2

On the Personal Finance and Money private beta I've noticed that the reputation requirements have been relaxed during the private beta (this is confirmed in the FAQ). I understand that the relaxed requirements are needed during the early stages so that the site can function before users have gained the needed reputation. With this new users to the StackExchange platform have some of the same powers as experienced StackExchange users. How do we teach these new users how the system works? Also how do we keep their actions in check while they have this extra power?

As a suggestion it seems like the relaxed reputation requirements should only apply to users that have reputation on another StackExchange site.

Improve this question
2
  • can you point to specific examples of problems on money.stackexchange.com created by these new users with their temporary private beta superpowers?
    – Jeff Atwood
    Commented Aug 5, 2010 at 10:02
  • @Jeff This question money.stackexchange.com/questions/2301 and user cyotee.mp made me notice this. I believe the question was not originally a community wiki and I can only assume (based on comments) this user had voted down answers. Also on this question they edited a post combining 2 answers which effectively breaks the voting on the list. I don’t suspect this is being done maliciously but a user with rep from another site would have handled this consistently with other SE sites. Based on the user’s profile they have also up/down voted but have provided no questions or answers.
    – brainimus
    Commented Aug 5, 2010 at 13:22

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
2

This is related to a question I posted when meta was new. Taking into account that reputation on other SE sites contributed to the existence of the site in the first place, I would recommend that during the private beta that reputation contributes to the rights on the site.

Yet there are a few sites that will heavily attract people that do not know SO/SE, maybe SU. I am participating in Biblical Hermeneutics. The referral system brought half the people in that committed themselves to the site.

After in such a case it took a long time to get through the commitment phase (half the people half less than 1000, 1/3 even only 51 reputation, and we are at it for 2 weeks givin us 14%), it would really hurt if only a few people could help fill the pot.

And there will be moderators pro tempore that can help keep the site clean plus a local meta and chat that can be used to educate people.

Relax that reputation requirements, maybe take into account the reputation that helped build the site, and we are up and running.

But how do we tell the people that they might lose some of their privileges when the private beta is over?

Improve this answer
1

+1 for the suggestion in your second paragraph, although IME the problem users typically don't show up until after the site has already established itself (i.e. there is a population of users available to annoy).

So during the formative stages of a site (when the users are, by definition, more dedicated than the casual ones that show up later) everyone is pretty much well-behaved, and the population is small enough so that the moderator can take care of any problems that do occur.

Improve this answer
0

I actually think that the second paragraph is an excellent suggestion. I posted it at Meta.SE in some form or another.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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