Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 157 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

The chat profile for a user includes a reputation total. This appears to be the sum of the reputation from all sites. A few days ago I logged in to a few other sites just out of curiosity, grew my chat reputation by 1k.

Given that there are 84 sites in the network, it seems like a person could get 200 rep on one site, and then login every single site in the network, and they would get 8,500 reputation points on chat (200+83*100).

This can be somewhat deceptive on chat when you see some with what appears to be a large reputation, and then find that they have used the site hardly at all. Reputation is intended as a measurement of helpful participation. If you include the account association bonuses, in a network-wide calculation, then I don't think it reflects participation very well.

This is slightly concerning because it appears that chat privileges is based purely on the total reputation. (I could be mistaken/wrong, I haven't anything on meta that contractions this assumption though). It seems like a person could get to a point where they can deal with flags by just getting a small amount of rep on a few sites. If my understand is correct, I do wonder if the chat reputation should be based on having 1k, or 10k on a single site, instead of having a total rep of 1k or 10k on all of the sites combined.

share|improve this question
    
The association is 100 rep, not 200. – Cole Johnson Apr 3 '13 at 22:42
    
@ColeJohnson, right, but you don't get the bonus until you reach 200 on a site. Which why I my formula was basically 200 + numberOfSites*100 – Zoredache Apr 3 '13 at 22:58
1  
Well, actually 101. – Cole Johnson Apr 3 '13 at 23:04
2  
Actually 100, and the 1 comes from just signing up. ;) – A.M. Aug 2 '13 at 21:13
up vote 15 down vote accepted

Your point is noted. We are going to try a slightly different rep formula on chat, to see how it pans out... Getting a true "is this 100 from the rep-bonus" on every site is... somewhat complicated, and probably unnecessarily subtle. Our thought now is basically: once you start getting rep above the rep-bonus level (on any site), we'll look only at sites where you're contribution is non-trivial. This won't impact anyone's ability to talk on chat, but will prevent perceived rep escalation by abusing rep bonus.

Yes, there is a narrow edge case where it might mean that someone doesn't have some higher access level, but tbh the cases where this will genuinely cause a difference are supremely slim. We're going to give it a go, anyway. We can always change it back (it will only affect how chat calculates network reputation).

share|improve this answer
    
I'm too lazy to create a sockpuppet and test: do you get ~100 rep for chat purposes just for joining every SE site with no contribution? – Gilles Aug 14 '13 at 17:59
    
@Gilles Lamart was less lazy, the answer is yes. – Gilles Jan 20 at 18:54

Now that we have 98 sites total (some are private betas, though), this may be a real problem. It's easy to get 10k chat rep for any 300 rep user now. And 300 rep is easy to get on some sites. A user could theoretically create 6 such accounts and chat-ban people at will.

I suggest this be calculated similar to the flair rep: sum of all rep on all sites where rep>=200

share|improve this answer
1  
I don't think I have ever seen a problem with this but I agree that this makes sense. – Rory Alsop Feb 3 '13 at 9:35

I definitely agree, and now we actually have 99 sites. I for no real reason have an account on every site, more as an achievement then anything else. This might give me chat moderator tools, I haven't used chat much though. This is definitely bad, since I only have about ~300 non-association bonus rep overall.

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .