posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 08:38 AM
I would suggest looking at how many other user-contributed sites have solved this problem. I think many of those options are aligned with the ATS
Not knowing the infrastructure ATS operates on, I'm unsure how feasible/infeasible changing the behavior of the threads/stars/flags implementation
I've always liked the 'earn more privileges as you contribute more' model.
www.stackoverflow.com is a great example of this. When you initially sign up, you can't do a lot more than just read the threads. As you begin
contributing, you get more rights.
Not being able to star threads until you've posted 25 messages will (nearly) completely eliminate the bias that comes from new users.
But it seems that some of the bias is stemming not just from new-user bias, but, for lack of a better term, the habit energy of the existing users. I
love the phrasing of the OPs post - it's main goal, IMHO, is to serve as a wake-up call to that very fact. "Wait a minute. Why DO I star-and-flag
that post?" For me, the rationale usually is "I think this is important enough that I want it emphasized over other stories."
It's very easy to forget that, by starring everything, you star nothing.
Impose a star-limit. Five per day. (More elegant models allow more points based on the number of points you have earned.)
Maybe allow down-starring, but only for users that have contributed, say, 100, 500 or more messages.
Make the path of least resistance for our users be aligned with the direction and emphasis that we, as a community, want the site to
The specifics are important...and not something that one person decides off-the-cuff while drafting one of his first ATS messages. Put great minds
together, and you can accomplish great things. What about starting a meta-thread with the goal of coming up with a set of proposals? These issues
are solvable, improvable.