FanConcert's scoring system allows people to positively or negatively score other people's posts.

When someone looks at a scored post, like a concert date, they'll be able to see how many people agree or disagree with the post. With this information they'll be able to make a better casual determination of the quality of that information.

Why casual determination? Well, just because a dozen people agree with something doesn't make it true. However it's fair to say it's more likely to be true. In theory all 12 of those people could be malicious but in practise they probably aren't.

I'd like to also look into score weighting in the future. The idea being that the better reputation you have of submitting good information to FanConcert, the greater weight your opinion should have on scoring and editing.

A reputation points calculation for each user is in place for FanConcert right now but it's in the early stages. Many other websites use a reputation point system to gauge how much you should trust a user, like eBay. If you're a FanConcert user your reputation points are on your personal home page.

Back to scoring: a venue could have a negative score because its name is incorrect. What if the person who created that venue fixes the name? The score would still say the name is wrong. This is a problem.

So I'm proposing what I call stale scores. The idea is that all scores submitted before the correction would be marked as stale and the venue's score reset to 0.

The users that submitted those scores would be able to see a list of their stale scores and go back and either re-score the posts or do nothing.

Right now you get reputation points for scoring other people's posts. Stale scores could be worth less than non-stale scores, giving people incentive to revisit stale scores and score the posts again.