:''This is just a proposition, not policy. See the [[User talk:Alerante/Point_system|talk page]] for all discussion.''
After taking the [[Wikipedia:Wikipediholic|Wikipediholic]] test for the fourth time, I suddenly, for an inexplicable reason, had a brain spark. Why not use a point system to determine who can do what? Perhaps this was related to my browsing of [[GameFAQs]], which also uses such a system for its permissions.
Each contributor is given a number of points, essentially an indicator of the privileges a certain user had. People aim to gain these points by making contributions that others deem useful, thereby increasing the chance that someone will vote in a positive manner for them.
==Point system 2.0==
This radically differs from the previous system of point awards in that the ability to give points is restricted to a [[bureaucrat]]-like group of users. In this vein, it holds more of a similarity to [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship]], and keeps normal users from being distracted by the task of rating others.
These bureaucrats still have their own points, which means that if other ones take issue with one, they can be voted down; and that ones with more points still give more to users.
===Version 2 privilege levels===
In this chart, 1 point is the amount the average bureaucrat can bestow on a user.
{|
|-
!Points
!Permissions given
|-
| -25
|Banned or blocked
|-
|''0''
|''Base level for anonymous users''<br />Editing with a required summary
|-
|''25''
|''Base level for registered users''<br />Everything a registered user can do now
|-
|50
|Availability of a rollback link for on-the-spot reversion
|-
|75
|Ability to delete images
|-
|100
|Ability to delete and undelete pages
|-
|150
|Ability to protect and unprotect pages, and edit protected pages
|-
|200
|Ability to run [[SQL]] queries
|}
Highly tentative. Changes should be discussed on the [[User talk:Alerante/Point system|talk page]].
===Objections===
Any new objections should go here.
==Giving points==
A user can grant a certain percentage (-100 to 100) of an allotted fraction of points to someone else. The donor does not lose points, but rather gives a "prop" to the other's rating.
Let's say [[User:ExampleUser|ExampleUser]] has 476 points. Assuming that he can give 5% of his points to, say [[User:JohnDoe|JohnDoe]], who has 99, ExampleUser can decide to increase or decrease JohnDoe's rating by 23.8 points. If he gives JohnDoe a '''rating''' of 50%, JohnDoe will now have 115.9 points, and ExampleUser retains his 476.
A user cannot give more than one rating at a time, but he or she can change it. If JohnDoe makes a major change to, say, [[Cheese]], that ExampleUser likes, the latter can change his rating of JohnDoe to 100%, pushing his point level up to 122.8 points.
In addition, these ratings are affected by the granting contributor's points. For example, if ExampleUser gains somebody's favor and now has 500 points, JohnDoe's 100% rating is not a 23.8 but a 25, so he has 124 points.
Anonymous users cannot have points, as [[IP address]]es are not guaranteed to only be one person. They will always edit at the base level of zero points.
==Privilege levels==
The number of points that a user has determines how many privileges he or she has. A sample table follows, which is by no means final, rather just a couple of numbers I threw together before Civics and Economics the other day:
{|
|-
!Points
!Permissions given
|-
| -100
|Banned or blocked
|-
|''0''
|''Base level for anonymous users''<br />Editing with a required summary
|-
|''15''
|''Base level for registered users''<br />Ability to mark edits as minor<br />Summaries not required
|-
|30
|Creation of new main namespace pages
|-
|50
|Ability to move pages
|-
|100
|Availability of a rollback link for on-the-spot reversion
|-
|150
|Ability to delete images
|-
|200
|Ability to delete and undelete pages
|-
|300
|Ability to protect and unprotect pages, and edit protected pages
|-
|350
|Ability to run [[SQL]] queries
|}
And so on. I'll edit this as ideas pop up.
==Possible objections==
*Doesn't this create a [[caste system]] of sorts?
:Yes, but there is already some vestige of that in the titles of sysop, bureaucrat, etc. In my opinion, one's rating should be hidden from other users and only visible to themselves.
*Doesn't this distract the attention from editors away from contributing to articles, turning essentially all of them into [[bureaucrats]]?
:There'll probably be people who dwell on points, like there are people who frequently roam [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship|Requests for adminship]]. I don't intend for this to be something people will focus on, rather something like [[WikiMoney]] where you'll only bother about it if 1) you know what it is and 2) you have a compelling reason for giving it. <small>[ [[User:Alerante|alerante]] | [[User_talk:Alerante|“”]] 20:36, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC) ]</small>
*Doesn't this turn Wikipedia into a giant flamewar where people will fight over points and punish people with different opinions by penalising them?
:Wikipedia's premise, in my opinion, could turn into a giant flamewar as well. Edit wars, revert wars, etc. are common. Someone who wants points will attempt to make genuine contributions to articles, just as one who wishes to have recognition or the currently-existing higher statuses (sysop, etc.) will do now. People who only want power for themselves will, in general, be ignored, and if they begin to become bothersome and repeatedly spam in an attempt to receive a higher rank, they will get a block, or at least quite a bit of resentment.
:What drives flamewars and other such conflicts are not differing opinions, but one's refusal to accept them. Simply having differing opinions doesn't instantly cause a flamewar — everyone on Wikipedia has a point of view on something, and we aim for NPOV on every article to satisfy all. One who is intolerant of a POV different from his or her own is generally drowned out by those who see it as valid. The problem may be (and I do see this) that it will generally be those harboring bad feelings that will make use of this feature. Therefore, a possible suggestion may be to only allow a level of [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats|Bureaucrats]] to give points. <small>[ [[User:Alerante|alerante]] | [[User_talk:Alerante|“”]] 20:36, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC) ]</small>
==Miscellanea==
I've held off on allowing [[Wikipedia:Developer|Developer]] privileges to be granted by this. The people who run the server should be able to protect its integrity.
<small>[ [[User:Alerante|alerante]] | [[User_talk:Alerante|“”]] 23:11, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC) ]</small>
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed in any way by the Wikimedia Foundation or any of its affiliates. In fact, we fucking despise them.
|
