things go unnoticed for long periods of time and indeed, could be covered up and not discovered for a very long time. Yes there is a process but only if someone chooses to, it's not a compulsory process on everything which is what you're not taking into account. I did say I wouldn't post but this suggestion is getting stupid, it's about a points system and not a "let's have a go at Dark Arcanine and accuse of him of insecurity issues". I beg all future posters from this point on to take this into account, focus on the suggestion at hand and not the chance to try and give me crap, I'm far beyond it. ------------------- Gone Fission: Blog Centaurus-A | Decrepit Birth | Gorod | Necrophagist | Nile | Psycroptic | Revocation | |
|
quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report
| |
|
Avalith Avasythe: Dividing by Zero since 2008/0
(moderator) RPG/Adventure [DS] Wiki Staff Applications wiki staff chrono neowiki pokemon yugioh   total posts: 19428 GameGrep pts: 3888 since: Jul 2003 |
 Nov 02, 09 at 3:27am |
|
Honestly.. I don't see why more recognition or incentives are needed. We've got contributor tags. We've got staff tags. Consistent, long-term contributors have a chance to get a free name change. Wiki edits are prominently displayed on your main profile page. I personally feel that anything more would just be overbearing and another reason for self-righteous contributors to puff their chest out more and try to make others feel inferior.
-------------------  Registered Linux User No. 498029 | |
|
quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report
| |
|
Insanity Prevails (neocrs)
(moderator) Site Contributor's Forum User Reviews Critiques and Help  total posts: 14842 neopoints: 7043 GameGrep pts: 412 since: Feb 2003 |
Nov 02, 09 at 7:14am |
|
What's with the bitching about importance of site positions? That doesn't even have anything to do with it. As I recall, neopoints, gg points and wiki edits are not earned solely by members in those site positions so it's a moot point.
The focus should really be on how to make it work in the first place before you go anywhere else. Even putting aside the concept of wiki edits not going through a pre approval process you have some issues to figure out. Base this on bytes and you run into the problem where people might remove content from a wiki. Should they be hit with negative points or do you set up a system where only positive byte changes count and thus easily abused for large point rises? Base this on a number of edits and you're left with another easily abused system where loads of insignificant small edits can earn a lot of points over someone making large more worthwhile contributions. As for the voting concept I already gave my view on that. ------------------- | |
|
quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report
| |
|
Ameer Away until 20th of December
NeoXtreme  total posts: 8389 since: Feb 2004 |
Nov 02, 09 at 8:44am |
|
I just can't think of a fair way to implement any sort of Wiki system. Wiki edits aren't as tangible as walkthrough submissions, or cheats. As mentioned, there is no real way of measuring an edits merit based on discreet measurements such as bytes, or number of edits. As someone else mentioned, I believe the reason why the staff and contributor tags exist is because a point system just cannot work.
The only remedy I can think of is a general wiki contributor tag, provided that a user doesn't already have a contributor/staff tag present. -------------------  | |
|
quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report
| |
|
Chekkaa my.photos update - Nov. 21st
Seeketh Maximus    total posts: 5669 neopoints: 183 GameGrep pts: 304 since: May 2007 |
 Nov 02, 09 at 11:20am |
|
It seems like the only way to accurately give recognition for wiki work would be a person reviewing all of the work to make sure it is of good quality. Obviously though, it just would not be worth it to set up a wiki review system (like CRS). That is why I suggested the page rating system in the first place, because that is getting closer to the human-based reviewing system, but even in the post that I suggested it in, I said why it wouldn't work.
------------------- | |
|
quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report
| |
|
Daedric Prince
|
Nov 02, 09 at 2:04pm |
|
Do people edit the wikis to get recognition or edit them to help better the site? It's like people who donate money to the site. They do it to help out without thinking about getting recognized for it. It does, to a certain extent, keep track of how many edits you have in your profile. For exceptional contributors, there is the contributor tag. And for those on the staff, they have tags so people can see who is "in charge" of the wiki if they need any "higher authority." And of course they are recognized for their contribution to the site in that way as well. I don't see how those on the staff "deserve" any extra special recognition. It's quite obvious they are helping the site already.
I do see how this could make sense, seeing as the whole "well they aren't doing it to get recognized in the first place" mentality falls apart a little when you look at how neopoints and post counts are displayed. I've also just never really been a fan of all that extra "stuff" below the avatar, so maybe I'm subconsciously against this because of that. -------------------  | |
|
quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report
| |
|
Hera
|
Nov 02, 09 at 5:14pm |
|
I'm not suggesting this because we should get points because our roles are seemingly (Rather assumed) less important than those who are on gamegrep/CRS, I'm suggesting this because it would be a cool idea to have and would give more incentive and more reward to those who spend a lot of time working on the NeoWikis.
 But I can guarantee that I have seen, countless times, people saying that the NeoWikis and the people who work on them are fall less important to the site than those who work on the direct contributions to the site. Though, if Richie is so intent on making it fair. Then minus the tags and add point? It would go with the same detail as gamegrep/crs. You don't get tags for being a CRS contributor or a gamegrep user. Though, I really wouldn't like that because I know a lot of people who use the tags as a way to get to the wiki. Well, more so of an easier way to get to them. -------------------  "The first blow is the most important. It often negates the need for a second." -Agrus Kos | |
|
quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report
| |
|
Benedict
|
Nov 02, 09 at 6:31pm |
quote Chekkaa
 -------------------  | |
|
quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report
| |
|
Krunal Not just a guy... but a...
(moderator) NeoWiki Best Practices and Help NeoWiki Bug Archives NeoWiki Bugs NeoWiki Discussion, Suggestions and Feedback NeoWiki Requests and Planning RPG/Adventure [PS2] Wiki Staff Applications wiki staff finalfantasy neowiki stargate whiteknightchronicles wikiguides wiki contributor crossedge  total posts: 25813 neopoints: 77767 GameGrep pts: 17491 since: Feb 2002 |
Nov 02, 09 at 6:58pm |
|
The only way I'll agree if 1,000,000 Bytes = 1 Point.
Simple as that. Mostly because if a member deletes spam, they unfortunately lose bytes, so it's really not a consistent way of doing these things. Likewise, I can create multiple tables on various pages that are, say 20000kb+ in size, but it can easily be optimised to be 1000kb which just means that people will go more for quantity in bytes as opposed to quality and speed of loading pages.  -------------------  | |
|
quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report
| |
|
Hera
|
Nov 02, 09 at 11:32pm |
|
That's just stating if it were byte size that we based it around.
You know those scores that appear on the top contributor list on the wikis? I was thinking possible add those scores together to = the number of points you would receive. ------------------- "The first blow is the most important. It often negates the need for a second." -Agrus Kos | |
|
quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report
| |
|
Redemption "N" Custodial Engineer.
(admin)    total posts: 5051 GameGrep pts: 1066 since: Mar 2000 |
 Nov 03, 09 at 12:02am |
|
I personally wish that NeoPoints could reflect the sum total of contributions to Neoseeker. Too many different point systems fragment the concept of contributing. If contributing is helping out the site, then NeoPoints as a reflection of helping out the site should be a unified system.
Sadly, we do not have a plan on how to consistently and fairly combine all these systems. The Wiki Edits page is a good recognition page, but it lacks a connection to the rest of what people understand. I'm not sure how to solve this, I'm just pointing out we have considered this and our preferred solution involves having ONE single point system. This is similar now to how we have comment counts and forum posts. There are simply too many different numbers floating around. ------------------- The further back you can look, the farther ahead you can see. <paraphrased> - Winston Churchill | |
|
quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report
| |
| [All dates in (PT) time] | Threads List « Next Newest Next Oldest » |
| REPLY TO THIS THREAD START NEW THREAD |
PAGES: «prev 1 2 |
Powered by neoforums v0.9.8b (equilibrium)
Copyright Neo Era Media, Inc. 1999-2009
Print
subscribe
remove
