Proposal: Idea Management System
I do not feel to have fully grasped this topic yet and my proposal is a work in progress.
I am submitting it since the deadline is today.
I would be happy to continue working on this if the community decides that something like this should be used or have further work done on.
It is very hard to coordinate the communication within groups.
This is getting more complicated with bigger group sizes and open access.
This makes it really hard to have high quality discussion and stay on a topic with some back and forth argumentation.
When a project grows the relative and absolute size of “newbies” grows which lowers the quality of discussions.
Giving everybody the same right and weight results in low content in public discussions and the forming of private groups to increase quality at the cost of excluding ideas from the public.
chat based system dont work well:
- engage users
- does not work well with >20 active users
- arguments with back and forth are nearly impossible unless in real time
I have witnessed this in various telegram and skype chats that grew to >100 participants.
Slack and discord chat groups try to advance on this by offering multiple channels to enable parallel discussions on different topics while engaging users in the popular chat format.
Slack has the option to use threads to answer to posts, which is a nice feature, but mostly underused.
The reply feature in telegram is just a quote feature and not well designed for splitting off discussions from a chat.
telegram reply improvement idea:
An improvement would be to have the option to have subchats from any chatgroup to reply back and forth on a specific topic.
These subchats could be viewed by any member of the chat by expanding the mainchat.
Discord is also lacking any reply feature other than a quote which makes it hard to have longer lasting discussions.
forum based systems:
- discussions dont need to be real time
- replies back and forth are possible
- reputation system can be implemented
- people are lazy and prefer to use chats
So to me a forum based system should be favored over a chat based system!
existing forum based systems:
Forums like Reddit offer a better way for on topic discussions and include the possibilty to order threads via upvotes and downvotes which is helping to promote higher quality. But it lacks a reputation system that gives members with higher reputation a better vote.
karma uses complicated algorithms which they did not publish afaik. I am not sure how much you can fake karma using bots.
I would think reddit has algo to spot bots and dont count their votes.
you can give awards to very good posts. You have to pay for coins first to give them away. So there is a cost to stop abuse.
This is a really good platform for having detailed discussions and reasonsing Pros vs Cons.
It could f.ex. be used to have a public discussion on a contest.
Every contest participant can post their idea and all users can comment, post pros/cons and judge much much they like the solution.
It can even show different perspectives f.ex. you can filter for how a certain user judges on these proposals.
I want to look more into this, esp how to implement a reputation system into this!
This solution is a clear improvement over the forum we have right now.
here is a post with possible further improvements:
My proposed reputation system/algorithm:
My proposal is to build on existing forum-based solutions and create a reputation system that orders content by upvotes/downvotes relative to the reputation of the voters.
This can be very effective to give bots/spammers very little reputation.
For this the starting point of who has all the reputation is important.
Global vs individual ranking:
My goal would be to ultimately have a system where everybody could choose their own reputation system starting point based on who they trust/like. This would need a new app.
But for a public forum that is not possible. Instead the starting point could be the admins of the forum or TON holders.
Since we are having many contests here, contest winner could also gain reputation points in the contests.
How to base the reputation rankings
- you start with a state and go from there. points could be inflationary.
- f.ex. 10 admins start with 100 Points each.
- For every post you can give up to 1-3 upvotes or 1-3 downvotes, which will add/substract points for the poster.
- points are given based on the formula: number_votes * points_voter/100
example: user 2Pac has 200 Points. He gives 2 Upvotes to user Zer0 for his good post. -> Zer0 receives 2*200/100 = 4 Points.
2Pac receives +0.1% for his first 100 votes in the last 30 days and then +0.05% for the next 100 and so on. -> Making 100 votes/month is rewarded the most.
How to integrate quadratic voting?
Zer0 would gain points depending on how many votes 2Pac did in the last 30 days.
Instead of just upvoting posts, you could also up/downvote user f.ex. because they upvoted a post which you consider spam.
You can up/downvote every user every 30 days.
This system is inflationary by design. This means if you are inactive others will gain points exponentially while you stay flat.
New accounts have zero say until they posted something that somebody with reputation liked.
-> No spamming by new account.
-> spammers can be downvoted very quickly and loose all their reputation
Implement bonding curves:
Upvoting/Downvoting should be rewarded depending on how others are up/downvoting it in the future. -> You stake part of your reputation behind a post by up/downvoting
The OP obv should have the biggest stake. Early voter have a bigger stake and late voters. Bonding curves have this feature.
This is a solution for the oracle problem as it incentivises to vote in a way which aligns with the community. The obv downside is that minorities are suppressed.
Maybe only expect 10-30 votes per user/30 days instead of 100-300. -> dont incentivise to vote on posts which are not clearly good or bad.
Different buttons to make it easy:
Upvote = 1x
Silver badge = 2x
Gold badge = 3x
downvote = -1x
spam = -2x
abusive post = -3x