On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 03:40:40PM +0200, Ansgar wrote: > On Wed, 2020-04-15 at 08:56 +0100, Neil McGovern wrote: > > The point of the trust levels is to distribute the moderation. Whatever > > metric we come up with, it will involve a certain amount of actually > > using the site, and engaging with the community. > > Looking at some topics on meta.discourse.org, people explicitly use > trust levels as a "reward" tool to increase "user participation" in > some metric. [1] mentions this for example, but it's not the only topic > talking about reward systems or gamification in Discourse. >
I think to be accurate, this should be rephrased as "some people, who are not discourse developers explicitly use..." - I know this may seem pedantic, but posting an example of where someone's priorities are doesn't mean that Debian would have the same priorities. > Badges and other systems serve the same purpose. I conceed that it certainly can, but I would ask you to consider that there are also other uses. As the discourse developers themselves have stated, a number of the badges are there to help guide new users on how to use Discourse features, and the badge notifications quickly drop off. Additionally, each badge can be customised and individually enabled/disabled. Note: I am not making a judgement here on the suitability of any particular badge or trying to balance if the badge award system is good or bad. In fact, the *whole thing* can be disabled, or a custom one addeed to encourage people to log in once an hour, or to like every post, should we wish to do so. I simply ask that motivations are not ascribed to what is going on when other possibilities exist. > (I can do those tricks too ;-) SCNR this one time...) > *grins* Neil --
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
