I'm not sure I follow you. This seems to be mixing up 'posts of the month' with 'shares for best posters' If you are suggesting that we alter the rewards for POTM, I'm always open to suggestionsjimthehorsegod wrote:1 -the 2nd 'best' post of the month gets a reward disproportionately lower than one post with one thanks. Seems grossly unfair and removes entirely the incentive
If we can agree on a simple system that wouldn't be time-consuming to adminster, I'm all ears. Is it that simple though? Just because two posters thank each other, that wouldn't necessarily constitute abuse of the system. It could be perfectly genuine and warranted.jimthehorsegod wrote:2 - Abuse of the system by reciprocal thanking would be trivial to detect, why not just do that?
I'd say that the forum activity is worth at least 0.28% of the shares we issue. Especially when you consider that it can help attract members and motivate them to generate transactions/revenue.What value do you place on increased activity in the forums and will this offset the effect of devaluing individual shares?
What I mean is that if we accept that rewarding posts is the way to drive up posting (separate discussion!) and as per your original statement:richard@imutual wrote:I'm not sure I follow you. This seems to be mixing up 'posts of the month' with 'shares for best posters' If you are suggesting that we alter the rewards for POTM, I'm always open to suggestionsjimthehorsegod wrote:1 -the 2nd 'best' post of the month gets a reward disproportionately lower than one post with one thanks. Seems grossly unfair and removes entirely the incentive
Then by having 1x 'blockbuster' reward, for POTM at one end of the scale, and 1x share max reward for any other thanked post, you're not differentiating between a post thanked once, and a post thanks ten thousand times, if there's another one that month thanked ten thousand and one times (exaggeration to emphasise point) that wins POTM.richard@imutual wrote:To encourage members to post multiple quality posts, rather than relying on a single 'blockbuster' (already recognised in POTM)
kevinchess1 wrote:Not reely fair on posters like luke and oggy who never get thank though isit
Totally agree with youSarah wrote:I'd prefer the process of awarding shares for posts to be stopped altogether (preferably with already awarded ones cancelled). There does seem to be a lot of low quality posts in the forum and knowing that they're diluting my shareholding makes me less inclined to use imutual as a cashback site.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest