* Malcolm Burtenshaw <talez at arach.net.au> [ 4 Oct 2003 02:55]: > 1) Johnny posts a comment to K5 or rates a comment on K5 > 2) Scoop divides the number of comments Johnny has made vs the number of > comment ratings he has made and then by a comment/moderation ratio > 3) If the number from (2) is less than 1 revoke Johnny's rating privilidges > 4) If the number from (2) is greater than 1 then re-enable Johnny's ratings > if they haven't been enabled already. A noble idea, but your comment/rating ratio is *far* too high. Nobody (with the possible exception of some of the more active trolls) is going to post as many comments as they rate. > Optional sub-features: > * Limiting users from rating until a certain number of comments have been > met > * Tying the comment rating ability to a user's mojo Personally, I think that if rating ability is going to be tied to comments, giving a user rating ability simply for having a non-untrusted (ie, >=1) mojo (or a minimum mojo level chosen by the admin, defaulting to 1) would be adequate - it means they have to be a semi-active commenter - at least one rated comment in the last x days (not sure what k5 uses for its x value though). This would also add only a conditional, since the user's mojo value is fetched on initialization already. -- -janra | http://www.write-on.indy/ (OpenNIC) Who needs to be big and burly when | http://www.write-on.org/ (ICANN) you can just apply physics? | Discuss the art and craft of writing