what is "abusing the karma system?"

[kevin]

folks, this came up elsewhere. i'm curious now. what exactly is "abusing the karma system?

we already remove the ability of people to smite when they do so in malicious ways, like smiting randomly and excessively. but how do we determine "random and excessive?" or am i wrong in that being what we do?

who decides whether a member is abusing the system? what are the rules? or if there are no rules, what are the policies?

are they written anywhere, in a FAQ, or something else?

please keep this discussion on the OP. i don't want to discuss the merits of the karma system-- i'm just curious about what is and is not an appropriate use.

thanks

This is how things are done currently. Members who abuse the karma system can have their ability to grant karma taken away.

perhaps it's time we discussed this, then.

---if i can abuse the karma system, then it must mean i have broken certain rules or policies.

---if i have broken certain rules or policies, then then those rules or policies must be outlined clearly enough for the staff to make those decisions.

---if they've been outlined clearly enough, then they must be written down somewhere, else they are so obvious that writing them down is unnecessary.

i don't think i've ever seen the rules about what kinds of karma are acceptable, and to me the correct use of karma is not obvious. so case, what is "abusing the karma system?" here are some possibilities:

1) smiting or applauding anonymously (we can force karma participants to identify themselves. this is already in teh forum structure)

2) smiting or applauding with insufficient justification from the thread content (we will need an explanation of what "sufficient" is, and how to tell when it exists, and moderator input on making the decision, for each instance of karma)

3) smiting  or applauding without having read the post (how do we tell?)

4) smiting or applauding because of malice, or fond regard, rather than post content (do we evaluate karma in light of past conversations between the members?)

5) excessive smiting or applauding within some period of time

6) smiting or applauding randomly

7) you name it . . .

case, i don't know what exactly you mean by "abusing the system." what did you have in mind?

@Case

[Happy Evolute]

Ooh, goody!



Another thread about karma!

[kevin]

+1

[eyeshaveit]

Executive authority - somebody or some group has to make executive decisions, else you have a what - a democracy or some form of an 'ism'?

[Happy Evolute]

"Abusing the karma system" has so far as I can remember been:

i. Logging in simply to go around smiting everyone on the Forum for an extended amount of time ... we deleted a lot of the negative karma and revoked that member's Karma privileges for a time.
ii. Creating a sock puppet to applaud all your own posts ... we deleted all the applauds and banned the sock.

If any other moderators can remember any other examples, please weigh in.

kevin, would you consider either of those two examples to be "abuse of the karma system"?

Yes, some guidelines would be good. Suggestions welcome.

[kevin]

i'm not a moderator, HE.

you are, and you're telling me that you've been administering the karma system all this time without being able to define what abusing it is?

i think the system is attractive to trolls and social misfits who derive satisfaction from causing distress to other people. it may be that certain restrictions and limitations might make it productive in ways that have obviously failed to materialize on this forum.

but i'm not prepared to offer suggestions, because i'm not interested in reforming the system, HE. i want it removed from my life. those people who find the practice of playing the karma game fun and informative can spend their time trying to improve it.

i simply don't want to participate.

[Happy Evolute]

but i'm not prepared to offer suggestions, because i'm not interested in reforming the system, HE. i want it removed from my life. those people who find the practice of playing the karma game fun and informative can spend their time trying to improve it.

please keep this discussion on the OP. i don't want to discuss the merits of the karma system

/unsubscribe

[Case]

kev,

Determining "abuse of the karma system" is above my pay grade as a moderator. So I'm just offering my personal opinions as a Valued Member on what it might entail.

I think that in theory, the karma system should be used to offer feedback on posts not the people posting them. Like our rule on insults, smites are comparable to saying "your post is stupid" and not "you are stupid." I personally have no problem with the anonymity of it. I think it offers more honest feedback overall if people have the option to remain anonymous.

However there are accusations that some people repeatedly smite the same post over and over, smite a certain person's every post (perhaps combined with harassing or borderline harassing behavior), or go back through a person's post history to smite old posts, etc. These things, IMO, are abuses of karma because they go beyond offering feedback on specific posts. These behaviors target individuals, not their posts.

[Kiahanie]

I have no idea (neither as a Valued Member nor as a Mod) what "abuse of the karma system" would entail, and at this point interpretations are without standards and are too subjective to make a determination of "guilty." Or not.

I'm really not interested in adding a layer of Karma Rules, but if there are to be consequences to the [ab]use of karma, then actions and consequences should be spelled out.

[Kusa]

smite
\?sm?t\
verb

: to hurt, kill, or punish (someone or something)
: to hit (someone or something) very hard

A smite is by definition an act of abuse. So the question is, how do you abuse an act of abuse?

[Case]

Alright. A rare +1 from me for cleverness.

[kevin]

kev,

Determining "abuse of the karma system" is above my pay grade as a moderator. So I'm just offering my personal opinions as a Valued Member on what it might entail.

you're a moderator, case. you'll have to vote on karma abuse, if it comes to that, so you'll need to make up your mind what it is.

I think that in theory, the karma system should be used to offer feedback on posts not the people posting them. Like our rule on insults, smites are comparable to saying "your post is stupid" and not "you are stupid." I personally have no problem with the anonymity of it. I think it offers more honest feedback overall if people have the option to remain anonymous.

doesn't work that way in practice, though. HE likes to call it "the karma game," and for many people, that's what it is. how many times have you seen someone smited for stating simple facts of common knowledge, or for welcoming a new member? these static smites and applauds fog the use of karma that you want to see by rendering it indistinguishable from random.

However there are
accusations that some people repeatedly smite the same post over and over, smite a certain person's every post (perhaps combined with harassing or borderline harassing behavior), or go back through a person's post history to smite old posts, etc. These things, IMO, are abuses of karma because they go beyond offering feedback on specific posts. These behaviors target individuals, not their posts.

so are you going to search these activities out and penalize them? how would you phrase the rules?

or are you going to accept abuse of karma as an inescapable accompaniment to its existence?

how are the written policies going to be worded?

please understand, my interest is rhetorical. i think it's self-evident that karma has failed in the purpose you would like to assign to it, and i'd prefer to see it go. if you think otherwise, then you'll need to decide what is or is not "karma abuse," eventually.

remember, the term was yours, not mine.

[eyeshaveit]

By definition, anonymous karma has no high purpose and is also open to abuse. Best guess has between 75% and 95% of smites are not warranted, as they are based on bias, etc. Karma is what it is - always has been - so, why does one get their jimmies rustled over karma: hurt feelings, a need to right a wrong, a need to control, a power play, what?

[Athlete]

Is it any coincidence that the ones with the highest number of applauds are the ones crying, whining and complaining?? proof that there egos are so fragile.

Gnu Ordure - 3000 + applauds
Kevin - 4,000+ applauds

But a few smites make them cry. how cute.

their ego and esteem gets so high with more applauds, so when they get smited they get offended and dont want their negative karma touched because they are too sensitive. unfortunately theres just no 'applauds only' system, then obviously they would have nothing to cry about.

they take it wayyy too seriously man, just calm down guys.

do we see people like rickymooston, and others with the most smites complaining? NO!

[FGOH]

I seem to recall that there was a case of disabling karma when someone came in and did nothing but smite, often choosing really old posts.

[kevin]

meagain has publicly stated tht she does that. in order to raise the smute ount of people she doent lke

[Inertialmass]

http://isgodimaginary.com/forum/index.php?action=rules

v)  The "No s**t" Rule.  Do not flood the boards with inane comments across multiple threads. 

A hugely annoying (and apparently illegal, see above) form of karma abuse is to flood our threads with fake "+1"s, while not following through on the promise. 

Kevin, I want those promised plusses dammit!

+1

[Athlete]

yeh he owes me a few of those too!

[kevin]

http://isgodimaginary.com/forum/index.php?action=rules

v)  The "No s**t" Rule.  Do not flood the boards with inane comments across multiple threads. 

A hugely annoying (and apparently illegal, see above) form of karma abuse is to flood our threads with fake "+1"s, while not following through on the promise. 

Kevin, I want those promised plusses dammit!

+1

hi inertial

i opened this post because of athlete's just above.

i can't plus you every time i'd like to because of the two hour limit.

if i try to award you an applaud and it doesn't show up, it's because i've applauded you somewhere else and forgotten that i did so.

you can rest assured that you will recieve applauds from me regularly, as a reward for your continuing substantial contributions here.

[kevin]

yeh he owes me a few of those too!

sorry athlete:

Sorry, you can't repeat a karma action without waiting 2 hours.

you'll just have to wait. thank you for being so interested and engaged about karma. these threads would not be the same without your consuming interest in the matter.

[Athlete]

yeh he owes me a few of those too!

sorry athlete:

Sorry, you can't repeat a karma action without waiting 2 hours.

you'll just have to wait. thank you for being so interested and engaged about karma. these threads would not be the same without your consuming interest in the matter.

its quite alright. a pleasure to spread humor in these threads

thats the problem with letting you opt out. all of us will lose the applauds we've been getting.

[Inertialmass]

Well, okay then.  I don't want to only see a buncha magic pixie dust fertilizer spread around -- I wanna see my karma grow!  Positive karma is crucial to my self-esteem, which explains why I have always tiptoed cordially and ever so diplomatically around Maggie's and Jay's posts on race 'n' guns 'n' stuff.

And you don't really have to excuse yourself each time you open posts belonging to someone you claim to have on "Ignore" -- it's understood that placing someone on "Ignore" is only an expedient for sending the message that, "I am aloof from your lowly, earthy critique," while it's also understood that the urge to peek is irresistible.

[Athlete]

<+1>

[Athlete]

By definition, anonymous karma has no high purpose and is also open to abuse. Best guess has between 75% and 95% of smites are not warranted, as they are based on bias, etc. Karma is what it is - always has been - so, why does one get their jimmies rustled over karma: hurt feelings, a need to right a wrong, a need to control, a power play, what?

+1 Eyes.

[Inertialmass]

how did you get your english so good

Gosh thanks, but I don't see my English as anything terribly special.  Mom and Dad always had Steinbeck, Thoreau, Twain, etc. plus Mark's Handbook of Mechanical Engineering, Scientific American and Physical Review laying around the house. 

One who hasn't been around too much just lately but whose style I admire much more than my own is Urs, http://isgodimaginary.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=761

[Inertialmass]

<+1>

Ha, ha.

[Athlete]

edited coz i thought you wouldnt take it seriously and respond.

good timing though!

[Athlete]

how did you get your english so good

Gosh thanks, but I don't see my English as anything terribly special.  Mom and Dad always had Steinbeck, Thoreau, Twain, etc. plus Mark's Handbook of Mechanical Engineering, Scientific American and Physical Review laying around the house. 

thankfully i have a dictionary open since i cant understand half of the big words you use!

i guess reading a ton of books is the way to make it then!

+1

[Teaspoon Shallow]

By definition, anonymous karma has no high purpose and is also open to abuse. Best guess has between 75% and 95% of smites are not warranted, as they are based on bias, etc. Karma is what it is - always has been - so, why does one get their jimmies rustled over karma: hurt feelings, a need to right a wrong, a need to control, a power play, what?

I am going to make a guess, some members want to contribute in a positive way and negative feedback in the form of anonymous smites does not give them anything they can improve on.

For me?  I don't see it as useful tool for the purpose of argument or learning.  So I just ignore karma and try to ignore threads about it unless it will benefit our community.   Some people smite for silly reasons but I cannot see the reason they choose to smite.  It seems often the only way some members feel they can "hurt" their interlocutor is to press a button and add to a number count.  I have used the feature and found it useless.  I have no interest in trying to hurt people, if I think your post is dumb, I need to tell you why I think it is dumb.  The why is important. 

EDIT to clarify, I do give out applauds. 
1. For thoughtful posts
2. Interesting posts
3. When I see really dumb smites.

Hmmm, I see a level of hypocrisy in my actions.

[kevin]

+1