New Reputation Thing What do you all think?

[MajesticTreeFrog 0]

Hmm, I take it my deduction wasn't hypothetical? Strange, I don't remember docking hashbang.... DAMN YOU EVIL TWIN! Still, I like the idea, but I have also always made sure to post a reason for my deductions(and I believe my additions)The other thought I had was that as people's reputations go up, should there mod's be worth more?finally, should users who just joined have mod ability? Because if someone didn't like how someone modded him/her, couldn't they sign up for a bunch of flake accounts and retaliate by modding that person down over and over with throwaway accounts?Maybe wait till a user has something reasonable like 20 posts? What do you guys think?

[Darren1405241470 0]

I agree with Majestic and say that the users with the "newbie" tag (less than 10 posts) should not be allowed to change other peoples reputation. Ten posts should be more than enough to put people off making accounts specifically to change someone's rep.

[-=Wrighty=- 0]

I think its great. I gives everyone something to work for as I think the number of posts should not matter it is the quality not the quantity. So the members with the best reputation are the best members in my eyes rather than the ones with the largest post count.

[NilsC 0]

Hmm, I take it my deduction wasn't hypothetical? Strange, I don't remember docking hashbang.... DAMN YOU EVIL TWIN!

 

I agree with Majestic and say that the users with the "newbie" tag (less than 10 posts) should not be allowed to change other peoples reputation. Ten posts should be more than enough to put people off making accounts specifically to change someone's rep.

I (partly) agre, keep it away from new users. Maybe the ability to post a positive or negative point should be limited to members that are hosted. If you are a non hosted member with 5 or more positive points your ability to post points should be turned on. Any hosted member with 2 or more negative points (I mean 2 or more points below 0) should not be able to post points until the count is -1 or 0.

 

New members with good posts can receive bonus points but not dish them out.

 

If I understand the point system you can get 5 good points and deduct 3 bad points and yout total good point count is 2.

 

You have one good point and 3 bad points your bad point count is -2 and you need to improve your quality of posts. May it be content or staying on topic.

Only Hosted Members to post points

Not hosted with 5 or more good points, should be able to post points (if you loose grace and fall below 5... your'e outta here )

Hosted member with -2 or lower should loose the ability to post points

This concept on points rating are an opinion tool as well as a way of recognizing good posts. Just because you do/don't agree/disagree with the poster does not make it a good / bad post. A good bad post should have merrit on its own. Is it on topic, is the scope covering the points in the topic, is it copied from another source, did the poster quote the source, etc etc..

 

It's a lot to take into account for this to be a reliable tool.

 

Nils

[pbolduc 0]

I like the reputation option in this site. The only thing that is that it could easily be mis-used. I recently had a debate on the big bang theory with MajesticTreeFrog. Because of the subject matter and our strong and opposite positions It would not have surprized me to have gotten a negitive point from him. It never came. He/she understands the system.This I feel would have been a grave mis-use of the system, to give a negitive point because of a disagreement. The system is there to ensure that we each treat each other with respect, (language and such) and to ensure that info posted is accurate, and that the poster knows what their talking about.

[enterthematrix 0]

I don't really like this new reputation thing either. What's the point? I see someone has two "reputation points". So what? What does this mean? I don't have any points. Does this make that person with two points a better person than me? Do they get a better spot in some line? If so, couldn't I just have a few of my buddies make false accounts and give me some of these "goodie points"? And there are a few people on this site I don't like. Should I take away some of their points(I won't, this is just to prove a point)? And that point is: WHAT'S THE POINT?

[Darren1405241470 0]

WHAT'S THE POINT?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The point is so that people new to the site know who makes comments that most people think are worth reading and which posts not to take any notice of.

 

couldn't I just have a few of my buddies make false accounts and give me some of these "goodie points"?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you had've read some of the previous posts you would know that we have already discussed that at current you could make fake accounts to do this and you would also know that we have already suggested that to prevent this users should not be allowed to add points untill they have reached a to-be-determined number of posts/reputation points. Either way the admins can simply take the points away or even delete your account if they think you're cheating the system.

 

And there are a few people on this site I don't like.  Should I take away some of their points(I won't, this is just to prove a point)?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you dislike them because you disagree on some opinionative points then no I don't think you should take their reputation points away (unless they are simply disagreing to everything that you say just sto be annoying), however if you don't like them because they have made aimless posts that are too short and lacking in decent content or have broken the rules (which you should report too) then I believe that you should lower their reputation.

 

NOTE: The above is just my opinion and at current the rules about reputation changing have not been set in place.

 

I think that the only reason you dislike the reputation mod is that it requires a little thought.

[MajesticTreeFrog 0]

I hadn't thought about the idea of only allowing people to affect others rep after getting rep themselves. I think hybrid would be best. No reping till at least 40 posts or 10/20 posts and a positive rep.(PS: pbuldoc: you still have no clue what you are talking about, so hah! ) (PPS: for those with no sense of humor, that was a joke!)

[NilsC 0]

I'm a firm believer in self controll. -huh- I know it sounds funny and in a way it's ment to be funny in another way it's supposed to make you think.

 

We are here on this board posting our opinions, opinions are like sand on the beach. Everyone walking barefoot in it get sand between their toes.

Google search on 'Opinions are like'

To quote an old proverb:

You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar

You can win people to your side more easily by gentle persuasion and flattery than by hostile confrontation.

A friend in need is a friend indeed

A friend who helps out when we are in trouble is a true friend—unlike others who disappear when trouble arises.

From the sublime to the ridiculous is but a step

In life, things that are noble and magnificent are never far from things that are trivial and laughable. This saying has been attributed to both Napoleon Bonaparte and the French statesman Talleyrand.

 

All quotes and subtexts from http://www.bartleby.com/ Nothing original here.

 

The point is to criticize in private and applaud in public.

 

Why?

 

Criticism = censure! look it up!

Censure refers to open and strong expression of criticism; often it implies a formal reprimand: “No man can justly censure or condemn another, because indeed no man truly knows another” (Thomas Browne). Condemn denotes the pronouncement of harshly adverse judgment: “The wrongs which we seek to condemn and punish have been so calculated, so malignant and so devastating that civilization cannot tolerate their being ignored because it cannot survive their being repeated” (Robert H. Jackson).

I will give a positive point and post a note of why when I like a post. I'll send you a PM and ask you why you posted what you did before I post a negative point. That way you can explain what happened and maybe I misunderstood you.

 

Nils

[MajesticTreeFrog 0]

The difference between censure and criticism is formality. Censure is basically criticism that is expressed in a formal manner, usually by a group. That light nitpicking out of the way, points shouldn't be taken away because of disagreement, but instead for things that are:1. Continually trite, while at the same time not posting anything of depth elsewhere.2. Outrigth demeaning, or directly insulting. Particularly if that is all a post or series of posts is.Remember, we aren't so much moderating the individual posts, but instead the overall quality of the poster, despite the fact that the control makes it look that way. Therefore, I see the rep thing as something to be used for individual posts only in extreme circumstances. Instead, when a person continually posts junk, thats when rep should come into play.

[NilsC 0]

point taken, but you forgot to undeline the funny part again... not sure how many will get the point without the manual.Then again, I shouldent say to much... I had a spelling error in my sig file since Sunday. I have seen some of the fly by posters, 10 minutes of posting in someone elses work without thought to what the subject say.Have not been here long enough to see any 'flame' wars or demeaning posts. I have seen a few pointless ones and some placed in the wrong forum bur that is to be expected.Nils

[hashbang 0]

1. Continually trite, while at the same time not posting anything of depth elsewhere.

 

2. Outrigth demeaning, or directly insulting.  Particularly if that is all a post or series of posts is.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wow .. this thread has grown in a hurry!

I agree with Dendrobates Azureus on the 2 points above. This has been what I have been loosely applying when I rate posters. Nice to see the rep mod taking off.

 

cheers all,

hashbang

[MajesticTreeFrog 0]

It is true that there haven't been any demeaning posts so far, but I think that might be just a matter of time. But then again I might just be pessimistic.I don't so much care about 'fly by' posters, provided that they are just off topic. What I don't like are posts that I don't think have any worth at a more innate level, though this definition is highly subjective.On the other hand, I have a harder time deciding what should deserve a positive rep point.

[r3d1405241470 0]

ie look i got 1 :)this is sux, modz deserve a negative not positive.and since only the modz and admin can alter the warn level. the reputation thing is for members. this features is made for you guys, i think for fun or whatever. so don't take this one too seriously.

[NilsC 0]

ie look i got 1

 

this is sux, modz deserve a negative not positive.

 

and since only the modz and admin can alter the warn level. the reputation thing is for members. this features is made for you guys, i think for fun or whatever. so don't take this one too seriously.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

On your first statement I have to disagree, because if a mod does a good job and participates in a tread in a constructive way then he/she have the same opportunity to contribute something positive. A mod receiving a positive or negative point should not be determined by his or her moderating a topic or user (it probably happens - I know that for a fact!).

 

As for alter the warn level, that is not something users on this board see (At least I have not seen anyone else’s warn levels) so that can’t be used as an indicator of a users ability to participate in a constructive way.

 

Here is some food for thought, maybe we can ask for a way of rating the moderators… If the moderator does a good job and stays active in the forum they could get bonus point up until they became Administrators. So a junior moderator can redirect a misplaced post, when upgraded to the next level they can close a post that are off topic. When closing a post that are off topic a reason should be put in that post, if it is a repeat subject a link to the original post should be placed in the post.

 

So what’s this like for an idea… am I on to something here or what?

 

Nils