Forum:Removal of Halopedia's Point System (Part 3)

This is the third and (hopefully) final part of my campaign to remove Halopedia's point system. The first part was a simple petition, which I used to see whether there was enough support to further my campaign. With 75 signatures, many of which were from Halopedia's grizzled veterans, this proved to be true. The second part was more detailed - a blog, providing advantages and disadvantages of the system. A vote was added to that blog against my wishes, I even said in the blog that I never intended it to be the deciding vote - I wanted everyone to give their reasons, and let it simmer while they made up their minds.

Now, the ultimatum, if you will. In this final part, I'm going to list the basic pros and cons once again (adding the reasons provided by the comments in the blog), and leave the vote up to you.

Please, drink in the reasons, don't just rush in with "DOWN WITH POINT WHORES" or "I EARNED MY POINTS", read my pros and cons, and, for further details, read the comments in the blog as well.

This is the official vote. If I get enough support, I'm going to show this to staff (along with the petition and blog), and they have the power to remove the system. As with all voting on Halopedia, everyone is entitled to one vote, with administrator votes tending to carry more weight.

Anyway, on to the pros and the cons of the point system...and yes, I realise that its rather one-sided, but that's why I think it should go.

Advantages of the Point System

 * Encourages users to edit Halopedia's articles.
 * Closely linked with Halo 3 multiplayer rank, integrating the site with the games
 * Simpler than usergroups

Disadvantages of the Point System

 * The point system is a way of gauging individual progress on Halopedia. Basically, users are rewarded with a higher rank for making more edits. However, because the system is automatic, and based on quantity of edits, some users have found ways to exploit this, either by exploiting faults in the automated system, or making lots of tiny edits to boost their rank (unofficially known as "point-whoring"). This is unfair on the real hardworking users, who have contributed more to Halopedia, but have less points than the exploiters. The Top Users list has only the users with the highest number of edits, not the users with the best edits. I'm going to use forgottenlord as an example for this - he has contributed as much as some of the administrators, but as he improves articles individually, planning them in his user namespace before completely overhauling the article to his high standards, he has a relatively small edit count.
 * The system distracts users from the benefits of the usergroups - all of the usergroups are inactive, when they should be thriving with the influx of new information from the various Halo projects. A promotion in a usergroup is completely different from being promoted in the point system. In the usergroups, the councillors review your edits, judging them on their quality, and making promotions as necessary. Get enough promotions and you actually have a say in what goes on in the usergroups. As well as the promotions, the usergroups are superior to the point system in other ways - each group (focused on different aspects of the Halo universe) has an Article for Improvement page, dedicated to collaborative editing to improve one article.
 * Collaborative editing is becoming less and less common, which is a shame as it is one of the most fundamental features of a wiki. The term "collaborative editing" means that users work together to improve articles. This is preferable as different users have different goals when it comes to improvement - some may focus on spelling, some on adding the latest content, some want to ensure all the info is correct by referencing them. All great traits, but now I fear that users only wish to work individually, as there is no 'team aspect to the point system, unlike the usergroups. Users no longer communicate with each other on how an article can be improved, there's a general attitude of "look for edits I alone can make" rather than focused, concentrated editing.
 * Several users have asked whether it would be possible to base the number of points awarded per edits proportional to the size of the edits, but as I understand it, this would be 1) Very hard to programme, and 2) Open to further abuse, such as page flooding and/or spamming.

Thank you for your time - and don't be tempted to vote before reading all my reasonings (and everyone else's). Rec lai mer simon r j  h 13:17, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Voting

 * Support means "in favour of removal".
 * (x/y), where x is the total number of votes, and y is the number of administrator votes.

Support (51/3)

 * 1) - Per proposal(s) -  Rec  lai  mer   simon   r  j  h 13:17, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * - hey second vote. i said it here. DOWN WITH THE POINTS! -- PATX  13:24, 14 September 2008 (UTC) -Less than 50 mainspace edits.
 * - I'm all for getting rid of them. Gunnery Sergeant  Matoro3311  |  13:27, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) -DOWN WITH POINTS AND DOWN WITH VANDALIZERSISHNESS??? SPARTAN-A984 13:52, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) As per Simon. SPARTAN-G156  COM Channel Past Battles My History 13:55, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) As per simon. Also, wtf 984?- ONI recon 111
 * 4) I never really saw the points system as a motivator to edit. But Simon brings up good reason for it's removal. The End  is Near  for All  14:44, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) I have done many things for this site, edits that I take hours making, but because of this system, their pointless, because of this system I have given up on Halopeida.  Blake TalkWork 14:49, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 6) You're not here to earn points. You're not here to be praised. You're not here to gain recognition. You're here to work towards compiling a database because you love Halo. No other reason. The point system is not only retarded in itself, but is detrimental to this. Therefore, it should go. Darth tom (talk)
 * 7) We're here to edit and improve this site. Unfortunately, thats not enough for some people, lets find other ways to attract new users, I'm with Simon on this one.  Spartansniper 4 50'''  12:19PM Sept. 14, 2008
 * 8) If we leave the points system as it is, most of the people are going to make edits for the wrong reasons. I never cared about the point system but i'm getting a bit tired that we have to clean up the mess that the point whores created. I totally agree with Simon!  Black  Katana  19:23, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 9) - Lets end this once and for all...... Wra ithA scen <font color="#000000">dant   TacComm   Classified Operations  18:44, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 10) - As I have said before, the points system must be eliminated, and I give my unwavering support to this cause. Our Wikia must be kept in the utmost care of its real users, and this is the first step to a better future. We will win, no matter what the cost! Demon Razgriz 933 19:01, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 11)  Ha <font color="Red">lo <font color="Black">Du <font color="Red">de  19:27, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 12) - It's about time. Now that you're an administrator, more people will take you seriously.<font color="#4682B4">Thun <font color="#008080">ders <font color="#0000FF">trea <font color="#1E90FF">m328 19:39, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 13) -  RaZoRKilleR117 ,  Zurxoz <font color=Crimson>'Warkum  19:42, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 14) - Nice idea, really would help this site, maybe. Its got more advantages without than with-Genrealkits34
 * 15) -- Andrew-996  "Radio Frequency 9.96""Confirmed Kills" 21:06, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 16) -- SLH 1908
 * 17) - I think we should abolish point because of point whores, but also because responsible users are sometimes accused of point whoring when they're really not. For example, if a user makes lots of good, quality edits to a page, and someone sees they are making lots of edits to one page, they report them and the user gets banned. I personally think the point system is causing a lot of banning, and banning is discouraging users, and not putting on a good display for people to join our site.  --Agodo Kala Bura
 * 18) - Sure, points may encourage some people to edit articles. But not everyone is motivated to edit pages simply to get another rank. It may cut down on overall edits, but if they're only minor ones or something, so what? Remove the points system. It's a wiki, not a game show or something.  People will always edit, though at varying degrees. XRoadToDawnX 00:14, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 19) Down with vandals, hackers, and there noobish ways!!!Gears of War 2
 * 20) Though the point system may be a way to encourage new users to edit and contribute to articles, it also raises problems like point whoring and useless editing. Some Halopedian may find it interesting with lots of points and kept running around telling people that they're commander and are superior then other Halopedians, which in truth doesn't represent anything. The point system does not emphasize edits of quality, it's about edits of quantity. <font color="Silver">Master <font color="DarkGray">Chief <font color="Gray">Petty <font color="DimGray">Officer <font color="RoyalBlue">Spartan Contribution 03:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 21) - Yes, please remove. Special:Editcount is much easier to use, and with usergroup ranks, you actually have to work for your rank. Chiafriend12 03:08, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 22) - I agree...the Points System needs to be abolished. Mcloganator
 * As per Simon. (Great Job with this man) --<font color="MidnightBlue">Councilor Εw C 'Dnaudee <font color="Purple">Battle Net<font color="Green"> My Editcount 08:30, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Change of vote. --<font color="MidnightBlue">Councilor Εw C 'Dnaudee <font color="Purple">Battle Net<font color="Green"> My Editcount 09:10, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) for these reasons:
 * 2) *Encourages useless and sometimes even destructive edits.
 * 3) *Not good milestones. For example, "Sergeant" is 178 edits.
 * 4) *Not as good as editcount. With editcount, you just look at their editcount. With points, in order to figure out how many edits they have, you have to subtract 1000 points, subtract 100 more if they have an avatar, then divide by 50.
 * 5) *Gives people who make hundreds of useless edits much more respect than they deserve. User0(contribs)(talk) 00:21, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 6) Mr. Gorbachev, tear down these points. Gravemind 10:31, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 7) Down with the segregation of points. No longer will we have users claiming to be better than another because of points. No longer will the admins have to worry about banning people for point whoring. No longer will a user be judged by his points, but by his contributions....hopefuly. Omar-065
 * 8) Unless the quantity of the points to edits is changed, I think it should be removed. Major Nicmavr My Work My number of edits  My talk |undefined 16:05, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 9) With respect to forgottenlord, I personally feel that the point game is inappropriate on Halopedia. --<font color="#4D56B1">Dragon<font color="#F28500">c laws (<font color="#4D56B1">talk ) 20:04, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 10) As per Vote 25. I wish this worked out better...but it ultimitly failed (in most of our eyes, anywhy). SPARTAN-118
 * 11) I'm noticing a lot of users adding useless points to Trivia sections in articles, and I never noticed that before the points system was implemted, and it gets really annoying trying to fix this Jubinator 00:59, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 12) - This will hopefully decrease deliberate grammatical errors.-<font color="#78866B">The <font color="#704214">good <font color="#2F4F4F">one  05:26, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * - Time to finish the fight. Now I can make my grammer and spelling corrections in peace. -Dinobenn
 * Way less than the required amount of time or edits needed to vote. --<font color="MidnightBlue">Councilor Εw C 'Dnaudee <font color="Purple">Battle Net<font color="Green"> My Editcount 06:16, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) - At this stage, about the only thing that would convince me to come back full-time. - theblackthrone   (atthecenter)    (ofultimatechaos)  19:29, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * [Sorry, I don't know anything about HTML but I want to get rid of points, too. TheStoryteller]
 * User is ineligible to vote based on edits, Vote Stricken. --<font color="MidnightBlue">Councilor Εw C 'Dnaudee <font color="Purple">Battle Net<font color="Green"> My Editcount 08:55, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) I liked the old version of Halopedia. -- Grubish 360 Message Me •  Service Record  22:29, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * - Agent_DC
 * User has not met Voting requirements. --<font color="MidnightBlue">Councilor Εw C 'Dnaudee <font color="Purple">Battle Net<font color="Green"> My Editcount 09:29, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) How I long for the days of old when people actually edited to improve on something, other than for just points. - Grievous797
 * 2) I support this all the way, it's not that I don't like the points it's that I don't like the fact some users will make tiny edits to satisfy thier sin of self pride and to think they are "above all others". You made the right choice and I agree with you. -User:Halo Scout
 * 3) Finally!  PumasAreReal My PageMy EditsMy Movie
 * 4) I do have to agree with Simon on this. It does encourage people to just edit articles. I mean, if you look at the number of people blocked, there are quite a large number of them for point spamming. I also agree with another one of Simon's points. The collaborative editing part is crucial to maintaining a good and accurate wiki, and if points were taken away, people would be more inclined to help out their fellow Halopedians, and not be accused of 'assisted point whoring.' -User:The abbo
 * 5) I am in favor of the removal of the points. or at least getting a better point system. -Lt. Cronin
 * 6) Must...Stop...Changing....Vote.....<font color="CornflowerBlue">Gunnery  <font color="Gray">Sergeant  <font color="Teal">Matoro3311  |  19:03, 17 September 2008 (UTC)


 * 1)  I've long heard about the former glory days of Halopedia...before the point system.  Frankly, I'm eager to be rid of the moreover useless, detrimental points, and finally be able to see Halopedia as it was.  Points just give vandals a reward for screwing with pages, among other negative effects.  It's...simply unacceptable. - Stigma-231   bury me in honour [ Talk  ] [ Cont  ] 16:43, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe the point system is a system that enables bragging in a friendly Halo Website. I isn't needed. -Spartan Omega-427
 * Couldn't find any record of User, Vote Stricken. --<font color="MidnightBlue">Councilor Εw C 'Dnaudee <font color="Purple">Battle Net<font color="Green"> My Editcount 08:51, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) I'm throwin in my vote. this point system, is to me, very obsolete.-Lt. Cronin
 * I don't know much about the point system, as I'm relatively new to Halopedia, but with the information given I would have to vote for the removal of it. →Axxalis
 * Vote stricken. User lacks 50 mainspace edits. Major Nicmavr My Work My number of edits My talk |undefined 17:39, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) I'm in the vote for removal. We could create a better campaign to encourage users to edit. ~ Furball
 * 2) I believe most editing should be a colaboration of the different usergroups on Halopedia, as opposed to random groups of people starting out to edit a page and then screwing eachother over just for points. ~ S0AP117
 * 3) Wow, you have really done your research for this, haven't you? I was originally against the removal, but, you have persuaded me to change my mind. The data you have collected is unignorable.  Mechanical-Menace  9-21-o8, 8:16 a.m. (CMT)
 * 4) While it is nice, I don't appreciate the fact that trigger happy tony bans people for infinite when all they need is a slap on the wrist. It's doing more harm than good. -- 20:21, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 5)  When I first joined Halopedia, there were two things that alienated me.  First thing was that my knowledge of Halo was rendered obsolete since everything I knew had already been written as a Halo article.  Second thing was the points, which had my scratching my head and thinking, ''"How the heck did they get that many points?  Are there THAT many people updating this thing?  About a month into my time here did I learn about point-whoring, and my illusion of grandeur and respect for the Featured Users and whatnot was crushed faster than Master Chief crushing an innocent Unggoy.  Halopedia was made for documenting the best resouce available for Halo, not for showing off on the internet.  That's for YouTube and Myspace to do.  People have lost sight of that goal along the way, and we need to reignite that passion.  Was the Master Chief article written for points?  Was the Halo article written for points?  Were all of these great articles written merely for points?  ThunderCavalier 01:08, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * - Agent_DC - It is obvoius the point system is cause the vandel problem. So be gone with it already.
 * Vote Stricken, stop voting you are ineligible to vote based on all requirements. --<font color="MidnightBlue">Councilor Εw C 'Dnaudee <font color="Purple">Battle Net<font color="Green"> My Editcount 08:51, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 1)  The primary reason that I came to Halopedia in the first place was to improve the quality of articles. I had no knowledge about any point system or rewards for number of edits or anything like that. I came because I love Halo and I wanted to help out its wiki. It didn't take long, though, before my sense of competition kicked in, as it often does, and I was point-whoring myself. Reclaimer Simon RJH came and, thankfully, warned me about what I was doing . It was then that I realized that I had lost sight as to the whole reason why I am on Halopedia in the first place, to improve articles. I'm sure that I'm not the only one who has a similar story. To prevent this from happening again I throw my full support behind this campaign. ~LethalHughJass 17:19, 23 September (UTC)
 * I think that the current point system should be removed. However, maybe a new point system could be established. On one of the other sites that I vist (http://www.lyricsmode.com/) when you edit, your edits are subject to approval. That way, people who make good, quality edits that really do improve the article can still get credit, but point-whores don't and the competition aspect can be kept. -SAPHIRA1111
 * User has not met Voting Requirements. --<font color="MidnightBlue">Councilor Εw C 'Dnaudee <font color="Purple">Battle Net<font color="Green"> My Editcount 08:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) I agree with bringing down the point system, i remember the outrage that occured when the point system was changed the last time, it would be better off if it was done away with, because it seems like more of a competition as to who  cam accumulate the most points as opposed to making this site the best it can be. -- Spartan Q17
 * 2) I agree it has caused nothing but trouble. Spartan6  ( Contributions ) 03:20, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) I am definitely in agreement with this proposal.
 * 4)  Danl 'Badar  Comm-LinkService Record 02:52, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) Yes the point system needs to go I've been called a point whore one to many times. The point system is scareing away potental editors more often than not. Whispering 04:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * 6)  supergeeky1 16:26, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Stricken, doesn't meet voting requirements. Honor Guard <font color=#00416A>Spartansniper <font color="#000000">4 <font color="#000000">50''' 16:36, Oct 29, 2008 (UTC)


 * 1) I find the points system a largely arbitrary way of stroking one's ego, not an actual gauge of prowess in editing skills or ability.   Useless Old Grunty 05:48, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) I think that the people who make edits for the sole purpose of getting points, are not really the kind of people who make good edits.  The people who would continue to edit despite there being no point system are the ones who really care about this wiki and put love and effort into everything they write. Lieutenant  Mcloganator  02:28, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Neutral (6/0)

 * - I don't care anymore. The "forgottenlord" point is quite swaying. Banana Cat Message MeEditsStats 13:31, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Which is ironic considering he opposes the abolishment. Banana Cat Message MeEditsStats 17:42, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Changing Vote Banana  Message MeEditsStats 00:04, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * - Neutral!! <font color="#0000FF"><tt>Little</tt> <font color="#0000FF"><tt>_</tt> <font color="#0090FF"><tt>Missy</tt> - 13:58, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * 1) - Like it was said above, I don't think of it as much of a big deal.  As long as people don't spam pages with incorrect and irrelevant edits, I don't really care. (Heh I didn't know how to vote so I just made the edit.  I hope this was the correct way to vote :P) User:k9colin
 * 2) - I don't really care if the point system goes or though I am leaning towards the removeal of the point system because it has been causing alot of trouble but I won't be "upset" if it stays or I don't care if it goes. User:Spec-Opp Spartan
 * 3) Honestly I think the system makes users of this site a little more corrupt. On the other hand I like what Forgottenlord is saying about progress measurement, so I will decide where I fully stand on this topic later. --<font color="MidnightBlue">Councilor Εw C 'Dnaudee <font color="Purple">Battle Net<font color="Green"> My Editcount 09:12, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) Frankly I don't really care whether or not the point system goes, but it is kinda nice to see who has done the most in terms of contributing to the site.  My opinion when it comes to editing aricles is that I don't do it for the point, but to make the site look better.  Heck, I don't even know how many points I get every time I edit, and thats fine with me.  Alot of my edits may be spelling corrections, but that still makes the article, the site, and us members look better, doesn't it?  If you're not gonna edit and just do all the quizzes and the polls, though, then you're wasting your time as a member!  I'm not saying stop doing the polls, but I'm saying mix it up a little.  Edit some articles wihle doing all those quizzes and polls you love so much.  Just make sure what you edit in is valid information.  Otherwise the admins will have to do something to that info and remove some points.  If the pints are still around, that is.  In any case, there are pros and cons to each side, but I'm not taking either. Wolfsbane6 04:31, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) I think that the system should have 3 levels, General,Team,Personal. you are ranked by the average of all your scores times the quality of the edits on 1-10. the ranks will be abolished, and the general teams will be UNSC,Covenant and flood. an example of the smaller teams are, for the UNSC, Spartans,ODSTs,Marines  Jman97 2:32 EDT 20 September 2008
 * 6) There seems to me to be no reason to remove the points system. Sure it needs some tweaks to avoid exploitation of said system but removal seems a tad on the extreme side to me.  Vehicular Manslaughterer  8:53, 23 September 2008
 * 7) i really don't care what happens to the point system. but what ever will make people edit propraly and neatly i will support, but for now, i stand neutral. User:grunt minion22 6:04am 24 september 2008
 * 8) -  I think that the point system simply further integrates Halo into this site. However, if the problems grows large enough, I am willing to simply have them done away with. People who mercilessly spam are dealt with by punishments, such as banning. It should stay this way.  The points system is a way to classify our members, to see who has helped more with the Halo Community. This way, a reputation is made, every time time someone posts truth into an article. This is in fact my first edit, and I am happy to contribute, not to have my status go higher.
 * 9) - We all know that pointwhoring is bad, but people need a motivation to get their lazy backsides to edit. Furthermore, this point system makes Halopedia a one-of-a-kind Wiki. I think that we should make the points INVISIBLE! - Yoshinibble123

Opposal (35/1)

 * 1) - No, i don't think the points should go, and yes, I feel all funny being the only one in the Opposing column, but I have an idea for the points: You don't see them, you don't know they exist, and you don't know how many you have. However, your rank still grows in the same way. People won't know what gets them promoted and what doesn't. This means that the newer users that come here that are likely to point whore will not know what they must do or how far they have to go. Upon entry, they will not even see that editing helps rank. Thecairocat 15:55, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The main reason of the points are to encourage users to edit, so I don't think that would be any better. Rec  lai  mer   simon   r  j  h 16:09, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) - I don't think points should go either. Maybe we should remove them, for say, a month and see what happens. If it mostly good, the points leave forever. If Halopedia turns bad, then bring them back. It's a sound plan. kougermasters 22:06, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I've said before: Points aren't the only way to encourage editing nor are they the only way to measure progress. I don't care that my point count is low because I measure my article success by how close I bring articles to FA quality and by how many of them make it to FA status (1 right now).  Once good articles become a standard, I'll probably use that as a measure of my success.  I've never gauged my success on edit count or points.  However, that doesn't mean that I believe points should be removed because the reality is that there are very few users on this site that would measure their success in that way.  Whether it be points, usergroup ranks, adminship/moderatorship, number of votes their blog garners, number of friends they have.....I don't care.  It should be about what makes them motivated.  I am the worst example of someone who is not getting due credit because I have built my system around one where I don't WANT to have credit come to me in the form of points.  The complexity of rewards system is far more complex than that.
 * The problem, IMO, is that people - new and old - have looked at points as the main measure of progress on this site. Wikia certainly didn't help this problem by making the top users list based off of the biggest point whores, but that's a completely different problem that TheCairoCat certainly raised suggestions about earlier.  I oppose the abolition of the points system because I believe that the carrot that each user would prefer to get them moving should be provided.  I believe that every user who wants to use points to measure their progress should be allowed to. Usergroups have never benefited from an influx of new users.  Oh, sure, they often pick up a lot of individuals popping in and adding their names to the userlist, but the reality is that the rate that people leave the base rank remains relatively close to the rate that people with notoriety join the usergroup - nothing else.  During our H3 push, we got a lot of notable users who, I think, were relatively good editors, but the swarms of useless editors that came in and added their names to the list before doing nothing were, I think, forgotten.  Those good editors almost without exception became notable veterans while the poor ones just vanished.
 * I think we have the same situation now, but we blame the death of usergroups on the points system. The death of usergroups isn't because of the points system.  The death of usergroups is because we have failed, time and again, to recognize the root problem of usergroups: they are veteran oriented - designed for the veteran psyche, by the veterans, for newbies that think like the veterans.  Back in November, the FoH and PoH were so dead that Manticore tried to get them shut down before someone suggested they be merged into the AoH.  MoH was running with only two or three people.  The CoH, like now, was unable to meet its quota and only posted 2 Councilors.  The UoH was the only one running smoothly, and that was, in part, because it had the most interesting job with changes coming nearly every month.
 * I think we forget our own history, forget the activity levels and the fluxes that have happened time and again and have forgotten to analyze their root causes. Halopedia does have a problem and it's not points, point whores, social features, etc. The problem is the veteran community: it's friendly, it's responsive, and it will tend to help users that ask for help - but that's it.  BlueMilk, who many of you know is my gf, joined Halopedia briefly last year, but later left.  She got the impression that the veteran community was, generally, a mean, uncaring group that wasn't bothered with newbies.  She didn't feel welcome, she didn't feel like people wanted to know her, she didn't feel like people even cared about her.  In fact, the only person she likes was Relentless, and the only reason for that is because Relentless went out of his way to talk with her - and that was only because he knew she was my gf.
 * We have a problem, and it's not the points. We treat new users like idiots until proven otherwise.  If a user complains about a common problem that has been answered many times, we flame them rather than help them.  If a user cares more about points than he does about quality, we flame him for being a point whore.  If a user has a question that's already been documented on a relatively central page, we flame them for not doing their research.  We don't treat newbies with respect, we treat newbies as if they're n00bs by default.  Every website on the planet must have a balance between bringing in new users, getting these new users to become veterans, and keeping its current veterans if it wants to survive.  We are really good at the last point, we are really poor at the middle point, and the points system has done miracles for the first point.  The middle point is entirely about the veterans of this community - and that's the truth about every community. There are problems and flaws with the points system - the creation of points whores and the failure to reward people for the quality rather than quantity of edits certainly is the source of many problems.  The fact that this community seems (amazingly, considering the game's rating) to be focused towards teens doesn't help much either (apparently, FFXI had no problems with the same featureset), but usergroups and collaboration is not the fault of the points system - I think, in fact, the points system exposed a flaw in a community that doesn't promote either.  We promote collaboration and usergroups on IRC amongst ourselves, not on the site proper.
 * But that isn't the reason that I oppose this proposal. I oppose it because I believe that points do bring in good users as well as bad.  I think that many users we now welcome as peers have joined because of the points system and quite a few may never have looked twice if it weren't for the points system.  I think the points system encourages edits by people who were previously hesitant to edit - even if those edits were of lower quality.  I've got several pages on my watch list and I see the edits people put into these pages and there have been more than a few edits that I've gone "wow, I wish I thought of that first".  Oh, I still have to go in and clean up those pages because the person couldn't write at a Grade 6 level, let alone Encyclopedic quality (I think there's only one set of edits on those pages I've never corrected), but the fact that they made a content contribution that I had missed and realized needed to be there, or reworded something that I thought had been fine but their rewording actually made it better, to see all these things happen on these pages by users we never would've looked at twice and feeling that they would be much less likely to have happened if it weren't for the points system, I see it as the success of the points system and I think we ignore that success because we spend more time cursing them than thinking about "maybe this could be utilized", we spend more time hitting the rollback button than the undo button and maybe retaining or rewording a line or two.  That's collaboration of a different type, one that I feel does happen and is quite constructive to this community.  I see that collaboration, I see these ideas by these unknown users, and in them, I see the advantage of the points system that so many people forget or ignore.  This is why I support the points system. --forgottenlord 17:36, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) - Like I say most of the time, as per Forgottenlord. Plus, i'm just sick and tired of these petitions getting posted up every five seconds.  General  Tony ,  Administrator of Halopedia  Talk  9/14/2008
 * 2) - The points do encourage many to edit. It gives them the sense that they are being rewarded for their actions. I'm not saying it should a contest of who has the most points, but the users that do have the most points are usually veterans and admins, which helps indicate to the new users which user to look to for help. Maybe my achievement ideas could be incorporated into the point system, for major acts worthy of commemoration, some users may receive "point packages." Either way, the point system has made Halopedia beep up on many of the wikia users indicators, increasing popularity, and well, everyone plays Halo. ^.^ --  <font color="RoyalBlue">Lovemuffin  ••• <font color="DimGray"> Talk undefined <font color="Navy"> Edit Count undefined Contributions undefined 01:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) For me, the points system has been a completely positive experience. After the initial hassle of Quiz overusage, getting points was a good incentive for editing articles. I had rarely done edits before that, but getting points gave me a reason to do it. And it especially made me use my account. As time passed, points became less and less important, and getting the articles correct and good was the main incentive. Now I really don't think about points when editing, even though advancing to a new level is always a good prize. However, I can safely say that the point system made me like editing Halopedia, and I'm sure the same will happen to many users.You say these "point whores" are one reason for the removal. They do abuse a flaw of the point system, but does it harm anybody? Somebody gaining lots of points does not diminish another users' achievement. They only effect those who aim to have the most points. The system is, or should be thought of as, self-driven, not peer-driven, which means that an user seeks to advance, not to beat others. And why should many users' fun be taken away because of a few cheaters?Mutoid Chief 19:35, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) On Halopedia if an article has some mistakes we don't delete it. We EDIT the article to meet our standards. Its a waste to remove an article for mistakes. So why don't we just tweak the point system a little bit. How about not giving full points unless they contain a certain amount of data. Make it more pleasing. This system also helps users set goals. A.D.S. 14:55, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) Helps mptivation + helps identify veteran users vs. n00bs.  Major  Spartyti  m  e  Talk  02:16, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * But what happens when the 'n00bs' get lots of points from worthless edits? that makes them get more respect from other users who don't know they've been point whoring.-
 * 1) I like a few others, share the views with Mutoid Chief. The points have been a real motivation and I've not been a point whore like some. I like the points. They should stay. Sangheili Fleet (comm) 07:57, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) As per ForgottenLord, though, he made the explanation humongously wider and larger than I anticipated... <font color="#0000FF"><tt>Little</tt> <font color="#0000FF"><tt>_</tt> <font color="#0090FF"><tt>Missy</tt>  - 08:13, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) The point system is the most interesing feature in the whole site, and it helps me to contribute edits. Don't remove it, for god's sake. User:Kronos101 11:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) The point system is kinda cool. I like all these milatary ranks. Deathlock227
 * 5) It makes me edit, its like a reward, as per CT also, these things need to stop going up.  Mr. Halonerd   My Talk  | My FanFic 12:48, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 6) - I oppose this move movement, because of the simple fact that these points add a social aspect that is at the core of any game (eg. HALO), that should be continued throught this Wiki, and because it helps differentiate between our less and more experianced users, I am also tired of the large amounts of these petions, as per CT. And if a user is a point whore, they are normaly a *** hole anyway, and are either banned, or are disliked and ignored by many real users. Spec-op sniper058   21:22, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 7) It dosn't really help a whole lot, and will most likely creat some more glitches.-Notanoob
 * 8) If somebody wants to cheat for their points, then fine. We shouldn't give them the satisfaction of knowing that we actually care. these people desrve nothing more than being ignored. Sitheris 00:25, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 9) You're just adding more disadvantages to make it seem like there is no reason to keep it. And the benefits truly outweigh the disadvantages. Think about it. Encouraging members to edit is a VERY important thig. It keeps people active within the Halopedia community, as well as keeping the site updated with the latest news and interesting trivia. I really do think that we should keep it. It's that important to me. ~Epeu
 * 10)  - Like many people here are saying, as per forgottenlord. =P <font color="#6495ED">Gunnery  <font color="#808080">Sergeant  <font color="#008080">Matoro3311  |  07:47, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 11) -Think of it this way (Points=(Editcount*50)=Rank) either way if you take out the poits it's still going to be the same, but it might attract less good halopedians and Demotovate existing halopedians, but if we keep the point system this will keep halopedians that feel motovated by this method (like me) and it will be easier to spot P.W's. -Ntvi &#39;Nivaree (Sub-71)- 07:15, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * If "good" Halopedian means to edit for points, then I don't think anyone here are "good". <font color="Silver">Master <font color="DarkGray">Chief <font color="Gray">Petty <font color="DimGray">Officer <font color="RoyalBlue">Spartan Contribution 13:21, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Sighs*. Good Halopedian doesn't mean 'Edits for points' - and that's not what was said - nor is it 'Doesn't edit for points'.  Good Halopedian means 'can provide constructive edits'.  What that Halopedian uses to motivate them to provide said constructive edits is irrelevant.  If we lose good Halopedians or the chance to gain good Halopedians from the removal of the points system - and despite what many claim, we can thank the points system for at least a few good users - then it is a valid claim that we may fail to attract fewer good Halopedians because some of those good Halopedians may need points to motivate them --forgottenlord 13:52, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * So a good Halopedians needs motivation to help them to make constructive edits, right?! What is the purpose of being a Halopedian, gain points?<font color="Silver">Master <font color="DarkGray">Chief <font color="Gray">Petty <font color="DimGray">Officer <font color="RoyalBlue">Spartan Contribution 14:26, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * What the hell are you talking about? The only difference between a Good Halopedian and a regular Halopedian is a Good Halopedian is successful at making constructive edits.  I am not saying the purpose it to get points, I'm saying we can motivate people to make edits using points and I have seen success on that point. --forgottenlord 02:14, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No, you don't understand, the point system is to encourage a Halopedian to edit, but we are talking about constructive edits, not some non-constructive edits placed on the site everyday, which is why Simonrjh petitioned to remove the point system, because people are doing edits for points! <font color="Silver">Master <font color="DarkGray">Chief <font color="Gray">Petty <font color="DimGray">Officer <font color="RoyalBlue">Spartan Contribution 11:04, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, I understand that very well. But that's not the problem.  Yes people are editing for points - that was the intention of the points system.  That's not the problem and that's not the complaint.  The complaint is that people are making LOUSY edits for points - edits that they may have been able to make much better had they not been so frantic at garnering points.  That's the complaint - that the points don't reward effort or quality, they reward hitting a button and because they reward that, people keep doing that.
 * That's what YOU don't understand. People can be good Halopedians and have edited for points.  People can be lousy Halopedians and not have edited for points.  This has nothing to do with good Halopedians or lousy Halopedians but rather the abuse of the points system by lousy Halopedians.  The question we have to ask is whether the problem of the lousy Halopedians abusing the points system for points are enough of a problem that we're willing to risk the good Halopedians who rely on the points system for motivation - and there are some members of this community who have fully admitted that they edit for points and have relatively good edits.
 * Similarly, I don't believe the problem is nearly as widespread as many of our members claim it is. Why?  Because I have seen edits that most of you would blast as being low quality (and I'll admit, they are low quality and probably reduce the quality of the article overall) but add a content contribution (big or small) that, once edited to conformed with grammatical and spelling expectations, makes the article better than where it started.  It requires less focus on the Rollback button and far more focus on using Undo and Edit - and putting in the time and effort to analyze the change, decide whether it should be kept, and fixing it.  I could be wrong, but I have a suspicion that most rollback users aren't putting in that sort of time and effort.
 * I understand this complaint very well, MCPO. I raised issue with your statements because you have simplified the problem entirely to "Editing for points is bad, not editing for points is good" - which is far from the reality of what we're dealing with.  I'm not saying you're wrong to oppose the points system, I'm saying you've oversimplified the question - and far too many others are in the same boat right now. --forgottenlord 00:37, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry but I didn't correcty project my opinion so yeah scratch my "previous statement" and I think forgottenlord explains this situation quite well. But this point system is one of the things that does motovate me as well as giving me a good feeling when I make a Contribution/edit that would potentilly help further halopedia. Now to rephase my statement of "good halopedians" I believe all good halopedians are people like you or me people who edit to better and help halopedia not JUST FOR POINTS, but you never know some people do it purely for points, some people don't, and other people just edit. =D - Sub nova CommTribute 09:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, well, ok, I hope that you get my point, and I yours, let's put an end to this argument. <font color="Silver">Master <font color="DarkGray">Chief <font color="Gray">Petty <font color="DimGray">Officer <font color="RoyalBlue">Spartan Contribution 11:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * On a completely different note, if you stick a # before all of the :, you won't break the numbering while still maintaining the spacing
 * I agree and I do get your point. Cheers Sub  nova CommTribute 12:28, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh ok thanks I'll keep that in mind
 * 1) -Please don't remove the points. It's what keep me going on this site. One of my goals for school is to get a high rank on Halopedia, and this is destroying it. Bioniclepluslotr 15:18, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) -Admiral Hess 20:16, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) Voy101 21:17, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) - I seriously think the point system has encourage me, to me it shows my Halo knowledge and I do feel like a real liuetenant sorry for spelling if its wrong.GruntMaster772 GruntMaster772 21:59, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) - What's wrong with the point system? It does encourage users to make edits, and isn't that what you're supposed to do in a wiki? And your argument that it would be difficult to distribute points proportional to the length of an edit is complete and utter bullhockey. String variables come packaged with a "length" function that returns their length, and from there it would be a simple matter to give a user points based on how high that number is. And how do points discourage usergroups? I would think that the average user would attach to a usergroup right when they heard about the points system. Anyway, that's my vote. Keep the points. Quil 00:44, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 6) - I don't really see anything wrong with the point system. If someone point whores big deal rank means nothing. And like CT said these things really need to stop going up. Sgt Eagle 10:41, 16 September 2008
 * - the points system creates motavation to edit articles, if it weren't for points, and the thought of promotion, i wouldn't edit, and if nobody edits, then halopedia will FALL TO CRAP!!!- joe a1
 * User has not yet met eligibility requirements for Voting. --<font color="MidnightBlue">Councilor Εw C 'Dnaudee <font color="Purple">Battle Net<font color="Green"> My Editcount 09:33, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) One of the systems which defines Halopedia from other Wiki's ODST Joshie
 * 2) The purpose of editing is to increase the quantity and accuracy of information related to Halo on Halopedia, not to emphasize group effort, even though group efort is a good thing. Yeah, there are point whores,  but those people usually get banned anyway. I think taking away the point system is taking away a big part of Halopedia, something that makes it more enjoyable to be here. Besides that, the military ranks are just plain cool. h410fan123
 * 3)  Banana Cat Message MeEditsStats 00:05, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) The point system was one of the things that I liked about Halopedia when I first joined and it has been an incentive for me when I have been editing. User:ShadowBroker44
 * 5) - I don't see anything wrong with the point system.--Dogbert14 00:44, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 6) - Sure some users might exploit it however it is higly motivating. I'm not saying it's the best system and all pros and cons are true however until somebody can come up with a better system based on the quality of the edits this one should in my opinion not be removed.One On One
 * 7) - No way. I mean, the points system is, to me (although i don't edit), what gives the fun to work in Halopedia. If it gets removed, people might lose interest in editing, and, instead of advancing as much as this wiki has done ever since the Points System "Amendment" or "Massacre" to me, of May or July, we'll stay the same, people could say: Ha ha ha, look at them! They were going so well and now they don't want to write another article!. Frankly, I wouldn't like people to say that from us! And specially for Halo! Totally sucks ass. Plus, I'm damn sure that eventually, if the point system was removed, another petition to bring it back would rise again, and people will be upset because they will have to make like a thousand edits to regain the points they once had, and will look at the past, POINTING AT ALL OF YOU, SCREAMING: WHY!? WHY DID YOU TAKE IT DOWN!? WHY DID YOU DID THIS TO ALL OF US!?. Of course, that's kind of a rehearsal because I want to act in a school play, and I want to be ready. But, I still think that the point system should stay. Way better! I think that the point system we had at the start should be brought back. Then, more people could edit, and then MORE PEOPLE COULD COME!SITHASSASIN47 21:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 8) - All the way oppose. The point system encoureges people to make Halopedia the best halo source. Just because some people are low ranked should NOT mean that we get rid of the Point system. We NEED it!!!!
 * 9) the point system makes it more fun kind of like a game would u take the point system off halo on xbox live Pyrotronic alex 6:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC
 * 10) as the points system proves quite rewarding for polls and quiz games. Nemesis645 05:47, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 11) GO SCREW YOURSELF! JUST BECOZ OF POINT WHORES UR SO SCARED YOU PETITIONED TO REMOVE THE POINT SYSTEM. THE SYSTEM'S ADVANTAGES OUTRULES ITS DISADVANTAGES. AND THERES NO SUCH THING AS A PERFECT SYSTEM SO THERES OUGHTA BE SOME POINT WHORES. WITHOUT THE SYSTEM, ALOT OF PEOPLE WOULD PROBABLY STOP CONTRIBUTING AND LET THEIR ACCOUNTS RUST AWAY AND HALOPEDIA WOULD NOT BE AS UPDATED AS IT IS NOW. LOTS OF USERS OF HALOPEDIA WERE GIVEN THE WILL TO CONTINUE CONTRIBUTING TO THE ENCYCLOPEDIA BECOZ OF THE POINT SYSTEM. PLZ STOP THIS MADNESS OR YOU REALLY, REALLY, SHOULD SCREW YOURSELF.
 * 12) - I think it should be removed because more people will randomly edit for more points.XtremeSpartan117 16:32, 24 September 2008(UTC)
 * 13) It's what makes our site unique. Solar flute
 * 14) This poll is probably long dead, but I felt I should say something, especially after reading every single response and taking a little time to think about it. I was here before the system was even implemented. People would still edit, with or without the point system. You'll still get the same problems; people editing just to edit, vandals, etc. It's like HaloDude said - you'd only eliminate the so-called "point whores", and that's kind of a mixed bag of users there. Most are at least decent users. So what if their motivation is the points that they get? This is a wiki; you remove one factor, you're still going to have problems, simply because it's a bunch of people adding to it, with free access, no less. You're bound to get idiots regardless. Smoke. 06:05, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) the point system makes it more fun kind of like a game would u take the point system off halo on xbox live Pyrotronic alex 6:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC
 * 2) as the points system proves quite rewarding for polls and quiz games. Nemesis645 05:47, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) GO SCREW YOURSELF! JUST BECOZ OF POINT WHORES UR SO SCARED YOU PETITIONED TO REMOVE THE POINT SYSTEM. THE SYSTEM'S ADVANTAGES OUTRULES ITS DISADVANTAGES. AND THERES NO SUCH THING AS A PERFECT SYSTEM SO THERES OUGHTA BE SOME POINT WHORES. WITHOUT THE SYSTEM, ALOT OF PEOPLE WOULD PROBABLY STOP CONTRIBUTING AND LET THEIR ACCOUNTS RUST AWAY AND HALOPEDIA WOULD NOT BE AS UPDATED AS IT IS NOW. LOTS OF USERS OF HALOPEDIA WERE GIVEN THE WILL TO CONTINUE CONTRIBUTING TO THE ENCYCLOPEDIA BECOZ OF THE POINT SYSTEM. PLZ STOP THIS MADNESS OR YOU REALLY, REALLY, SHOULD SCREW YOURSELF.
 * 4) - I think it should be removed because more people will randomly edit for more points.XtremeSpartan117 16:32, 24 September 2008(UTC)
 * 5) It's what makes our site unique. Solar flute
 * 6) This poll is probably long dead, but I felt I should say something, especially after reading every single response and taking a little time to think about it. I was here before the system was even implemented. People would still edit, with or without the point system. You'll still get the same problems; people editing just to edit, vandals, etc. It's like HaloDude said - you'd only eliminate the so-called "point whores", and that's kind of a mixed bag of users there. Most are at least decent users. So what if their motivation is the points that they get? This is a wiki; you remove one factor, you're still going to have problems, simply because it's a bunch of people adding to it, with free access, no less. You're bound to get idiots regardless. Smoke. 06:05, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Discussion
If the points system were to go, would it be possible to add a small section at the top of your page saying what rank you are in each usergroup? I know there are the userboxes but they just get stuffed at the bottom of the page with the other userboxes. Banana Message MeEditsStats 13:31, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * It would be possible to design some kind of optional template to put at the top of your userwiki page, with the rank in each or any of the groups. Rec  lai  mer   simon   r  j  h 13:36, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Don't we already have Userboxes for that? <font color="DimGray">The End <font color="Gray">is Near  <font color="DarkGray">for All  14:46, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey good idae simon. -- PATX  14:56, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * K4, why don't you read what I wrote, userboxes just get stuffed at the bottom of userpages among hordes of other pointless userboxes. No-one can be bothered to look for someone's rank among that. And PATX, it was half my idea =`( Banana Cat Message MeEditsStats 17:55, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * So.....you put it at the top. ''' WARNING: ANOMALY DETECTED  :  INITIATE SCAN  Identified : Sierra-One-Four-One 17:59, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * It's only two lines, and you've got to start with something? I was starting with my proposal. Banana Cat Message MeEditsStats 18:03, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * And I don't won't to boss you about, but that picture on your sig is much bigger than regulations. Etc etc. Banana Cat Message MeEditsStats 18:05, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Problem with userbox-People can say anything via them. Like saying them beat everything on Halo on Legendary, yet never play it-Generalkits34

Y'know, there is an inherent bias into the way the prelude to this vote is set up. You could easily make paragraph long arguments for both the advantages and disadvantages (well, maybe not the Halo 3 ranks one, but still) but only the disadvantages have lengthy arguments. This creates a lot of bias problems: someone just glancing over would think that the people opposing points have much better arguments while the people supporting them have very simplistic arguments and thus do not think on a complex level. I would've thought that considering the very lengthy arguments Rookie162 and I both wrote, you could've come up with a much more balanced representation of the two sides to this debate. --forgottenlord 16:50, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Aren't you going to vote? kougermasters 17:14, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Priorities - and I wouldn't be me if I didn't write an essay --forgottenlord 17:37, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I was thinking that too. It might be that it's because it's for getting rid of it and why we should, after all, the author is for the abolishment. Banana Cat Message MeEditsStats 18:01, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Simon rjh, just make a decision already. Tally in the votes. Get rid of the points system, or let it stay. The points system is destroying friendly relations between users. It is like a war, there are the people all for the removal of the points system, other people are against the removal, and there the just neutral people who want as all to shut up and stop arguing and make Halopedia a great encyclopedia for Halo knowledge. Then there are point whores, who exploit the points system for their own ends, that don't really care if the points system gos or not either; they'll just leave and be annoying on some other website.

The vandals just want to cause trouble any way they can, and all of this arguing is making decent Halopedians weaker and gives the bad Halopedians their chance while we're all distracted arguing about this nonsense! It's turning users against each other; read the comments on your blog and you will see that once-good users are stooping to horrible lows, saying foul, regrettable things to each other that we normally wouldn't even think! Just make a decision already, keep the points system, or let it go, but just close this vote thing and stop all of this mindless fighting! I'm weary of this mindless conflict. I am currently opposed, but almost neutral. I may change my vote in the future. --kougermasters 17:18, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * It's a Forum, not a Blog. <font color="DimGray">The End <font color="Gray">is Near  <font color="DarkGray">for All  17:26, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I know that it's a Forum; I copied this from the blog and forget to change it. kougermasters 02:00, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

All the point system has done since it was introduced is cause chaos and bring in vandals. Its destroyed halopedia.- ONI recon 111

With the point system, we have the following:
 * Point Whores
 * Vandals
 * Sockpuppets
 * Personal attackers
 * noobish users who contributed but had poor grammar etc.

Without the point system, we'd have all that, minus the point whores.

 Ha <font color="Red">lo <font color="Black">Du <font color="Red">de 12:54, 15 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree with HaloDude. Point whores are the least of our problems. Vandels will vandalize regardless of points, they don't care. Some users will ban-dog by sockpuppeting, and most likly will be the same users who flame others and do some more vandalizing. And the usergroups encourage the no0bish users to make more crap edits. They'll make 10 or 20 poor edits (or 50) and request for a promotion, and then the councilers or whoever runs the usergroup will come down hard on them, and they'll flame and vandalize and get banned again. Besides, point whores rarely damage the wikia when point whoring, so they just get banned.


 * I crack down hard because it encourages better editing/hard work and because that's simply how I am. If they make those kinds of edits and are just looking for promotions all the time then they were never here to do what is expected of them when they joined this site in the first place. It is a never ending issue regardless of whether or not the system is here. --<font color="MidnightBlue">Councilor Εw C 'Dnaudee <font color="Purple">Battle Net<font color="Green"> My Editcount 09:25, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Really, I don't see why we should have the point system, what does it represent, does it really means you get lots of edits and be recognized as a true Halo Fan? If it's for points then I would start spamming Halopedia for no reason! But this is Halopedia, not an Edit-and-Points race! It actually encourages people vandalizing Halopedia. <font color="Silver">Master <font color="DarkGray">Chief <font color="Gray">Petty <font color="DimGray">Officer <font color="RoyalBlue">Spartan Contribution 10:52, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * isn't banning for getting rid of point whores and vandals?Bioniclepluslotr 20:07, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No, banning is for guys who violate Halopedia's rules. <font color="Silver">Master <font color="DarkGray">Chief <font color="Gray">Petty <font color="DimGray">Officer <font color="RoyalBlue">Spartan Contribution 10:16, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. Some of you are saying that if we remove it, it will cause problems. But personally, I don't see how that could happen. No other wiki has point systems. Take halowik.net, for example. They don't have a point system, whatsoever, but they aren't suffering from any problems that some of you have suggested. Major Nicmavr My Work My number of edits My talk |undefined 12:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Why do these keep going up? seriously, and for all those saying we should get different points for the length of edits your wrong, its impossible and point whores will just hold down "a" for 3 minutes and get 200,000 points. It's impossible because its not in the MediaWiki code. Just scroll down some on this oage and you will se a place for point and rank things: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:SocialProfile. - Mr. Halonerd147 21:47, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, as for now, I probably will be banned yet again for trying to state my opinions (i did get silenced and suspended for 4 weeks) I believe the Points system has only attracted stupid, irrelevant users to OUR fine wikia. I have a lot of reasons why I resent the Points System.

1: I was going through polls and quizes and found a few quiz questions that said "PS3 is Better!" "Why does XBox suck?" or Microsoft sucks. I have seen a lot of this.

2: We have had a a lot MORE spammers, haters, and just retarded users. A few have tried to get attention on the forums, by admitting that they have a crushed life. Others just post stupid Topics. For example click this link to see this proof that stupid users have been attracted here. Copy and paste this link: http://halo.wikia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1096&sid=225950e06699cc32aca39ec76addb330

(Sorry, the guideline templates for shortcuts has been removed so I didn't do the link right) Anyway that topic is called, "PLAY THE BANNING GAME!" Ridiculous huh?

3: Also, a few extremely weird haters who spam about the users that THEY hate. Really annoying. I won't say the names, but I know this person went on different accounts and wrote about how much he hates this person on a comments page.

4: Polls and Quizes aren't as cool now, especially with grammar errors and phony answers. Sometimes, users put up polls with '2 right answers'. What I mean is when their are 2 answers. The titles are the same, but only one* of them is the right one.

5: I have been here since the this wikia opened, (well not literally, but I was here during the first stages of it's creation) and I have never seen such ridiculous and impossibly dumb things here.

6: To everyone who finds these dumb polls: Simply skip them, don't try to answer them. Hopefully someone with forumy powers will see it and do away with it.

I hope that was convincing enough.Misterchief 01:53, 18 September 2008 (UTC)