META: Number of points to start a thread

Submitted by Julian on

I and many others believe that the amount of points needed to start a thread should be raised. That troll just showed us how easy it is to create an account and, in thirty minutes, gain 100 points to start a ridiculous thread, which caused me to start trembling for 15 seconds. My suggestion would be 1000 points at the bare minimum. Hope you guys will be open to changing this. Thanks.

MGoBoard

Tasker Bliss

December 10th, 2017 at 6:35 PM ^

I’ve been a member for a while, but not a frequent commenter. I made my first post the other day and wasn’t negged to oblivion. I wouldn’t mind pushing the rite of passage back to greater points or time served, though. I will just have to save what little wit I possess for longer. The board and the First Amendent will no doubt survive.

Joined: 04/20/2016

MGoPoints: 627

KennyHiggins

December 10th, 2017 at 6:20 PM ^

And MGoPoints is probably the best metric for engagement, contribution, and interest.

I don't think we'd have a shortage of good threads if we started at 2K points or 3 years as a member to start a thread.

Joined: 12/03/2016

MGoPoints: 12497

TIMMMAAY

December 10th, 2017 at 6:27 PM ^

One year on the board, or 1k points. It won't stop the shit posting, but will reduce it somewhat, while still allowing for someone new who has something worthwhile to say. 

Joined: 09/08/2008

MGoPoints: 56288

895B129D-4C82-…

December 10th, 2017 at 6:26 PM ^

This board is the worst part of this site. Keep raising the walls to keep others out, but that just makes what's inside the walls more and more inbred.

Joined: 07/04/2017

MGoPoints: 33

BryRich3

December 10th, 2017 at 6:26 PM ^

I've been reading this blog for years. I only signed up last year to comment on something. I'm not even sure how the points work. I always on the app so I can't see points. There have been a few times I've come across newsworthy information and haven't been able to post it. I believe Everyone should get a chance to post and if they screw that up then they forfeit their right to post things.

Joined: 12/09/2016

MGoPoints: 248

Lawyer12

December 10th, 2017 at 6:28 PM ^

I was on this page for a while before I even understood half the jargon. A year and 5/10k would be good; at least a full season.

Joined: 12/17/2012

MGoPoints: 3066

quercus99

December 11th, 2017 at 10:10 AM ^

If I can start a thread, then the bar is too low.  I will feel that way at 100 or even 1000.

 

Back to the topic at hand, I think that certain dodgy individuals have shown that the bar is too easy to achieve.  Furthermore, having a low bar indirectly encourages trolls to troll.  If the indoctrination is harder, and the cost higher, then less worthy individuals will not even bother.  This would make herding this collective of cats easier for the moderators, thereby improving the quality of the content for the community.

A change is beneficial in my opinion.

Joined: 01/15/2015

MGoPoints: 105

LSAClassOf2000

December 10th, 2017 at 6:32 PM ^

Somewhere, and I cannot remember where precisely, Seth once explained the rationale for 100 points being the threshhold. Back in the day here, that was the threshhold for voting and posting without the Captcha (it's been so long since I've had to worry about it). People have come to me about this too and I can't change the threshhold since I only have access to the editing functionality, not the accounts and related programming. 

Selfishly, I would like the limit raised myself. It actually would make in-game moderation a bit easier. 

Joined: 01/07/2011

MGoPoints: 130687

Frieze Memorial

December 10th, 2017 at 10:38 PM ^

The problem with your suggestion is that it unbalances the system. In the current system, when you upvote you create 2 points. When you downvote you destroy two points. Balance. In your system, when you upvote you create no points. When you downvote you presumably destroy two points. Unbalanced ... And without some sort of Federal Reserve Of Mgopoints, the economy will eventually run out of currency.

Joined: 01/09/2014

MGoPoints: 6465

Arb lover

December 10th, 2017 at 8:46 PM ^

What about changing the point system so that you get no points for comments and only points when people upvote you (or downvote you). That way if you have 100 crap posts you get nothing except hopefully 100 clicks for mgoblog adverstising revenue purposes. 

Joined: 11/26/2017

MGoPoints: 6915

ghostofhoke

December 10th, 2017 at 6:37 PM ^

5000 would be better. There are too many people here to have anyone without a year a two worth of experience creating a thread. I’d say at least 75% of the threads in the last couple of years have been complete shit. Fewer would be much better.

Joined: 11/21/2014

MGoPoints: 8562

Andystubs

December 10th, 2017 at 6:38 PM ^

FWIW, have to imagine there are plenty of responsible long time readers like me who don’t post much. That also means we aren’t posting crap. That said, still like the idea of being able to start a thread if / when there’s something of value to add.

Joined: 07/28/2014

MGoPoints: 960

Leaders And Best

December 10th, 2017 at 6:50 PM ^

Points as constituted are not a great measure. If you want to use points, people need to be more judicious in how they give them out and end things like the POSBANG posts. Some douchebag could post in a couple POSBANG threads and generate enough points to troll.

Joined: 09/09/2009

MGoPoints: 22529

speakeasy

December 10th, 2017 at 7:02 PM ^

I've been here for going on nine years and have ~100 points for each of those years. This is, of course, indicative of being much more inclined to reading and lurking than content production. But on the chance I have something worth starting a thread over, I'd like to think I've earned that right in through my nearly decade tenure despite not having a zillion points. Takeaway is that given the ease of acquiring points, time elapsed since joining seems like a much, much better way to filter out the assholes.

Joined: 04/24/2009

MGoPoints: 1059

Julian

December 10th, 2017 at 7:14 PM ^

some guy commented 100 times on old threads, then posted a thread called "Michigan Hires Rich Rodriguez as Offensive Coordinator". The thread text was "Just Kidding!". It had like 55 negs in 15 minutes.

Joined: 12/04/2017

MGoPoints: -15

KingCarr

December 10th, 2017 at 7:18 PM ^

I have an idea.  In order to post you must study Mgoblog history.  It can be a series of courses over a two year period.  Once you pass the course then you can post. 

Of course you wouldn't post this terrible topic because you would have learned it has been hashed out thousands of times.  

Joined: 07/06/2008

MGoPoints: 643

Squeezebox

December 10th, 2017 at 7:37 PM ^

so I only post when I have something positive to contribute to the conversation.  Thus low point total.

I was thrilled when I got to 100 points and could start an informative thread occasionally with new information.

Readers might want to reconsider the way they rate posts.  For many, points are given out like candy on Halloween night, resulting in bloated totals.

A closer examination of threads will show that strictly informational messages have far lower point totals, than opinion posts.

The more people act responsibly, the less the need for a sheriff.

Could we find a way to issue a warning to post responsibly, especially for newbies?  If they continue to act irresponsibly, they could be given a 3 month posting ban.  More for second offenders.

It would be fairer to penalize those who take advantage of the system, than to set an arbitrary limit that affects all.

Joined: 04/25/2014

MGoPoints: 1566