Each comment, proposed revision, and bill created by a DC Participant, counts as one contribution. A contribution can be ranked by other participants on a scale of negative one to five stars. As typical, five stars is excellent and one star means low quality. No stars indicate strong disagreement with the contributor’s method, or message. A negative star is reserved for contributions that are unethical, or fundamentally misguided.
The Star Reputation System helps other users know how active and respected you are in the community. Each contribution you make receives a star rating, and the average of your total contributions’ star ratings is used to determine how many stars appear below your name on your public user profile. You can earn rewards and a reputation title by making public contributions that help move forward the public debate by averaging over three stars. Partisan comments motivated by ideology, instead of a spirit of constructive consensus building will be unlikely to average much over 2.5 stars.
The color of the stars indicate the total number of contributions one has made, or star rankings a comment has received. As some less thoughtful participants may hand out negative stars for merited criticism, while others will give five stars for affirmative fluff, please don’t think a 4 star reputation is always superior to a 2 star reputation. Consider participant’s reputation title and the color of their stars, as well as the number of stars.
Additional contribution credits can be earned by completing a star rating constructive criticism box. One quarter of a contribution credit is earned by the original author of a bill each time another participant clicks on “Submit to Vote” or “Ready to Vote.”
A new ‘DC’ participant, Jill Example comments on two bills and introduces a new bill that receives eight ‘Ready to Vote’ clicks for a total of five contributions. Jill’s reputation will be colored green. Additionally, her new bill receives a rating of five stars, and her first comment averages a five star rating while her comment seen below receives twelve ratings averaging only two stars. Wherever Jill participates, her contributions will now look like this:
Jill’s Father, John Example has been on Direct Congress for much longer. Some of the 500 suggestions for revisions and comments John has made have been unpopular while others have averaged over four stars, with a total average for all these contributions of 2.5 stars. In addition, for each of John’s bills that receives a ‘Submit to Vote’ or ‘Ready to Vote’ click, John earns another quarter contribution credit. One bill John created made it to the voting floor, receiving 20,000 affirmations along the way, and had an average star rating of 3.2. Unfortunately, a different bill John created was much less popular with an average star rating of 0.78, even though 10,000 participants did click on the ‘Submit to Vote’ link for that bill. Combining all of this information, we find that John has made 30,500 contributions (Copper level) and has a cumulative average reputation of 2.4. In this example, John is submitting a proposed revision with an average rating of 4.5 stars after six votes.
Anytime a star rating on a proposed bill is selected by a user the following box appears:
Any participant on Direct Congress who falls below 0 stars for more than 24 hours will be put on a one year probation from contributing to Direct Congress Forums. They will still be allowed to vote and click on star ratings, but will not be allowed to submit comments or create laws. A second violation – falling below 0 stars for more than 24 hours will result in five years of probation from submitting comments, star-ratings and bills, or probation until the violating participant’s 21st birthday, whichever is less. A third violation may result in permanent probation from all activities except voting. If a contributor who averages negative stars feels they were wrongly sabotaged by an internet gang, they can petition the Direct Congress staff for a removal of the probation from their record. A responsibility of the ‘DC’ Staff is to respect and protect those with minority viewpoints.