Woodruff wrote:To piggy-back on this interesting idea, include the ability to set a user-defined filter that would block posts by users that reach a certain level of negative, much as current users' posts are blocked with a foe move. In this way, forum-foe'ing would no longer be necessary (or certainly not as necessary).
That would be another option, yes, although I'm not sure I would use it in that way. So far I've never seen the need to foe anyone; and I frequently see others reading the posts of people they have foed...however I would expect that posts made by people with the lowest ratings would (hopefully) be ignored more often, because their status as trolls would be obvious to everyone from a single glance at their meter.
Dukasaur wrote:This would be a nice idea if people could be trusted to use it honestly. Unfortunately, the majority of forum users seem intent on turning everything into a partisan mud-slinging match. Inside of five minutes they would hijack this "reputation meter" and it would tell you not whether their posts are readable or not, but whether they voted for Obama or McCain.
The off-topic section is merely one part of the forum, and even if some did use the reputation meter to rate whether they agree or disagree with a post, that person's reputation would naturally equalize over time.
owenshooter wrote:and just imagine the moderation that would have to go into this due to abuse of the system... what a headache...-the black jesus
However if the meter were made totally anonymous, no moderation of the system would be required. I'll add that in the opening post.
Another idea would be to have a limit on how many + or - ratings a user could use per day, thereby making people think a little more before rating someone's post. That would also prevent someone who's having a bad day from going through the forum and rating everyone negatively (or some similar scenario).