Psycho-Babble Administration | about the operation of this site | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: Appreciation

Posted by Dr. Bob on August 1, 2010, at 2:43:33

In reply to Re: Appreciation » Dr. Bob, posted by 10derHeart on July 31, 2010, at 13:57:53

> >It wouldn't need to be public which posts were and weren't rewarded with points.
>
> It wouldn't"need" to be? What does that mean? Who decides? You? Each poster?
>
> Confused, as usual. If this is so, then why is there even a discussion here? If points weren't public, how would anyone know anything about them enough to feel hurt or good. etc? And if "private" (whatever that means) the why do it at all?
>
> I don't get it.

It could be completely private, and posters could still feel good about having been appreciated by others:

> > Getting points would just be a bonus reward, so you feel good about helping others out and you have tangible proof of your helpfulness. You can look at all the points you have and think, wow, I've helped a lot of people! Then you feel good about yourself.

But I think there's something to be said for it not being completely private. If people can see which posts a poster appreciates, that could help them help that poster in the future. And if they can see the point totals of other posters, that would give them a context for their own point total.

The more settings there are, the more complicated it would be, but one way to do it would be to give each poster these options:

1. giving points
a. give points and show which posts receive them
b. give points, but don't show which posts receive them
c. don't give points

2. receiving points
a. receive points and show posts which receive them
b. receive points, but don't show which posts receive them
c. don't receive points

3. showing total
a. show total
b. show total only if in top 10
c. don't show point total

The initial poster would have to give (1a or 1b) and the appreciated poster would have to receive (2a or 2b) for points to be awarded at all.

The initial poster would have to give and show (1a) and the appreciated poster would have to receive and show (2a) for it to show which post the initial poster appreciated.

Maybe a separate page would show the posters who agreed to be shown. 3b (only the top 10) could be the default. Even if a poster's point total weren't shown, they would still be able to find out for themselves where they stood relative to others.

How does that sound?

Bob


a brilliant and reticent Web mastermind -- The New York Times
backpedals well -- PartlyCloudy


Share
Tweet  

Thread

 

Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post


Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.

 

Start a new thread

 
Google
dr-bob.org www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for
in

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Administration | Framed

poster:Dr. Bob thread:952980
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100714/msgs/956660.html