>Who defines positive? Who defines negative?

Players. Open interpretation. While different players have different views, I think there is some general consensus. You see this in battlefield comments. Some characters get almost universally complimented. Others get umpteen people calling them a douche as soon as they delete.

Are some of the douche-callers probably out of line? Sure. But when you have a character for whom the "negative comments" outweigh the "positive" ones by a huge margin then usually that character really was pretty douchey.

>Who monitors that people are using it as they should?

I agree monitoring is sort of dicey. Mostly because there's no clear cut definition of "as they should". So maybe don't bother to monitor it at all.

>Meaning at 50 hours you get to put one vote on one character,
>and that's it? At that point, I'll make sure to save all my
>votes for the jerks.

Yes, and every 50 hours after that you'd get an additional vote. The number "50" could obviously be tweaked. Maybe you get your first vote at 200 hours and then get another vote every 100 hours after that.

For what it's worth, I'd save my votes for the jerks too. And I don't see that as a bad thing with respect to this proposed feature.

If you have a character who has amassed a "large" number of negative votes, considering how "rare" votes are to begin with, then maybe that's a guy you want to watch and potentially give some crappy title.

You would never punish him solely on the basis of the mortal-driven feedback. But you might use the mortal-driven feedback as a "red flag" to let you know that this particular character might be due for some snooping.

>Or maybe someone kills me, so I give them a thumbs down. Or
>maybe I don't like their name because it's similar to
>something I read in some book.

That is, of course, you prerogative. But since you can only vote once every X hours, you're not going to be able to flag very many people that way. Plus if you include a comment detailing why you're giving this guy thumbs down (e.g. "He killed me") then any staff member who looks at that character's info can just disregard your thumbs down.

>And the ultimate question...what exactly do you expect to come
>out of these player-run moderation?

Here's the problem I'm trying to solve:

I, while playing my character, see douchey behavior on the part of some other character. Not behavior that qualifies as a rules infraction, or else I'd immediately pray about it. Just crappy behavior of the sort that typically earns people negative titles, or possibly a critical PBF comment.

The immortal staff, however, is not omnipresent, and so may not ever notice this character's douchey behavior. So he essentially flies under the radar and "gets away with it".

I'd like to see fewer people "get away with it".