Forum rep

[Xynot2]

Ok... revamp of the rep system.

#1- remove Neg rep
#2- Forum staff able to rep people
#3- rep stats shown clearly under/near/on avatar
#4- so many staff reps = 25 TP like favor does (pick a number, any number) or maybe a cosmetic pet, or , or, or...

I dunno- silly?

[Crazy-Freddy]

Ok... revamp of the rep system.

#1- remove Neg rep. Yes
#2- Forum staff able to rep people. No but I think they already do.
#3- rep stats shown clearly under/near/on avatar. No
#4- so many staff reps = 25 TP like favor does (pick a number, any number) or maybe a cosmetic pet, or , or, or... No would increase people setting up Premium account to cheat.

I dunno- silly?
May be for some.

[Xynot2]

#4 - ok- must have 1 yr in forum to be considered-

Edit: And when I said *so many staff reps*... it would have to be a lot. Seriously. I wouldn't want the forums to become another quest.

[SemiraLynn]

A reputation counter is meaningless. Any kind of change wouldn't matter much. Whether it be reputation or post count, people on a wide variety of forums on the internet just use it as just another game to be played. Generally reputation is just a bar that shows how much time you've spent on the forum. It really doesn't reflect on your posts. And really, when you read a post do you love or hate it based on the length of their green bar? Good posts are good posts and bad posts are bad posts.

[Crazy-Freddy]

#4 - ok- must have 1 yr in forum to be considered-
That or 6 months at least.

[Anihsod]

judging from the amount of completely useless, neozoomdweebie posts done by folks with a lot of "green dots" .. I'd say the entire notion of "rep" is equally useless.

I've gotten +rep for some of the silliest things.

On the other hand .. every neg rep I've acquired is a prized possession. Every red dot I've gotten is kinda like when you know you've won a debate on a topic when the other guy calls you a nazi.

[Memnir]

Better still:

#0 Remove the Rep system completely, since it's been nothing but a point of contention and a facet of forum-life that nobody likes since it was inflicted upon us by the Mods for flimsy and threadbare reasons.

It is a terrible system that has never worked, and never will work, in the manner in which the Mods seem to have wanted/hoped it would.

[Xynot2]

Im not vested in the idea. I just saw an awesome thread that was the idea of perfection and got me thinking about +repping everyone in the thread and thought... HEY!

If you look at the comment on my blog page of MyDDO you'll get this reference...

I guess I held my gas in too long.

http://my.ddo.com/xynot2/

[Dysmetria]

Ok... revamp of the rep system.

#1- remove Neg repWhy?

Having a rep system without negative rep would render the system pointless. People would be gaining rep and never losing it even if all they did was spam and troll.

[Gkar]

I dunno- silly?

Looks at your gray box.

So....what made you start this thread?

Edit: Oh nevermind, I just read your last page of posts, I understand.

[Xynot2]

Looks at your gray box.

So....what made you start this thread?

Edit: Oh nevermind, I just read your last page of posts, I understand.

LMAO ME?!? get positive rep? I'm the evil twin.

[zarthak]

i dont get it, if Xynot2 wants to remove Neg rep, he will lose all his revenue.

[Jasparion]

judging from the amount of completely useless, neozoomdweebie posts done by folks with a lot of "green dots" .. I'd say the entire notion of "rep" is equally useless.

I've gotten +rep for some of the silliest things.

Ive gotten multiple positives and negatives on the very same post.

Thing is, I couldnt work out why I got either.

[Xynot2]

They key on the reward was forum staff rep.

getting rid of the neg rep was because people use it the wrong way.

The idea was a whim.

Im tired and rambling

My mom's punkin pie is awesome.

Anyone have a ricola?

[Gkar]

They key on the reward was forum staff rep.

getting rid of the neg rep was because people use it the wrong way.

The idea was a whim.

Im tired and rambling

My mom's punkin pie is awesome.

Anyone have a ricola?

Pie? I want pie. Fresh whipped cream too right?

[Xynot2]

Pie? I want pie. Fresh whipped cream too right?

and crushed walnuts and shaved chocolate

[Dysmetria]

getting rid of the neg rep was because people use it the wrong way. There is no official guideline as to how to use negative rep as far as I have seen. Therefore you can't "use it the wrong way. "

People using it in ways you do not think is right does not make them wrong.

[FrancisP.Fancypants]

I dunno- silly?

Extremely.

[Crazy-Freddy]

There is no official guideline as to how to use negative rep as far as I have seen. Therefore you can't "use it the wrong way. "

People using it in ways you do not think is right does not make them wrong.

I tend to disagree with you on this. Any time some one does not like what you say they tend to give neg rep. Even disagreeing with some one will draw neg rep.
this got me neg rep http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=4792241#post4792241
Should it have? I don't think so.

[Qhualor]

Ok... revamp of the rep system.

#1- remove Neg rep
#2- Forum staff able to rep people
#3- rep stats shown clearly under/near/on avatar
#4- so many staff reps = 25 TP like favor does (pick a number, any number) or maybe a cosmetic pet, or , or, or...

I dunno- silly?

1) dont care about it. i speak my opinion and experiences. if people dont like it, than thats fine with me. i just hope they neg rep me for the right reason and not because they disagree with me or dont like my post.

2) why not.

3) green squares are fine. i dont need a number or something like that to show how much my rep stats are. some people might like it, but i dont want it to look like showboating.

4) if they felt like doing that, than sure. more TP is good, but i dont need a prize because i said something the staff liked. its like getting stars in kindergarten.

[Hambo]

There is no official guideline as to how to use negative rep as far as I have seen. Therefore you can't "use it the wrong way. "

People using it in ways you do not think is right does not make them wrong.

I beg to differ:

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=184383

Can't get any more Official than that. And it's sticky-ed at the top of every top level category too...

[Uska]

Why?

Having a rep system without negative rep would render the system pointless. People would be gaining rep and never losing it even if all they did was spam and troll.

This if you remove neg rep the system loses what little point it has so if you remove one part remove it all rep means nothing anyways

[Xynot2]

This if you remove neg rep the system loses what little point it has so if you remove one part remove it all rep means nothing anyways

currently, neg rep is used as a strong arm tactic to shut people up when you're losing an argument.

And read the OP closer... the only rewardable + rep would be from staff.

[kierg10]

Don't get rid of the rep system, if you did less people would post funny pictures that I could save and laugh at more :D

[Gkar]

I tend to disagree with you on this. Any time some one does not like what you say they tend to give neg rep. Even disagreeing with some one will draw neg rep.
this got me neg rep http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=4792241#post4792241
Should it have? I don't think so.

I wouldn't have neg repped that, but I can see why someone would. You weren't negged for disagreeing, you were probably negged for the ****** attitude you were giving.

[Gkar]

currently, neg rep is used as a strong arm tactic to shut people up when you're losing an argument.

And read the OP closer... the only rewardable + rep would be from staff.

Which leaves your version as pointless, unless the goal is to just reward kiss ass teacher's pets?

[Xynot2]

Which leaves your version as pointless, unless the goal is to just reward kiss ass teacher's pets?

Would you rather have civil discussion and teachers pets or the situation we have now? RHETORICAL!

[Crazy-Freddy]

I wouldn't have neg repped that, but I can see why someone would. You weren't negged for disagreeing, you were probably negged for the ****** attitude you were giving.

Ya the forum ass kisser didn't like the truth. Just like the one gave neg rep for this.
http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=4799558#post4799558

Just proves a point here.

[Gkar]

Ya the forum ass kisser didn't like the truth. Just like the one gave neg rep for this.
http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=4799558#post4799558

Just proves a point here.

Yeah don't know what that neg rep is for lol

[Crazy-Freddy]

Yeah don't know what that neg rep is for lol

Maybe because I said forum staff should not give out Rep. Seems to me that would be biased and a show of favoritism.

[Dysmetria]

I tend to disagree with you on this. Any time some one does not like what you say they tend to give neg rep. Even disagreeing with some one will draw neg rep.
this got me neg rep http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=4792241#post4792241
Should it have? I don't think so.Giving you negative rep because you disagree with them, or because they do not like you, are two perfectly valid reasons for someone to give you negative rep. As is any other.

You may think it is wrong, the op may think it is wrong, but as there is no official guidelines regarding the giving out of rep, it is not actually wrong.


I beg to differ:

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=184383

Can't get any more Official than that. And it's sticky-ed at the top of every top level category too...Nothing in their says there is a "wrong way" to give negative rep. It does say that you need a certain amount of positive rep to give negative rep to a post you "didn't like," and that you can contest negative rep you received if you feel it was unwarranted.

It also says that posting to complain about receiving negative reputation you received but feel you did not deserve is against the rules. Multiple people have done so in this thread already.


currently, neg rep is used as a strong arm tactic to shut people up when you're losing an argument.If a little negative rep is enough to get you to give up posting on a topic, you must not have felt very strongly about it or were very sure that you were right.

[Qhualor]

Giving you negative rep because you disagree with them, or because they do not like you, are two perfectly valid reasons for someone to give you negative rep. As is any other.

You may think it is wrong, the op may think it is wrong, but as there is no official guidelines regarding the giving out of rep, it is not actually wrong.

Nothing in their says there is a "wrong way" to give negative rep. It does say that you need a certain amount of positive rep to give negative rep to a post you "didn't like," and that you can contest negative rep you received if you feel it was unwarranted.

It also says that posting to complain about receiving negative reputation you received but feel you did not deserve is against the rules. Multiple people have done so in this thread already.

If a little negative rep is enough to get you to give up posting on a topic, you must not have felt very strongly about it or were very sure that you were right.

actually, there are examples of how to give positive and neg rep. i suggest you read them.

neg rep is for inflammatory, derogatory, disruptive, trolling, or violates community guidelines and not because you just disagree with someone. if i had copper piece for every post i disagreed with, i would make it rain in the Marketplace because i had so much. the "wrong way" is what is not listed previously.

"Administrators are able to view the reputation left for and by users. Administrators may perform random audits on users reputation habits in addition to investigating reputation abuse reports. Users who are found to be abusing the Reputation system may receive disciplinary action in addition to having their own Reputation level altered/reset at the discretion of the moderators." if you feel you were unjustly given neg rep, you are allowed to have it investigated and your rep can be given back. admins dont read every post to police the forums and sometimes its a good ieda to notify them in case their has been past problems with particular posters.

[Saravis]

Giving you negative rep because you disagree with them, or because they do not like you, are two perfectly valid reasons for someone to give you negative rep. As is any other.

OR I don't know, maybe you could do the intellectual thing and provide an intellectual counter to the post you disagree with, rather than being disrespectful to the opinion of the poster and resorting to low blow tactics, just a thought.

[Dysmetria]

actually, there are examples of how to give positive and neg rep. i suggest you read them.

neg rep is for inflammatory, derogatory, disruptive, trolling, or violates community guidelines and not because you just disagree with someone. if i had copper piece for every post i disagreed with, i would make it rain in the Marketplace because i had so much. the "wrong way" is what is not listed previously..I have read them, and all those things you said "neg rep is for" are exactly what you said, "examples." That is not an all inclusive list, there are plenty of other reasons people can give you negative rep as well including those I and the OP mentioned.


"Administrators are able to view the reputation left for and by users. Administrators may perform random audits on users reputation habits in addition to investigating reputation abuse reports. Users who are found to be abusing the Reputation system may receive disciplinary action in addition to having their own Reputation level altered/reset at the discretion of the moderators." if you feel you were unjustly given neg rep, you are allowed to have it investigated and your rep can be given back. admins dont read every post to police the forums and sometimes its a good ieda to notify them in case their has been past problems with particular posters.Abuse of the rep system is further defined as trying to farm reputation for yourself or others, either by asking for it outright, or by complaining about getting negative reputation. A couple posters have done that in this thread already.

Sure you can try to get the mods to remove negative rep you feel you received unjustly. They don't do so in many cases tho.


OR I don't know, maybe you could do the intellectual thing and provide an intellectual counter to the post you disagree with, rather than being disrespectful to the opinion of the poster and resorting to low blow tactics, just a thought.That's what I have been doing. Not everyone has the capacity to go the intellectual route tho.

Likewise people can wear their negative rep as a badge of honor like I do. The smaller your greenis, the more people couldn't come up with a legitimate response to your arguments and instead resorted to those "low blow tactics."

That's how I look at mine, and it seems better than getting upset about it enough to uselessly complain about neg rep in yet another thread on the topic.

[Deathdefy]

Better still:

#0 Remove the Rep system completely, since it's been nothing but a point of contention and a facet of forum-life that nobody likes since it was inflicted upon us by the Mods for flimsy and threadbare reasons.

It is a terrible system that has never worked, and never will work, in the manner in which the Mods seem to have wanted/hoped it would.

Exactly!

I only know who knows what they're talking about from having read enough of an individual's posts over a number of years.

It's unfortunate that people new to the forums understandably could think that size of greenis has a genuine correlation with general quality of posts.

Plenty of big greenises are clueless, plenty of small greenises have really interesting contributions.

[KainLionheart]

Better still:

#0 Remove the Rep system completely, since it's been nothing but a point of contention and a facet of forum-life that nobody likes since it was inflicted upon us by the Mods for flimsy and threadbare reasons.

It is a terrible system that has never worked, and never will work, in the manner in which the Mods seem to have wanted/hoped it would.

Well said.
+1 Rep?

[Qhualor]

I have read them, and all those things you said "neg rep is for" are exactly what you said, "examples." That is not an all inclusive list, there are plenty of other reasons people can give you negative rep as well including those I and the OP mentioned.

Abuse of the rep system is further defined as trying to farm reputation for yourself or others, either by asking for it outright, or by complaining about getting negative reputation. A couple posters have done that in this thread already.

Sure you can try to get the mods to remove negative rep you feel you received unjustly. They don't do so in many cases tho.

That's what I have been doing. Not everyone has the capacity to go the intellectual route tho.

Likewise people can wear their negative rep as a badge of honor like I do. The smaller your greenis, the more people couldn't come up with a legitimate response to your arguments and instead resorted to those "low blow tactics."

That's how I look at mine, and it seems better than getting upset about it enough to uselessly complain about neg rep in yet another thread on the topic.

well, than it seems you have a problem with the wording of the rep system and dont fully understand. i would suggest taking it up with someone from admin.

[DocBenway]

well, than it seems you have a problem with the wording of the rep system and dont fully understand. i would suggest taking it up with someone from admin.

It looks like, from the green boxes, there is lots of time to catch up. Since the system revamp there are no more "big hits" like there were before. They have the time to research while getting however many more green boxes it takes to neg rep. I'm showing 3 more than they have and I'm still centuries below the neg rep giving threshold.

[Dysmetria]

well, than it seems you have a problem with the wording of the rep system and dont fully understand. i would suggest taking it up with someone from admin.I have no problem with the wording of the rep system, and I understand it quite well.

Those that do not understand it are the ones that are getting needlessly upset by the system, and waste their time uselessly complaining about negative rep in threads like these.

[Cendaer]

Ok... revamp of the rep system.

#1- remove Neg rep
#2- Forum staff able to rep people
#3- rep stats shown clearly under/near/on avatar
#4- so many staff reps = 25 TP like favor does (pick a number, any number) or maybe a cosmetic pet, or , or, or...

I dunno- silly?

Yes, silly.

It's simple really: if someone is giving you negative reputation, you're doing it wrong, and should probably stop doing it wrong before innocent bystanders are hurt.

If it's not nice, necessary, or true...you probably shouldn't post it.

The only change they should make to forum reputation is to remove it.
.:.

[Crazy-Freddy]

Abuse of the rep system is further defined as trying to farm reputation for yourself or others, either by asking for it outright, or by complaining about getting negative reputation. A couple posters have done that in this thread already.

Well I for one am not complaining. I really don't give a rats Butt. Seems though you rather play by what ever suites your fancy.. But then some are like that any way. Be proud of what and how you think. Just as I am proud that I don't let Idiots worry me. As for mods taking neg rep off sad to say they are as useless as the ones that give it out. No Guts at all. Now back to the game I pay to play.

[MRMechMan]

XYnot, if you are upset with people neg-repping your trollololing, there are 2 ways to turn those reds into greens.

1. Stop trolling and post useful, informative information that helps others.
2. Troll harder.


Anyway, /not signed, your suggestion was poor overall and clearly has personal bias. Neg rep has a purpose, if a post recieves a lot of it, there is probably a reason. Perhaps look at your own posting history instead of asking for the entire system to change around you.

[Uska]

currently, neg rep is used as a strong arm tactic to shut people up when you're losing an argument.

And read the OP closer... the only rewardable + rep would be from staff.

Neg rep doesnt shut anyone up and staff has better things to do than to pass out rep

[goodspeed]

The this true. Why just another thread ago I (blanked) off like 7 or 8 people hahaha. Oddly enough I do think a mod of some kind moderates when a truly hated post springs up cause 4 of em were taken away and I didn't send any report thingy.

Anyway now down to the real answer. Lets not take neg rep away, lets let everyone have it, and let them neg the same people as much as they want!!!! Oh how the bars will glow blood red in the moonlight. Makes me giddy just thinking of the chaos to ensue.

[SirValentine]

#1- remove Neg rep


Neg rep's existence makes it much easier to identify the habitual trolls. Not by the red boxes, but by the fact that they've disabled reputation.

[Gkar]

Maybe because I said forum staff should not give out Rep. Seems to me that would be biased and a show of favoritism.

Oh, could be. Or it could have been the devs neg repping you ;)

[Vint]

actually, there are examples of how to give positive and neg rep. i suggest you read them.

Difference of opinion. I am not trying to troll, but the above can be looked at in a few ways.

Are you suggesting that people read them as you are smarter than them and are being condescending?

Or are you being helpful and trying to show someone something?

I think I know, but there are a lot of people that either have no common sense or their sarcasm detector is disabled. What may seem simple to some can be mind blowing to others?

P.S. I don’t care about the sentence or quote. It was just an example.

[Hokiewa]

Nothing in their says there is a "wrong way" to give negative rep. It does say that you need a certain amount of positive rep to give negative rep to a post you "didn't like," and that you can contest negative rep you received if you feel it was unwarranted.



It clearly states that giving negative rep for simply disagreeing is against the rules. It is not an example, it is clearly outlined in the beginning of the post. But continue believing whatever you like!

[dterror]

There is no official guideline as to how to use negative rep as far as I have seen. Therefore you can't "use it the wrong way. "

People using it in ways you do not think is right does not make them wrong.

Not quite true. The official guideline as to how to use neg rep is right there next to the radio button when you are selecting to neg someone.
Disapprove (e.g. Inflammatory, Derogatory, Disruptive, Trolling, or violates community guidelines)

[sebastianosmith]

currently, neg rep is used as a strong arm tactic to shut people up when you're losing an argument.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-VdXNTy7a_SQ/UMHxw-ykGJI/AAAAAAAAAQo/ZP7QrRnryCQ/s800/NegRep.jpg

[Dysmetria]

It clearly states that giving negative rep for simply disagreeing is against the rules. It is not an example, it is clearly outlined in the beginning of the post. But continue believing whatever you like!It does not say negative repping people for "simply disagreeing" is against the rules. It does say you "shouldn't" do so, however people do do so all the time and in many cases the mods don't remove the negative rep even when asked to by the person that received negative rep for that reason, much less punish the person giving it to them for that reason in any way.


Not quite true. The official guideline as to how to use neg rep is right there next to the radio button when you are selecting to neg someone.
Disapprove (e.g. Inflammatory, Derogatory, Disruptive, Trolling, or violates community guidelines)That "e.g." at the beginning is the important part, it means those are examples of reasons why you can give someone negative rep, not that those are the only reasons you can do so.

[Chai]

Better still:

#0 Remove the Rep system completely, since it's been nothing but a point of contention and a facet of forum-life that nobody likes since it was inflicted upon us by the Mods for flimsy and threadbare reasons.

It is a terrible system that has never worked, and never will work, in the manner in which the Mods seem to have wanted/hoped it would.

This.

The report system is good enough.

The rep system quickly turned into a "like/dislike" system similar to facebook, and does not serve the purpose it was put in place for.

[Chai]

It does not say negative repping people for "simply disagreeing" is against the rules. It does say you "shouldn't" do so, however people do do so all the time and in many cases the mods don't remove the negative rep even when asked to by the person that received negative rep for that reason, much less punish the person giving it to them for that reason in any way.

That "e.g." at the beginning is the important part, it means those are examples of reasons why you can give someone negative rep, not that those are the only reasons you can do so.

Yeap, they dont enforce abuse of the system enough. What they did instead was to limit the amount one can give in one day and amount one can receive from the same person consecutively.

[Chai]

currently, neg rep is used as a strong arm tactic to shut people up when you're losing an argument.

Neg rep is used as a strong arm tactic to shut people up when the people doling out the neg rep are losing an argument. Its another form of ad hominem in and of itself. Point being disagreed with cant be refuted logically, so they attack the poster instead, through the rep system.

[Qhualor]

Difference of opinion. I am not trying to troll, but the above can be looked at in a few ways.

Are you suggesting that people read them as you are smarter than them and are being condescending?

Or are you being helpful and trying to show someone something?

I think I know, but there are a lot of people that either have no common sense or their sarcasm detector is disabled. What may seem simple to some can be mind blowing to others?

P.S. I don’t care about the sentence or quote. It was just an example.

I was actually serious. It seemed Dysmetria was looking for a loophole in the meaning. Examples given didnt seem to be enough to understand so i suggested he take it up with a mod.

Im really not some jerk. If im pushed in that direction, i can be :)

[Saravis]

Neg rep's existence makes it much easier to identify the habitual trolls. Not by the red boxes, but by the fact that they've disabled reputation.

Not necessarily, there are posters who prefer for people to rely on their own experiences to form an opinion and not rely on the opinion of others, in other words, people should learn to think for themselves.

[Vint]

I was actually serious. It seemed Dysmetria was looking for a loophole in the meaning. Examples given didnt seem to be enough to understand so i suggested he take it up with a mod.

Im really not some jerk. If im pushed in that direction, i can be :)

I understand your point and know that you were being helpful as always.

I have been + rep for being a jerk, and been - rep for being what I thought was positive.

As we are on the third page someone could decide not to read the first two and come straight to this post and it looks like I am being a jerk. This happens alot especially with threads 60+ pages. Win some lose some, I just move on.

[zarthak]

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-vdxnty7a_sq/umhxw-ykgji/aaaaaaaaaqo/zp7qrrnrycq/s800/negrep.jpg

+1

[Uska]

Neg rep is used as a strong arm tactic to shut people up when the people doling out the neg rep are losing an argument. Its another form of ad hominem in and of itself. Point being disagreed with cant be refuted logically, so they attack the poster instead, through the rep system.

giving someone neg rep doesnr affect their posting at all unless there are lot of people doing it and if they get enough neg rep for that to happen then they most likely shouldnt post at all.

[Sirea]

*shrug* Maybe people should stop caring about such an arbitrary system as forum reputation. Why does it really matter how many little green dots you have next to your name? It has no bearing either here or in the real world. It's just a silly little ego booster that lets people pretend that they're important in an anonymous setting. It reminds me of how people on Facebook complain because they don't get enough "likes" on their posts.

[Xynot2]

XYnot, if you are upset with people neg-repping your trollololing, there are 2 ways to turn those reds into greens.

1. Stop trolling and post useful, informative information that helps others.
2. Troll harder.


Anyway, /not signed, your suggestion was poor overall and clearly has personal bias. Neg rep has a purpose, if a post recieves a lot of it, there is probably a reason. Perhaps look at your own posting history instead of asking for the entire system to change around you.

My OP was due to an entire thread of useful info and wanting to +rep the entire thread.

I thought... HEY! what if ...

And it blew up into this. Im not worried about my rep or rep in general. It was a nice thought for a nice group of people who deserved it. And if you're wondering and want to read it, it was the thread about the stuck bug where the images and descriptions were posted and even forum staff were involved.

nothing else was wanted or intended.

[Handpicked]

Giving negative reputation is alot easier than explaining why you disagree with someone, especially when your arguement for disagreement is unsound. So expect that whenever you voice an opinion or assertion in one direction or the other without trying to walk the fence as many do you may receive negative rep.

Good posts aren't based on what people will think of them.

[Chai]

giving someone neg rep doesnr affect their posting at all unless there are lot of people doing it and if they get enough neg rep for that to happen then they most likely shouldnt post at all.

This is not true, and I proved it a while back.

When I started this account in 2008 there were 4 or 5 people who trolled my rep into oblivion, even going as far as neg repping posts that were very old where they werent even part of the thread. People tried to deny this was the case saying I couldnt prove it. However...there was a bug back then (which I have since reported, and has been fixed) that allowed us to determine where each rep pip came from.

Once I was able to prove that I knew it was the same 4 or 5 people I knew it was already, all of a sudden, it stopped happening. The issue I had was that they were more than willing to allow it, as long as I couldnt definitively prove who was abusing the system. Once I could, they must have done something about it, because it stopped.

This has happened to other people besides myself around these parts as well. Heavily neg repped simply and solely due to disagreement. Its like a dislike button on a facebook page. Some of those people then had their posts modersted for a time, simply because the pixelated playground bullies who all patted eachother on the back enough times over the years ganged up on the newbie who had different opinions than they did.

This is why they need to just do away with it and go with report only. Either a post warrents reporting or it doesnt. Since every report has to be read by a MOD they will be far more likely to act when someone is abusing the system.

[Xynot2]

This is not true, and I proved it a while back.

When I started this account in 2008 there were 4 or 5 people who trolled my rep into oblivion, even going as far as neg repping posts that were very old where they werent even part of the thread. People tried to deny this was the case saying I couldnt prove it. However...there was a bug back then (which I have since reported, and has been fixed) that allowed us to determine where each rep pip came from.

Once I was able to prove that I knew it was the same 4 or 5 people I knew it was already, all of a sudden, it stopped happening. The issue I had was that they were more than willing to allow it, as long as I couldnt definitively prove who was abusing the system. Once I could, they must have done something about it, because it stopped.

This has happened to other people besides myself around these parts as well. Heavily neg repped simply and solely due to disagreement. Its like a dislike button on a facebook page. Some of those people then had their posts modersted for a time, simply because the pixelated playground bullies who all patted eachother on the back enough times over the years ganged up on the newbie who had different opinions than they did.

This is why they need to just do away with it and go with report only. Either a post warrents reporting or it doesnt. Since every report has to be read by a MOD they will be far more likely to act when someone is abusing the system.

I need a shower. I just +1 repped Chai. >.<

[dterror]

It does not say negative repping people for "simply disagreeing" is against the rules. It does say you "shouldn't" do so, however people do do so all the time and in many cases the mods don't remove the negative rep even when asked to by the person that received negative rep for that reason, much less punish the person giving it to them for that reason in any way.

That "e.g." at the beginning is the important part, it means those are examples of reasons why you can give someone negative rep, not that those are the only reasons you can do so.

Exactly. GUIDELINES.
Guidelines are not comprehensive lists of what can and cannot be done. From the examples given, someone should be able to easily extrapolate what does and does not warrant a neg rep, and the examples given thus serve as an official guideline.

[cdbd3rd]

.... Seriously. I wouldn't want the forums to become another quest.



Hunh?? It's NOT!?! :eek:

Aw, man.. That explains why my loot has been suxxors.



:D

[cdbd3rd]

...

My mom's punkin pie is awesome.

...


and crushed walnuts and shaved chocolate


I'm detecting a theme here...


I really really would make a comment tying 'pie', 'crushed nuts', and 'shaved' together, but I try to avoid mother jokes.

Sisters otoh, would be fair game. :p

[Xynot2]

I'm detecting a theme here...


I really really would make a comment tying 'pie', 'crushed nuts', and 'shaved' together, but I try to avoid mother jokes.

Sisters otoh, would be fair game. :p

SO glad I wasn't drinking coffee when I read this : )

[Memnir]

I wouldn't want the forums to become another quest.It's not.

It's PvP. :D
.
.
.
http://i.imgur.com/xewzT.gif
.
.

[SirValentine]

Not necessarily, there are posters who prefer for people to rely on their own experiences to form an opinion and not rely on the opinion of others, in other words, people should learn to think for themselves.

I never said everyone with disabled rep was a troll, but almost all of the trolls have disabled rep.

[Memnir]

Meh - NM.

[mdgiest2314]

bump

[shores11]

Ok... revamp of the rep system.

#1- remove Neg rep
#2- Forum staff able to rep people
#3- rep stats shown clearly under/near/on avatar
#4- so many staff reps = 25 TP like favor does (pick a number, any number) or maybe a cosmetic pet, or , or, or...

I dunno- silly?

/not signed, it is fine the way it is. The negative rep at least for some acts as a deterent for some. The rep system does not need to be turned into something major.

[SirValentine]

Nevermind, didn't realize someone necro'd the thread.