handofg0d Posted:

If there is no downvote the option is to either vote for good entires, or dont vote at all, basically.

Again, you’re bumuming people only vote for good entries. There’s plenty of people who would upvote wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww posts just for the lightning-strike chance of them winning, since it is both funny and makes a political statement.

handofg0d Posted:

As far as the spam – shrug, moderation? I mean, how hard would it be for a mod to look through a list of submissions every other day and clear off the spam?

Moderation would only curb the obviously spam entries, but not the problem of horrible ideas. If mods discriminate based on items they personally don’t like, that violates the point of itembuildr (community voting/participation) and it is very likely to frustrate people. If six people say an item sucks, the community has spoken so it’s back to the drawing board. But if one powerful person happens to not like an item enough to remove it, the submitter is clearly going to feel singled out because his/her entry didn’t appeal to the right person.

Like with improving 4chan, change begins with the community members. If enough people vote fairly in itembuildr, and outnumber the trolls, the item quality will increase. In a case where there’s almost as many trolls as there are legitimate voters, winning basically amounts to little more than a lottery.