Board Thread:Internal management/@comment-1764483-20160131204339/@comment-24024415-20160202212555

Starfruity wrote: ...there are going to be inexperienced people...

...And to be fair, this rule kinda IS increasing voting standards. Though if you have a better idea to filter out "n00bs" I'd be glad to hear it. How is a weighting rule increasing standards? It's certainly a counter to low standards and lessens their impact, but certainly does not increase those standards.

High powers can counter the low uncultured with this weight. Using TULO's example: many new users can mess up votes, and powers can alter the outcome for the benefit for the wiki, but only to an extent. Once that extent has been reached, the rule begins to no longer function as the mass of uncultured influence the vote.

This current system still allows for inexperinced to influence the vote. With the added downside of crippling some users unjustly. So no, not increasing standards in that regard.



IDEA #1: Raising the vote requirement is a simple, undisputable method to limit the problem users that I can currently think of. Doing so limits the influence of unexperienced/bad (or as you say it "n00b") users while not hampering the normal user like myself, which is probably the best outcome for this vote.

Of course, n00bs will still be able to get around this and influence the vote, but not as many will participate due to long, menotinous lengths that comes with the requirements. Trolls and griefers will most likely be found out or leave on their own accord before they have major voting rights and cause havoc. Those who want stick around but would cause problems out of ignorance (otherwise known as the "uncultured" side of the n00bs) will become more educated on wiki standards due to extended exposure.

This is why extended requirements works in my mind. It rehabilitates users to become more aware of what they are voting on and actually increases the quality of votes. Will it siphon every troll ever and would every person be fully educated? No, but those requirements are very lofty in their own regard. Filters are not stoppers, they are made to correct a majority of the quantity that flows through it. As mentioned above, even the current system is flawed in the same way. Plus this is not only a quick and easy fix, but helps remove the negative and as a biproduct promotes a healthy userbase.



IDEA #2: Vote threads for major voting rights. Simply put: it proves one's legitimacy by public opinion and not by edit #. Quality of edits, quantity of edits and time spent on wiki, personal upkeep, respect to othe users (rudeness, cussing, ect.), and acknowledgment of the rule and regulations of the wiki would all be parts of this system. Note: ALL STAFF WOULD HAVE THIS BY DEFAULT  due to those users have already proven their trust and responsibility.

This concept filters all those who want to just get the easy 25 edits and start sickening the wiki's votes with ill intentions. It also allows people without positons to prove themselves as a positive influence for the wiki without having to. Too intense? Possibly, it is still just a concept. Can people fake their persona and make bad votes afterwards? Yes, but by this point there's not much the current rule can cover. In fact, the current would actually benefit that malicious user if left to grow.

Sorry for the delayed responce and the large texts, I just want to be as thourough as possible with my ideas.