"good" and "bad" are so judgmental. Old moral scenarios that wrestle with things like "when was it appropriate to kill Adolph Hitler" are a good (heh) example (although extreme).

I am for a karma system that is "good enough". It doesn't need to be perfect; it just needs to quantify some form of contribution. And once the metrics are gathered, they create a smaller set of the population that is then easier to judge if need be.

So I'm once again with benny1967 on the subject. Let's hash out a system that is good enough, expand/refine it as need be, and exercise judgment against the metrics. I think it's safe to say there will always be context that lets us immediately say "oh yes, Member A with her 1000 posts did indeed contribute positively, while Member A with his 500 posts was an obvious troll."

Some worry about a spammed karma system, but spammers and gamers become self-obvious and easy to weed.

Some in the discussion keep trying to make it about that very thing.