Should non-staff members be able to have 3+ VP?

Originally Posted by RULE

Being a member of staff doesnt mean your a top voter though. We've had plenty of mods / admins over the years who were terrible voters,

I agree but it seems like the most actionable solution, having mods on a slideable VP scale would cause all kinds of conflict among the staff team.

Originally Posted by RULE

Being a member of staff doesnt mean your a top voter though. We've had plenty of mods / admins over the years who were terrible voters,

I agree but it seems like the most actionable solution, having mods on a slideable VP scale would cause all kinds of conflict among the staff team.

Originally Posted by Nicholas

Yes it is. These votes should never be equally weighted.

That’s why it’s the mods job to delete those type of votes. We’ve gotten lazy and just started handing people 0 VP so we can take some work off our plates. If those people had 2 vp, voting like complete idiots, there would be more work for the staff which we should have. If they continue to vote that way, they get infracted, or banned. But ya mods really don’t have much work to do on here lol.

Originally Posted by Nicholas

Yes it is. These votes should never be equally weighted.

That’s why it’s the mods job to delete those type of votes. We’ve gotten lazy and just started handing people 0 VP so we can take some work off our plates. If those people had 2 vp, voting like complete idiots, there would be more work for the staff which we should have. If they continue to vote that way, they get infracted, or banned. But ya mods really don’t have much work to do on here lol.

Originally Posted by Son of Dubai

That’s why it’s the mods job to delete those type of votes. We’ve gotten lazy and just started handing people 0 VP so we can take some work off our plates. If those people had 2 vp, voting like complete idiots, there would be more work for the staff which we should have. If they continue to vote that way, they get infracted, or banned. But ya mods really don’t have much work to do on here lol.

It took me about 20 minutes earlier to go through one users voting history and delete the votes. It would take me 20 seconds to lower their VP to 0. In the same 20 minutes I could update all of the LBA/LBT threads, vote on several battles etc. And that was just one user.

I don't think it's laziness I just don't think deleting votes instead of lowering VP is a good time investment especially when all new users automatically get 2 VP. Whether you think that's right or wrong it's not going to change soon as it would require an admin to make a change to the code.

The first user didn't break the rules so it's hard to issue a ban for that. There was talk of implementing a minimum character limit on the voting boxes but it never happened. Again though, lets not hold out hope for code changes and do nothing in the meantime.

Do you have a better suggestion than 3 VP for Staff, sliding scale of 0 - 3 VP for members? If we can get a few suggestions we can poll it in the staff forum and implement. Let's refrain from changes that require coding until X is active again and focus on the immediate changes we can make.

Originally Posted by Son of Dubai

That’s why it’s the mods job to delete those type of votes. We’ve gotten lazy and just started handing people 0 VP so we can take some work off our plates. If those people had 2 vp, voting like complete idiots, there would be more work for the staff which we should have. If they continue to vote that way, they get infracted, or banned. But ya mods really don’t have much work to do on here lol.

It took me about 20 minutes earlier to go through one users voting history and delete the votes. It would take me 20 seconds to lower their VP to 0. In the same 20 minutes I could update all of the LBA/LBT threads, vote on several battles etc. And that was just one user.

I don't think it's laziness I just don't think deleting votes instead of lowering VP is a good time investment especially when all new users automatically get 2 VP. Whether you think that's right or wrong it's not going to change soon as it would require an admin to make a change to the code.

The first user didn't break the rules so it's hard to issue a ban for that. There was talk of implementing a minimum character limit on the voting boxes but it never happened. Again though, lets not hold out hope for code changes and do nothing in the meantime.

Do you have a better suggestion than 3 VP for Staff, sliding scale of 0 - 3 VP for members? If we can get a few suggestions we can poll it in the staff forum and implement. Let's refrain from changes that require coding until X is active again and focus on the immediate changes we can make.

Originally Posted by Nicholas

I agree but it seems like the most actionable solution, having mods on a slideable VP scale would cause all kinds of conflict among the staff team.

All the more reason there should be a universal scale for VP. As opposed to selective elevated VP.

Originally Posted by Nicholas

I agree but it seems like the most actionable solution, having mods on a slideable VP scale would cause all kinds of conflict among the staff team.

All the more reason there should be a universal scale for VP. As opposed to selective elevated VP.

Originally Posted by Rant

All the more reason there should be a universal scale for VP. As opposed to selective elevated VP.

You've lost me. Why is the likelihood of conflict on staff a benefit?

Originally Posted by Rant

All the more reason there should be a universal scale for VP. As opposed to selective elevated VP.

You've lost me. Why is the likelihood of conflict on staff a benefit?

If you think everyone should be at the same vp you're dumb and I don't like you

If you think everyone should be at the same vp you're dumb and I don't like you

Originally Posted by Nicholas

You've lost me. Why is the likelihood of conflict on staff a benefit?

Why would the staff being of the same VP as regular members cause conflict between them?

---------- Post added at 03:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:20 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Bleu

If you think everyone should be at the same vp you're dumb and I don't like you

I mean on an upward scale. Lowering VP =/= Raising VP.

Originally Posted by Nicholas

You've lost me. Why is the likelihood of conflict on staff a benefit?

Why would the staff being of the same VP as regular members cause conflict between them?

---------- Post added at 03:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:20 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Bleu

If you think everyone should be at the same vp you're dumb and I don't like you

I mean on an upward scale. Lowering VP =/= Raising VP.

[Rain Matrix 2021]

Why are the mods fighting so hard for high vp

It doesn't effect u, it effects our battles tho and it seems like everybody's in agreence

[Rain Matrix 2021]

Why are the mods fighting so hard for high vp

It doesn't effect u, it effects our battles tho and it seems like everybody's in agreence

Originally Posted by Rant

Why would the staff being of the same VP as regular members cause conflict between them?

---------- Post added at 03:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:20 PM ----------



I mean on an upward scale. Lowering VP =/= Raising VP.

I think you misunderstood me. I was suggesting 3 VP be reserved for top voters as well as moderators. 4 VP being removed entirely.

I think for one mod to reduce another mods VP will cause conflict for obvious reasons and if there is reason to reduce a mods VP in the first place we should question why that person is a mod.

Originally Posted by Rain Matrix 2017

Why are the mods fighting so hard for high vp

It doesn't effect u, it effects our battles tho and it seems like everybody's in agreence

I haven't seen any mods fighting for having a higher VP than the top voters on the site? I suggested 3 VP for both. That sets them dead even, besides the staff team should be qualified to have the same VP as the best voters on the site and if they're not voting adequately then that should be looked into and rectified. Report it if you see it and we'll look into it.

Originally Posted by Rant

Why would the staff being of the same VP as regular members cause conflict between them?

---------- Post added at 03:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:20 PM ----------



I mean on an upward scale. Lowering VP =/= Raising VP.

I think you misunderstood me. I was suggesting 3 VP be reserved for top voters as well as moderators. 4 VP being removed entirely.

I think for one mod to reduce another mods VP will cause conflict for obvious reasons and if there is reason to reduce a mods VP in the first place we should question why that person is a mod.

Originally Posted by Rain Matrix 2017

Why are the mods fighting so hard for high vp

It doesn't effect u, it effects our battles tho and it seems like everybody's in agreence

I haven't seen any mods fighting for having a higher VP than the top voters on the site? I suggested 3 VP for both. That sets them dead even, besides the staff team should be qualified to have the same VP as the best voters on the site and if they're not voting adequately then that should be looked into and rectified. Report it if you see it and we'll look into it.

[Dirty Work]

I'm with @punk and @Aggo on this one for the most part. Punk's math is a bit strange, wanting it to be only 2 VP and 0 VP. Shodan is absolutely correct about 2 VP being functionally the same as 1 VP in this case.
This is always an exhausting conversation because there are so many angles on it and it seems like no two people ever have the same exact vision.
I've always thought that everyone is trying too hard to mitigate bad votes and control outcomes. I say just have everybody's vote count as one vote and let the chips fall where they may, with nobody at 0 or more than 1. But when I listen to people's gripe about all the hate voting and the voters who don't even read the battle, for example, it starts to make sense that they would want to have a system to curb that a bit.
The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of only having the options of 0 and 1 VP across the board, mods included. Adding a 2 VP option (0,1 and 2) may be a good compromise for people like @Bleu who understandably want at least a bit more to work with.
If we are going to keep it 0-4, then we should at least open up the 3 VP which is not even being used and give it to a good amount of people to balance things out. We should also give 4 VP to some members, not just mods, though more sparingly.

Edit: @Son of Dubai

[Dirty Work]

I'm with @punk and @Aggo on this one for the most part. Punk's math is a bit strange, wanting it to be only 2 VP and 0 VP. Shodan is absolutely correct about 2 VP being functionally the same as 1 VP in this case.
This is always an exhausting conversation because there are so many angles on it and it seems like no two people ever have the same exact vision.
I've always thought that everyone is trying too hard to mitigate bad votes and control outcomes. I say just have everybody's vote count as one vote and let the chips fall where they may, with nobody at 0 or more than 1. But when I listen to people's gripe about all the hate voting and the voters who don't even read the battle, for example, it starts to make sense that they would want to have a system to curb that a bit.
The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of only having the options of 0 and 1 VP across the board, mods included. Adding a 2 VP option (0,1 and 2) may be a good compromise for people like @Bleu who understandably want at least a bit more to work with.
If we are going to keep it 0-4, then we should at least open up the 3 VP which is not even being used and give it to a good amount of people to balance things out. We should also give 4 VP to some members, not just mods, though more sparingly.

Edit: @Son of Dubai