Weighting the opinions of only those that meet a criteria of import that you have defined into existence excludes most members of a community of equals. You propose a clique not a community. it equates to keeping women from the vote. They never worked in top civil or political positions and could not own property. Why let their opinions count on matters they are not able to directly control or relate to.

We all play the game. We all share an equal right to have our opinions voiced. I dare say you have never heard of or played me and I have few kills. But i am a DS pilot. Try getting 75 000 kills or a great KDR doing only that. Whatever measure you try to use to gauge skill or worth you exclude people.

It is dumb to act that way, I mean a good idea is a good idea no matter who comes up with it but I do see your point
What I think is best and what I try to do is handle these things on a case by case basis, if I disagree with a person in one thread but really like an idea or post they have in another Im not going to let that earlier negative interaction blind me
And using something like hours spent or K/D ratio is even worse since its not even acknowledging them as a person, just a preconceived notion due to some numbers that dont really mean anything in the long run

I see.

If a person came in from open beta or launch and has opinions with such low experience it would need a second looking at - but there's no reason what so ever to disregard his post for this reason alone. It would fall unto us vets to validate his claims and responses and properly trol.. I mean educate him on any possible mistakes.

Uh huh
How about win loss ratio, Im sure to you a player that wins most of their matches would have an opinion worth its weight in gold
Now lets just go check the leaderboard and see who is on type

My my this is impressive, his win loss ratio is 11857.00
But hmm this is odd, he only has 68 kills total

Thats gotta be a bug Im sure, someone with more than 10k battles under his belt surely would get far more kills than that unless there was some funny business afoot


I hope you get my point, people will lie cheat and sell their own mothers when it comes to leaderboard rankings and using them to seriously judge a players worth or how much credence to give their opinion is a joke

I think it's best to not judge a person at all from stats but by how we ourselves take to his comments. These boards are quite active - if a newbie comes a long and spouts non-sense he always gets trolled into submission. A good example is a thread on page 1, "Why didn't CCP reset everything on launch." or some crap. Vets will point out his bad logic and his KDR/Kills have nothing to do with our responses to him.

I would say Likes are a better way to judge if a person knows what he's talking about around here. Check the top 20 most liked people and see if you'd listen to there advice or opinion.

*Flashes his likes*

This is ultimately the best way, sans the Like farmers part.

Take Arkena Wyrmpsire's posts in Feedback about Armor/Shields imbalances, for instance. The guy collected input, formulated new points, ran numbers, organized it all, and posted two very long and detailed threads about the issues surrounding it. But I don't think I've ever actually seen him in game, not on that character at least. I doubt he's in the top 250 anything, besides Useful Forum Posters.

you use the leaderboards for an assumption of ones charachter and ability

I think it is best to judge the idea, comment or critism on its own merits and not the source that produced it.

Even someone you perceive as an idiot can have a good idea occasionally.

You know, maybe a person who doesn't play as much, might have a different perspective, and a valid one as well.

You know, we aren't all kids on summer break.

I think you should judge a comment on the validity of that particular comment. If a comment can't stand on it's own, then it isn't worth much, no matter who says it. Incidentally, this is one of the principles of the scientific method. Judge by merit, not reputation, because reputation can be easily abused, and is a poor measure of merit.