Lot of posts keep asking to be done with the SDN points system, I disagree.
- did the point system motivate contributors, does it continue to do so?
- Do you still get answers to your question, or get the similar treatment you got earlier here at SDN?
- Are all the top contributors (or say 90%) genuinely good in their expertise and suggestions offered here?
- If you dare count, would you say 'gamers' and 'abusers' are a miniscule minority in terms of absolute numbers?
- What do you think is exactly wrong with trying to gain points?
- Do you remember who was the original (points = thanks) poster on SDN? That would be Roberto Negro - a top contributor. Do you think he was a point hunter? Was he not right in seeking recognition through points- given his contributions/weblogs are a great read even 3 years later?
- Now that I am naming names, go back and check Bhanu's interview with SDN folks if you will. Follow Rich Heilman's points progress here. See what made Craig an evangelist here. For them and for many more, points were a driving factor - and it did do a lot of good to a lot of people who got helped along.
I can go on and on - as to why, though imperfect, points system is good for SDN.
There are many suggestions to improve upon and get it cleaned up a bit. All such suggestions need discussion. But I strongly disagree with a sweeping suggestion of doing away with it, with some offenders being cited as the rationale for such a step.
Make no mistake - SDN is hugely successful. And a large part of the success has come from the points model. I am amazed at Mark F and his team's vision and work on it.
Points system is a great incentive to a lot of people causing a lot of good here - and precisely for that reason it needs to be strengthened and bolstered and not retired.