I have noticed in the Python Forum there is nothing but -1's on all of the threads except one.

So what i was wondering is can we limit the amount of down's a poster can do?

For example a member such as myself could do up to 10 down points per day, while JBennet will be able to do 50 and a new member will only be able to up ones that they fund useful. This will stop useless downing.

Just hopefully that will stop a new person just going around stuffing up the system.

I guess its meant to be self-governing, some dick will put things down, and someone else will put things back up again, and *hopefully* it evens out (kind of like vandilism on wikipedia).?

Yeah. i have just been noticing people putting things down for absolutely no reason. Constantly as well, in the Python forum every thread was -1, and only the first post had been voted on.

So thats the kind of thing that i would look at fixing.

First you people want a non-destructive rep, then you got one, then you hate it. Make up your minds people! (j/k)

It's not so bad, the most damage one person can do is -1. Every time I see a post I think shouldn't be voted down, I vote it up. Or, if you can't be bothered with that, ignore the voting system altogether, I'm sure other people will take care of it.

I find voting the voting system quite addictive somehow.

mmmm.. I understand what everyone is saying, and i agree it would be great. And i do upvote if i believe it was a good point. But i just dont like the fact that a new person can come over and down vote everything.

Oh well, hopefully as a responsible community we will be able to fight this by upvoting when necessary .

Lawl.

Are we metavoting now?

I HATE the new voting system. The add to rep was ok as it was - no need to add this nonsense. Now you get horrible -1 in bold type and really gaudy updown buttons. This just asks for some #@!* to start being a *&#~ing idiot. Is it there just to annoy people, to encourage them not to post?

Please Dani, take them away, my eyes hurt.

I want to give it a few more days to see how the "letting anyone vote up or down at anytime" is going to work out. The premise behind it is that any member can only affect anyone by ONE, and it only takes one other person to offset them. So it isn't as if someone on a rampage can really do much damage.

Also, it wouldn't make any sense to say that new members need to earn their down voting rights, because the people who are downvoting like crazy are regular members who are just trying to prove a point.

I think that it needs time to settle. The whole idea of such a voting system is that it employs the 'wisdom of crowds' and as such we can only see if it is actually working or not over time.

The concept is certainly sound enough, and has been successfully employed at many sites. If it works here or not, well we cannot tell yet, but Dani gets my full support for being bold enough to keep trying new ideas at DaniWeb rather than being happy with a static approach to site design.