[The Saucepan Man]

Today I was awarded rep points for a post which was no more than three lines, comprising six words (and symbols), and which did nothing more than clarify a query which had been asked by another Downer.

"Why on earth has ***** given me points for that nothing post?" I thought to myself. "It only took me a few seconds to knock up, compared to the hour or more that I normally take carefully crafting a detailed post on one of the Chapter-by-Chapter threads or similar."

Then, after thinking about it for a while, it hit me: why shouldn't it deserve rep points? Perhaps I have got myself into a mind-set that others have not but, recently, I have been tending to award rep points only to those posts which I find incredibly witty or highly insightful. Why should I be so restrictive in my criteria? A post can surely contribute to the forum in a manner deserving of recognition without having to be lengthy and/or highly complex and/or astoundingly intelligent. My post was none of these. It was simply helpful, and that of itself was of value (to one member, at least). And there are, I am sure, other ways in which posts can be of value without being any of these things.

This ties in with another point that occurred to me some time ago in consequence of the earlier discussion on whether rep points are appropriate to RPGs. Although I am not (with one exception) an RPG'er myself, my view is that they are. Surely creative writing should be rewarded just as much as witty and insightful posts. And why should the rep point system not apply to other areas of the board? It is rare, I should imagine, for rep points to be awarded in response to posts in the Quiz and Quotes Rooms. But it is an active area of the forum in which many members spend a lot of their time. Why should they not receive appreciation when they come up with a particularly good question, or solve a particularly difficult clue? Of course, this should apply only to those posts which are in some way 'above average', and since the standard in the Quiz and Quotes Rooms is high, these will be rare. But there are, I think, occasionally times when it will be appropriate. I have myself awarded rep points to Quiz/Quotes posts on a few occasions, but probably not consistently enough - perhaps because I am not in the habit of considering such posts in terms of whether they are deserving of reputation.

Maybe I am wrong in suspecting that the criteria generally applied by people in awarding rep is unduly restrictive. But I tend to think not (and this is where I have to choose my wording very carefully). The majority of those on the first page of the Reputation List, and certainly all in the current top 10, are the older members of the Downs. And us 'oldies' tend to have greater experience of putting forward structured arguments and to have accumulated more knowledge and 'life experience'. I appreciate and acknowledge that this is a generalisation and it is not meant to denigrate anyone here in any way. The general intellience of this forum's membership, of whatever age, impresses me on a regular basis. But it is, I think, true on balance simply by virtue of the fact that we have been around longer. And this suggests to me that posts which are written with the benefit of greater experience and accumulated knowledge (although not necessarily greater intelligence) are seen to be more deserving in the reputation stakes. There is also an element, I think, of those who write these types of posts appreciating and responding more readily to posts of a similar nature. And as this group accumulates a greater number of reputation points and awards 'higher value' rep those to others within the group on a regular basis, they will tend to 'pull away' from the chasing pack. This has, in fact, been occuring for some time now - just look at the current top ten.

My concern is that this risks making the system exclusive rather than inclusive. There is a danger that those lower down the rep table will look to the top of the table, see the seemingly insurmountable levels of rep being accumulated there, and simply opt out of the system, thus perpetuating the effect.

Which takes me back to my initial point. Perhaps we should be thinking of awarding rep in a greater number of situations than seems currently to be the case, and therefore rewarding more readily those who are not (yet, at least) in the habit of making complex philosophical or analytical posts. Would that not even up the field a bit more? And perhaps, for similar reasons, we should be taking into account (as far as we are able) the relative age and/or inexeperience of the individual poster when considering his or her posts. That is not meant to be patronising at all, but simply a product of my thoughts above concerning age, experience and accumulated knowledge. I am not suggesting rewarding posts which are undeserving. Nor am I recommending any kind of positive discrimination (something to which I am very much opposed). I am merely proposing that we take into account all of the relevant factors, and perhaps widen our criteria, when awarding rep posts.

Perhaps you think my concerns are groundless, or that the rep system is working perfectly well as it is thank you very much. Or perhaps you already approach the rep system on the basis that I am suggesting. If so, please feel free to say so. I am simply raising a issue which I thought might merit some consideration, with a view to ensuring that we have a rep system which is (as far as it can be) fair, just and inclusive, and one with which we can all feel comfortable.