What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 131 Stack Exchange communities.

The proposal is quite simple: Unlock "10k tools" for a user once they have earned 15k across the SE network on all sites.

Obviously there is some question about joining enough sites to cause this to occur just from a random vantage point of "let me log in to every single site and get lots of reps" but that would require 200 * 1 + 100 * 148 = 149 SE sites for this to kick in. Since there aren't 150 sites and not likely to be in the near future, this means they would have to actively participate to some degree on many sites.

By the time you have participated on many sites in the network to reach 15k SEI wide, I should think that you would have a pretty decent understanding of the SE model in the first place.


PopularDemand raised the point "why do you want this" to which I answer:

Excellent point. I have heard MANY people suggest it, so thought that I would make a feature-request and see what the general feel of the community is. It certainly doesn't help me, because even with the 100 site bonus I'm nowhere near 15k SEIwide, and not likely to be anytime soon. Subtract the bonuses and I'm only around 6k

share|improve this question
1  
No comment on the idea itself, but at the very least you could sum (Rep - 100) for each site to negate the bonus. –  NickC May 10 '11 at 15:58
    
sum(rep-100) + 200 (to account for the initial site requirement of +200 to get started) perhaps? –  jcolebrand May 10 '11 at 16:00
3  
You've described the feature you're requesting quite clearly, but I don't understand why you're asking for it. What's the benefit to the community? –  Pops May 10 '11 at 16:01
4  
I think each site has it's own feel/mood/approach/personality that doesn't transfer between sites. For this reason I don't think I should have the same permissions on each site. Sure I'm annoyed when I can't do certain things on sites I'm less active on, but it's appropriate I think. –  Michael Haren May 10 '11 at 16:01
1  
Doesn't the +100 bonus already credit you with the basic powers you've earned (voting, etc.)? I'd argue that most other powers should be relearned with each site –  Michael Haren May 10 '11 at 16:03
    
@Popular ~ Excellent point. see the edit. –  jcolebrand May 10 '11 at 16:04
3  
Thanks for the edit, but my question just becomes "why do those people want it?" –  Pops May 10 '11 at 16:08
    
@Popular ~ HellifIknow ... –  jcolebrand May 10 '11 at 16:12
    
I disagree with the proposal, but if I were to come at it from the other side I would suggest that you should still need some minimum threshold on any given site for this to work. As Grace Note mentions there's certainly a level of familiarity with the community necessary to use some of these features correctly. –  Tim Stone May 10 '11 at 16:19
    
1) Sign up for all 53 SE sites 2) Get 5.3k free rep 3) ??? 4) Profit! –  corsiKa May 10 '11 at 16:35
1  
@glowcoder ~ Hence the reason I and several others have pointed out that very fact, and have considered ways to remove that bonus ... –  jcolebrand May 10 '11 at 16:57

4 Answers 4

up vote 26 down vote accepted

I don't agree with this. It's for the same reasons that we have the association bonus to give a simple +100 reputation. It doesn't sound like a lot, but it's enough to give you the basics of the network functionality.

And this is because that's about the only major thing shared between the sites. The scope of the site, what actually counts as acceptable content, the tag system... all of these elements vary significantly between the different sites on the network. The power of full editing, full close access, and delete access, these are all things that really require you to understand the site you're actually looking at, and not just the network.

Take myself. I have almost 30k on Meta Stack Overflow alone, which if anything is representative of understanding the general Stack Exchange model. But I wouldn't even trust myself with tag creation (a mere 300 reputation privilege!) on any site other than the couple I frequent and have already earned this reputation. This is because all I know is the general philosophy, I won't know the specifics of the other communities. I'd need time to learn that. Time spent reaching 10000 reputation.

Even if it was just the tools for monitoring and not any of the associated privileges, I'd still be opposed. The point of the tools is to provide knowledge and assistance in moderation. But if you aren't familiar with the moderation of the target site, what use are those tools? Are you supposed to impose your own thoughts of moderation onto those who do have the privileges?

share|improve this answer
5  
Excellent points Grace. This is why I post these "why do you all keep talking about it and not making a question" posts, for the insight of you and a few others. Also, when someone wants to ask this in the future, we've laid a good foundation. Thanks! –  jcolebrand May 10 '11 at 16:07
    
You make a great point. However, there are a few relatively context-less privileges, such as view vote counts. –  NickC May 10 '11 at 17:21
    
@Renesis As mentioned to Moshe's answer in the comments, those are all pretty much earned with the association bonus. View Vote Counts is more of an anomaly, and that has its own oddities as to why it remains such. –  Grace Note May 10 '11 at 17:22

Different sites have different moderation styles. I don't think it would be right to give the 10k moderator tools to someone who's unfamiliar with the nuances of a completely different SE site. Maybe privs up to and including the ability to submit close and reopen votes (5000 rep level).

share|improve this answer

There are three kinds of trust we are talking about:

  • User isn't going to spam
  • User understands how to use the site correctly
  • User has significant topical knowledge and is capable of helping direct the specific site

When I go to a new site, I am frustrated by the lack of tools I am used to using on the sites where I have more than 3k rep, so I can understand the desire.

One could argue that sufficient reputation on one site could demonstrate that the first two kinds of trust could be given to the user network wide. In fact if you split out all the abilities, most of those that could be found under the first two levels are gained with the 100rep site association bonus.

However, the third kind of trust cannot be inferred from trust on another site. While I am an expert in electronics, I shouldn't be given the ability to close questions on the electronics site until I've accrued enough reputation to demonstrate the community's trust that I am an expert.

We could separate out the various abilities and have some that are tied to site-wide reputation, but it would only serve to confuse people, and very few people would take advantage of it. Further, I wouldn't want to tie it to a sum of all reputation across all sites, but to a more complex calculation that shows at least very high reputation on one very large site, as well as a good amount of reputation on many other sites. Once we get 100 Stack Exchange sites, the account association bonus alone would give one a cumulative rep of 10k+.

The current system works well, and someone that is truly motivated to gain advanced abilities on a given site can easily do so in a matter of weeks.

share|improve this answer
    
That whole work philosophy getting in the way of trawling meta all day huh? Good feedback! :D –  jcolebrand May 10 '11 at 21:07

I would say that this principle should be extended to other rights, like seeing vote counts and making edits. Additionally, I also think that this should apply to users who don't have 10K. (Perhaps they don't need access to the 10k tools unless they actually have 10k somewhere, but as long as you have earned a privilege on one site and you have 15K total, you should have that privilege on other sites as well.)

The counter argument, as mentioned by others, is the fact that other sites have different content and so privileges should be re-earned. I think that there are two kinds of privileges.

  1. Privileges that correlate directly to the site's content. (voting/editing)
  2. Privileges that are anti troll measures. (viewing votes, rate limiting.)

I think that the second kind of privilege does not need to be earned again. A "healthy" member of the community can be trusted with certain things. I can understand if #1 privileges should be earned again, but for heaven's sake, I don't want to be forced to troll (to gain rep) just to bypass the anti trolling measures! (Actually, making me earn #2 again is counter productive. If I don't know anything about a topic bu I want to participate in a site, I will be forced to ask/answer in a subject that I know nothing about. This can lead to subjective and/or low quality questions, which are motivated by the desire to "even out" my accounts across sites.)

share|improve this answer
    
I have the same question for you as I did for the OP: why? –  Pops May 10 '11 at 16:03
    
With the exception of the split vote count (and perhaps downvoting, but that really doesn't take that long to get if you're productive), all of the #2 elements are already earned via the account association bonus, which only needs 200 reputation. –  Grace Note May 10 '11 at 16:12
    
@populardemand see my edit. –  Moshe May 10 '11 at 16:15
    
@gracenote well what's with the split vote count anyway? Why is that even a privilege any more than voting? Seems like excess gamification of the SE system. –  Moshe May 10 '11 at 16:16
    
...why would you want to participate on a SE site devoted to a topic you know nothing about? I would say that the system should be doing its best to keep you away from that site, if anything. –  Pops May 10 '11 at 16:17
    
@populardemand to learn about that topic by observing and then slowly working your way in. –  Moshe May 10 '11 at 16:19
1  
Start from here, then follow a few other linked questions. I'm not gonna justify the need for a high reputation myself (I don't particularly care since I just use the timeline, which is independent of reputation), but in those questions is the basic reason as to why the privilege exists. –  Grace Note May 10 '11 at 16:33

You must log in to answer this question.

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