I just thought of a cool 2 part reputation system which would be an improvement over how stackoverlflow does things in my opinion ( I always get bullied by stack overflow mods lol). Let me know if anyone else has thought of something similar ever or what you think?
Part 1.
Mod permissions would be based on a rank system, this rank system places you based on the rating other users give you (all users no matter the rank have equal ability to rate other users).
Part 2.
All users are put into designated parties (each party consists of ten users) similar to how all soldiers in the roman armies were organized into "tent parties". Each party must contain at least one medium rank user to help guide the group to act within the greater communities interest. When a user has a low rank they can only communicate within their party. If their fellow party users consider them worthy they can rate them up to medium rank.
Medium rank users can publish content visible to the public.
High ranking users can moderate other users.
My issue with stackoverflow is people's ranks just go way too high and if i think they are bad mod I cant do anything about it, just witness their abuse - this is where vote/rating based ranking comes in.
When I am reprimanded on stackoverflow I have no one I can turn to for guidance on how to do better and how to defend myself - this is where party based communication comes in.
I am usually a very anti-authoritarian person so it's hard for me to say this but I do think hierarchy is important (to maintain a healthy community identity) and i also think this kind of hierarchy would be ethical and fair (with no potential to abuse of power at all).
