Reputation?

[lurkah]

WOW, did you guys see how many chiclets Scrivener is up to now? Ukugazillion!
Chiclet envy? :p

[MadAzza]

Still Maddie, I'm in awe of all your green chickies! @:)

Yeah, me, too! How the heck did that happen??

<blush>

[Miulang]

I think it's called "chicklet inflation". That occurs when someone tries to give someone a red chicklet for a post and has to give (I don't know how many, but there isn't a one-to-one correlation) positive ratings for many many posts, whether they really think those are good posts or not...just take a look at some of the posts you got positive ratings for, and you'll see what I mean. ;)

Miulang

[helen]

Excuse me but where did you find that piece of information from? I rarely give out a negative reputation but there was a time that I gave 3 negatives in a row and it didn't say anything about that.

[Miulang]

Excuse me but where did you find that piece of information from? I rarely give out a negative reputation but there was a time that I gave 3 negatives in a row and it didn't say anything about that.
Personal experience, Helen. ;) The 3 negatives were probably not given to the same person or the same post, were they?

Miulang

[helen]

Yes there were 3 different people. However you can not award reputation to the same person twice in a row, be it postive or negative, you have to award it to 10 other people first before you can award to that person again. But I don't think those 10 awards have to be postive.

[MadAzza]

I think it's called "chicklet inflation". That occurs when someone tries to give someone a red chicklet for a post and has to give (I don't know how many, but there isn't a one-to-one correlation) positive ratings for many many posts, whether they really think those are good posts or not...just take a look at some of the posts you got positive ratings for, and you'll see what I mean. ;)



I did. They were brilliant. Absolutely brilliant!

I take it you don't think I deserve my greenies. Well ... neener, neener!

[Miulang]

I did. They were brilliant. Absolutely brilliant!

I take it you don't think I deserve my greenies. Well ... neener, neener!
I never said that. I just said that if you wanted to give a person a bad rating on a particular post, you could, but if you thought a particular person was pilau consistently, you have to award many many positive ratings before the system, in its wisdom, will let you give that person another bad rating on another post. And how do you know I DIDN'T give you positive ratings on some of your posts, hmmmm? ;)

Miulang

[MadAzza]

Oh, so you're the one! <big grin>

[Pua'i Mana'o]

Oh, so you're the one! <big grin>

So looking at this thread, yours is the lastest response. I am trying to click all over the place to figure out how to empower posters with chicklets. While I have not quite figured out how to do that, I clicked on the "report post" BY ACCIDENT!! :o

Mea Culpa!!!!!!!

Then I clicked on FAQ, and faq me if I still cannot figure out how to toss chicklets people's way.

mfrubmumggrumblerurmumblerurgggrrrr....

[lurkah]

So looking at this thread, yours is the lastest response. I am trying to click all over the place to figure out how to empower posters with chicklets.

mfrubmumggrumblerurmumblerurgggrrrr....
You need to click on the "scale" icon http://www.hawaiithreads.com/images/buttons/reputation.gif located at the top right corner of the individual's post.

[helen]

You click on the scale icon, which would be just to the left of the report bad post icon.

To be clear on this:

There is a dark strip that is at the top of a post. Going from left to right are:

Left side:
Status of the post (noticed Old or Unread so far, might be others)
Date and time when it was posted to HawaiiThreads

Right side:
number of post in the thread (#1 is the first post of the thread)
balance icon, this is where you click to give reputation (it will say add to xxx reputation)
report bad post icon

If the balance icon is not there, then the post cannot receive reputation because the poster's account is closed or banned.

[zztype]

Click the little "scales" in the reddish bar at the top of each post... right by the post number.

Then I clicked on FAQ, and faq me if I still cannot figure out how to toss chicklets people's way.

[lurkah]

Wow, an unprecedented double echo off of my post. http://allthingshawaiian.com/lurkah/graphics/handpointingup.gif;)

Eh Blaine, is this deserving of one of your infamous "confonits"?

[zztype]

Ahhhh, dass what I get for giving the knee-jerk reply. I didn't see that there was a next page until after posting that... confonit! :)

[Pomai]

Unless the person with the most "chicklets" wins a new car, beachfront home, gasoline and a pack of "Chicklets" chewing gum for an entire year, I'd say LOOSE IT.

It only gives (internet) lurkers and "HaterAde drinkers" a tool to ruin other people's real world GOOD reputation.
:confused:

[kimo55]

Unless the person with the most "chicklets" wins a new car, beachfront home, gasoline and a pack of "Chicklets" chewing gum for an entire year, I'd say LOOSE IT.

It only gives (internet) lurkers and "HaterAde drinkers" a tool to ruin other people's real world GOOD reputation.

the rep system already gives me gas, but it ain't no big thing, as much as it's being played out to be. so ainokea.

[Menehune Man]

I got 2 green (good) and 1 red (bad) reputation point notices for the identical post I did. Pretty funny! :D

[sinjin]

I got 2 green (good) and 1 red (bad) reputation point notices for the identical post I did. Pretty funny! :D

I got a pm from a poster thanking me for my comments about their post and an anonymous red rep from someone else. Go figga. :confused:

[lurkah]

From glancing at this sorted list (http://hawaiithreads.com/memberlist.php?postslower=0&postsupper=0&ausername=&homepage=&icq=&aim=&yahoo=&msn=&joindateafter=&joindatebefore=&lastpostafter=&lastpostbefore=&order=DESC&sort=reputation&pp=30&ltr=), you might get the notion that only certain HT members had been invited to a private green chiclet ping pong party. ;)

Interesting too that it's now 21 to 17 in favor of removing the Reputation system.

[zztype]

Seems to me that if it could be arranged that all reputation points awarded were tagged with the user name of the person who awarded them, it would be quite invaluable.

[Leo Lakio]

Seems to me that if it could be arranged that all reputation points awarded were tagged with the user name of the person who awarded them, it would be quite invaluable.
I'm seeing more and more people doing this voluntarily (when they give me points) - and those seem to be the same people who have the most chicklets, too. Coincidence?

Hey - it's my 100th post! :D

[lavagal]

From glancing at this sorted list (http://hawaiithreads.com/memberlist.php?postslower=0&postsupper=0&ausername=&homepage=&icq=&aim=&yahoo=&msn=&joindateafter=&joindatebefore=&lastpostafter=&lastpostbefore=&order=DESC&sort=reputation&pp=30&ltr=), you might get the notion that only certain HT members had been invited to a private green chiclet ping pong party. ;)

Interesting too that it's now 21 to 17 in favor of removing the Reputation system.

quite the sordid list, LOL!

[tutusue]

Seems to me that if it could be arranged that all reputation points awarded were tagged with the user name of the person who awarded them, it would be quite invaluable.
I agree...red as well as green.

[tutusue]

I agree...red as well as green.

Bwaha! Someone gave me a red chiclet for this message! :D No ID of course. I consider it a badge of honor and will wear it proudly...after I chew it! ;)

[kimo55]

that happens far too often; a red chiclet as reward for a seemingly innocuous comment.

[sinjin]

that happens far too often; a red chiclet as reward for a seemingly innocuous comment.

Likely disgruntled lurkers who rarely post but that have been previously spanked.

[LikaNui]

Bwaha! Someone gave me a red chiclet for this message! :D No ID of course. I consider it a badge of honor and will wear it proudly...after I chew it! ;) Someone gave me a red one for my post thanking Ryan for hosting this board. Go figure.
I very much like your idea of not allowing people to give out red ones unless their screen name is included. Ryan? Helen? Is that doable?

[Leo Lakio]

Bwaha! Someone gave me a red chiclet for this message! :D No ID of course. I consider it a badge of honor and will wear it proudly...after I chew it! ;)
Green is spearmint; red is cinnamon, right?

So should you just give them out based on the flavor you think that post tastes like?

Do they grey ones taste like poi? :confused:

[zztype]

And to prove my point, somebody gave me cinnamon gum for THIS POST! Ryan, if it can be arranged, I think ALL reputation points should be automaticaly tagged with the username of the person who awards those points. Anonymity completely devalues the reputation system. Anybody else feel so? -- Blaine
Seems to me that if it could be arranged that all reputation points awarded were tagged with the user name of the person who awarded them, it would be quite invaluable.

[sinjin]

Do they grey ones taste like poi? :confused:

I certainly hope not. This haole boy don't eat no poi. :D

[Pomai]

And to prove my point, somebody gave me cinnamon gum for THIS POST! Ryan, if it can be arranged, I think ALL reputation points should be automaticaly tagged with the username of the person who awards those points. Anonymity completely devalues the reputation system. Anybody else feel so? -- Blaine

I agree. In my entire existance at HT.com, I've only received 2 or 3 cinammon gums. And both were left ANONYMOUSLY. :mad:

Most of the "Greenies" I received were proudly given by people who left their screen name along with a nice little message. And to all you folks, "Mahalo!" :)

But like I said before, unless the reputation system involves some sort of ca$h prize, I doesn't matter what kind of "gum" anyone gives me, I still grind 'em! lol

Speaking of Chicklets, I like the fruit flavors best. Never been a fan of the mints. :rolleyes:

[GypsyLika]

I agree. In my entire existance at HT.com, I've only received 2 or 3 cinammon gums. And both were left ANONYMOUSLY. :mad:

Most of the "Greenies" I received were proudly given by people who left their screen name along with a nice little message. And to all you folks, "Mahalo!" :)

But like I said before, unless the reputation system involves some sort of ca$h prize, I doesn't matter what kind of "gum" anyone gives me, I still grind 'em! lol

Speaking of Chicklets, I like the fruit flavors best. Never been a fan of the mints. :rolleyes:

I agree with what Blaine & Pomai said.
It took me a "few days" to figure out the reputation thingee.I haven't even posted that much, juss lilobit. And I get one RED chiclet from anonoymous neva put dey name, no-ack-hah. Was it for da B-words I used? I said it with affection. Regardless, its just gum! I like sommoe. :)

[lavagal]

quite the sordid list, LOL!


HAH! I got a cinnamon chicklet, too, for the note above. I guess we get chicklets for being smarter or more clever or quicker than those who can't think of anything to say. It's sad when you think about it. Those who give red chicklets aren't very creative and have no honor.

Can't wait to see the torrent of red chicklets I get for this msg. I'll keep you posted. And then I'll get more. THEN we can create a reverse inflation of chicklets where getting red ones is way cooler!

Well, cooler for those of us who can wrap their head around that idea. For those who can't, I guess they'll just give me more red chicklets.

[tutusue]

And to prove my point, somebody gave me cinnamon gum for THIS POST! Ryan, if it can be arranged, I think ALL reputation points should be automaticaly tagged with the username of the person who awards those points. Anonymity completely devalues the reputation system. Anybody else feel so? -- Blaine
Yup...and I've already been rewarded my red chiclet for agreeing with you earlier! Guess I'll get another one now! :rolleyes:

Hey! Let's have a red chiclet party once the poll is pau!

[Pomai]

Can't wait to see the torrent of red chicklets I get for this msg. I'll keep you posted. And then I'll get more. THEN we can create a reverse inflation of chicklets where getting red ones is way cooler!:D

Like I said, I prefer fruit-flavored Chicklets over mints, and FRUIT PUNCH/STRAWBERRY/CHERRY is my FAVORITE!

But LIME is cool too.

:rolleyes:

[zztype]

Uh oh, from the FAQ:

"Finally, if your Reputation score falls below 10 points — the number you get when you first join — you lose the ability to participate in the Reputation system."

So that means that if you get too many red chiclets, your score will fall to 0 and you'll be banished for a time from the chiclet system until somebody vouches for you. Unless that's your plan, that could be junk. Right now, chiclets you give other people, cinnamon or spearmint, carry quite a bit of weight. If you drop low in Reputation, your chiclets will be worth less to others. :(

Boooo!
HAH! I got a cinnamon chicklet, too, for the note above. I guess we get chicklets for being smarter or more clever or quicker than those who can't think of anything to say. It's sad when you think about it. Those who give red chicklets aren't very creative and have no honor.

Can't wait to see the torrent of red chicklets I get for this msg. I'll keep you posted. And then I'll get more. THEN we can create a reverse inflation of chicklets where getting red ones is way cooler!

Well, cooler for those of us who can wrap their head around that idea. For those who can't, I guess they'll just give me more red chicklets.

[Menehune Man]

I have been getting more rep notices, mostly green, but I remain at 3 green chicklets and a score of 150. Why no stay change li'dat?

[lurkah]

http://allthingshawaiian.com/lurkah/graphics/chicletworship.gif

Sorry, couldn't resist.
So, do I get spearmint or cinnamon for this? :p

[pzarquon]

Different members' reputation marks carry different weights. One 'chiclet' could boost or drop your score by 10 points, another by much, much more.

Frankly, I think overthinking this system is the biggest problem. It's supposed to work in aggregate, over time, with legitimate uses smoothing out those cases where people are just being silly or petty. The more you pay attention to it -- and especially the more you post about it -- the more it's going to bug you, and give others an excuse to mess with it.

I'm not counting individual chiclets or trying to determine what thresholds give whatever number of squares. But when I look at the big picture, I definitely see an effective representation of how some users' contributions are specifically deemed especially entertaining or helpful.

That is, I'm sure I'd have problems with how specific points for specific posts are given, but overall I see "plenny chicklets" for exactly those users I love to chat with on the board.

[zztype]

Yes, I agree, PZ, but it still remains that allowing anonymous award of negative rep points only invites abuse. The responsible adults here would rarely bother with awarding negative points.

I would have to assume that people who run around awarding spurious negative points anonymously have little or no respect for the system and are doing so in spite of the system.

I have to feel that in most cases, if the negative points or comments were associated with a specific user, they would be awarded more judiciously, with more thought and less in spite or just to be a wiseacre.

To me, it would make the whole reputation system far more valuable and a true representation of the users.

You don't allow people to post anonymous comments here. What's the difference?

[pzarquon]

Because there are legitimate reasons for marking a post as negative. Forcing onymous post ratings would inhibit this. The system skews toward positive reinforcement than negative punishment anyway (so very few active users actually have negative reputation overall for long), but eliminating the negative aspect entirely removes the little control it provides - discouraging spam, personal attacks, and newcomers who land here with both barrels blazing.

And if you think people are being petty and silly now, imagine what kind of grudges and vendettas would be fostered if names were attached?

Again, the reputation system is an aggregate system, not something to be overanalyzed on a per point, per chiclet basis. There's a reason why other common community-focused decision making processes are handled anonymously, and I think it makes sense here too.

[zztype]

By the same argument, then, allowing anonymous posting to the discussions will foster more truthful posting? In the aggregate, I mean.

(And hey, I'm just being argumentive here. I can see some of the points you are trying to make, but I am not convinced that the "final answer" or perception is absolutely correct. I feel there is room for further discussion.--Blaine)

[mel]

There are several pages of reputation discussion occuring at the vBulletin message forum which can be found here:

http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/search.php?searchid=207990

vBulletin 3.09 is what currently runs this board, but according to the publishers of the software they are currently up to version 3.5. There are hundreds perhaps thousands of posts on that forum and I think for anyone interested in the nitty gritty may want to lurk over there and read about reputation and see what the publishers of the software and other sysops/users have to say.

http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/index.php

In the end Ryan is the only one that can make decisions and changes here since he pays all of the bills.

[pzarquon]

Version 3.5 just came out, and it will require extensive overhauls of the customizations made to this site, so I'm not in a hurry to upgrade (and we'll be living in generic-looking forum land for a while afterward). I don't think there are any specific tweaks to the Reputation system.

And yes, ZZ, there is clearly room for further discussion (and we've had a lot of it), and I'm not saying that my view is "absolutely correct." But for all the flaws that are being hashed out to the point of ridiculousness in this protracted thread, and all the specific incidents cited, I think the Reputation system as implemented works as designed, and don't have plans to change it anytime soon.

But, hey, who knows how things will look by "Reputation? - Chapter 36"

[zztype]

I guess if you're going to allow anonymous lobbing of stones, then I have to vote to kill the freaking thing.

[helen]

Frankly, I think overthinking this system is the biggest problem. It's supposed to work in aggregate, over time, with legitimate uses smoothing out those cases where people are just being silly or petty. The more you pay attention to it -- and especially the more you post about it -- the more it's going to bug you, and give others an excuse to mess with it.
I can partly agree with you there but I suspect some of the post generated for this thread comes under the heading of "this is something new, how does it work" of course it doesn't help matters much that the rules that govern when and who you can give reputation to can get kind of confusing. Plus the concept of having three values associated with the Reputation system but you only see one which is your reputation score and not seeing what your postive and negative reputation weights are.

[cezanne]

I was thinking what's the big deal about the rep points and all then I checked mine. I got a red one for this post: http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showpost.php?p=43364&postcount=13

The anonymous comment left was: "Sorry hadda do it!"

What a joke... but at least they said sorry. :)

[helen]

To be honest, that post (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showpost.php?p=43364&postcount=13) that you did would have been better off as a reputation to Glen. If you haven't done it yet, you should at your earliest possible convince.

[Glen Miyashiro]

Oh, don't worry about me. I'm good.

[cezanne]

To be honest, that post (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showpost.php?p=43364&postcount=13) that you did would have been better off as a reputation to Glen. If you haven't done it yet, you should at your earliest possible convince.

Man I'm trying REALLY hard not to write: LOL!
:rolleyes:

[MadAzza]

Some pathetic, anonymous (of course!) dweeb gave me cinnamon for this (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showpost.php?p=43865&postcount=74) post, where I was agreeing with Menehune Man. WTF??
If I don't know who left the chicklet and I don't know why she/he left it, then what's the point? Although I do have an idea who/why, and it has nothing to do with that particular post ...

Anonymous losers ... go figure. <shrug>

[sinjin]

How would it be if we used this thread to address our detractors and their anonymous red rep comments? No quoting the comment, just a response if warranted. The beneficiary should know who they are. I strive to be earnest here an the feeling I'm either misunderstood or being misconstrued doesn't set well with me.

[tutusue]

How would it be if we used this thread to address our detractors and their anonymous red rep comments? No quoting the comment, just a response if warranted. The beneficiary should know who they are. I strive to be earnest here an the feeling I'm either misunderstood or being misconstrued doesn't set well with me.
Communication isn't just based on the written word but also on body language, facial expressions, voice inflections, yada, yada. This is where the internet will always fall short unless everyone uses a web cam! Emoticons, smilies and LOLs are so over used it's hard to know if someone is just trying to soften a stinging statement or that statement was actually meant to be funny. :D I know what you mean, tho'. :(

Awarding reputation points in HT offers the option of "I approve" or "I disapprove". There are very, very few posts in HT that I disapprove of. There are many I disagree with. There's a huge difference between those 2. I haven't 'gifted' (lol!!!) any red chiclets :mad: yet but if/when I do it will be for something I disapprove of...not disagree with. ;)

[Rickyrab]

1) Under the current system, you only let people with "positive reputations" contribute to reputation scores. This is unfair to those of us who happen to be more controversial and who like controversy.
2) The whole idea of a "reputation" system is silly anyway. People target individual comments and, since controversy often begets negative reputation scores, it contributes towards making this a dull board. True, I don't want a mean-spirited board, but it would be livelier if people didn't keep getting slapped in the face for asking controversial questions or adding to controversy.
3) I am not flaming. I am not trying to flame. I just like to have a say, just like everyone else has around here. I feel that there are more constructive ways to deal with complaints and auwes then to slap folks with bad grades on their report cards - i.e., explain to the folks being graded why they think negatively.
4) Also, I recommend complaints about comments on this board be voiced more openly, and I would like it made strongly clear that "reputation" scores are not referenda on the posters themselves, but on individual comments made by those posters. Thank you for listening.

[kimo55]

you are invited to leave then if you find the Ht format disagreeable.
OR..
create your own board and make yer own rules.1) Under the current system, you only let people with "positive reputations" contribute to reputation scores. This is unfair to those of us who happen to be more controversial and who like controversy.
uuhh.
waidaminnit...
all those who believe Kimo may fit into that group, raise your hands.

uh, ok, theory misproven, rickster...

[Rickyrab]

uuhh.
waidaminnit...
all those who believe Kimo may fit into that group, raise your hands.


uh, ok, theory misproven, rickster...

Oh, so it's only mainlanders with controversial attitudes that make red squares? Isn't that unfair and ethnocentric (location centric, 'ainacentric, whatever)?

[lavagal]

Oh, so it's only mainlanders with controversial attitudes that make red squares? Isn't that unfair and ethnocentric (location centric, 'ainacentric, whatever)?


I've had a few red chicklets and I live in Hawaii Kai. I don't know why you have yours, but I didn't get mine because I don't live in Hawaii. I don't think anyone has that criteria. Really!

[admin]

This is unfair to those of us who happen to be more controversial and who like controversy.If this is the mindset with which you approach conversations in this community, then you have to expect that you're going to garner more negative responses than your average user. I don't begrudge anyone, to a point, for enjoying stirring up the pot, but you can't cry foul if others don't want to play.

And our dear Kimo - no stranger to controversial or provocative opinions and posts - was probably one of the first to live briefly in "red square" land, and he was a regular! So the system is not picking on you for who you are, or where you're from. Just what you say.
I would like it made strongly clear that "reputation" scores are not referenda on the posters themselves, but on individual comments made by those posters.Except that they are "referenda on the posters themselves." Reputation scores are built from responses to individual posts, yes, but don't sweat or nitpick individual reputation marks from other users on individual posts. There will always be the pointless prop or petty ding. The overall score is what matters, and they generally reflect how a poster is received overall.

You strike me as an intelligent and an articulate person, so I don't expect you to have a negative reputation for long... so long as your primary motive for being a part of our community is conversation, and not controversy.

[Rickyrab]

I aim more for conversation than for controversy; the controversy is there to make the conversation interesting (in my viewpoint).

[Menehune Man]

Interesting, that after all this time, the poll results are still less in favor of the reputation system than for it. I just took a look.

[1stwahine]

Silently waits in the sidelines to give couple of Whack Whacks! :rolleyes:

Auntie Lynn :p

[Rickyrab]

that was meant to be a positive whack! :)

[1stwahine]

that was meant to be a positive whack! :)

well, it came out grey. there's no positive whack. a whack is a whack! :rolleyes:

Auntie Lynn :p

sorry, can not take back. ;)

[MadAzza]

1) Under the current system, you only let people with "positive reputations" contribute to reputation scores. This is unfair to those of us who happen to be more controversial and who like controversy.

What a load of crap. "Ooooh, it's unfair." What are you, 25 years old? Please look back at the "controversial" comments regulars here have made. Yes, sometimes a so-called "controversial" comment will get a red mark. Big fucking deal. More often than not, in my and others' experiences, a perfectly benign remark or humorous comment will get a red mark. Most of us take it as a badge of honor, not something to whine about.

I'm irritated by people who thing they're "controversial" and use that self-designation as an excuse for other peoples' reactions to them. Yes, maybe people react to you the way they do because you're "controversial." Or maybe it's because you're an "asshole." Or because they "disagree with you." Or because they think you're an "idiot."

Look, honey, I've gotten a lot of red marks for what I like to think are the same reasons you like to think: I'm too controversial. I'm ahead of my time. They just don't get it. I'm soooo smart. Whatever. But it's all bullshit. I'm not smarter than anyone else. I'm not more controversial than anyone else. My opinions aren't more "out there" than anyone else's. Anyone older than 30 knows that. Patience, dear.

It's a teeny little red chicklet. It is, in fact, something to be proud of. Dig it, live with it, adore it.

[AbsolutChaos]

What a load of crap. "Ooooh, it's unfair." What are you, 25 years old?


Hey now...are you saying there's something wrong with being 25 and that all 25-yr-olds are juevenile? I'm hurt! :eek:

I have to go cry now...oh wait, I'm 26...does that still make me fit into the "whiney" category? :rolleyes:

I definitely believe "age ain't nothin' but a number" in many cases, and I know PLENTY of people, even here, whose age doesn't fit their remarks, whether those remarks seem juvenile and whiny or wise beyond their years (or a combo of both, depending on the subject). Don't think age really has any direct correlation with the level of people's whiny-ness on HT...think it has more to do with their experiences in life and how they relate to others in general.

[Rickyrab]

What a load of crap. "Ooooh, it's unfair." What are you, 25 years old?

26, but good guess.

[MadAzza]

Hey now...are you saying there's something wrong with being 25 and that all 25-yr-olds are juevenile? I'm hurt! :eek:

I apologize for the insult to your age group. And for using the F-word. Once again, this proves I shouldn't post when I'm cranky and tired!

[lavagal]

I apologize for the insult to your age group. And for using the F-word. Once again, this proves I shouldn't post when I'm cranky and tired!


Well for some of us, it was downright entertaining! Sheesh. I ordered you another beer!

[scrivener]

I didn't know whether to give green for cracking me up with:
I'm irritated by people who thing they're "controversial" and use that self-designation as an excuse for other peoples' reactions to them. Yes, maybe people react to you the way they do because you're "controversial." Or maybe it's because you're an "asshole." Or because they "disagree with you." Or because they think you're an "idiot."

Or to give red for inappropriate language and unnecessary meanness. It ended up moot because I too recently gave Madazza green.

Thanks for the laugh!
And watch your mouth, you naughty person.

[kimo55]

I apologize for the insult to your age group. And for using the F-word. Once again, this proves I shouldn't post when I'm cranky and tired!
Hahaaa.
maddie.
you are such a kidder.

[Leo Lakio]

I got cinnamon gum from somebody (anonymously, of course) for the following posting in a thread on color printers:
Old news that the codes exist - current news is that the EFF has recently figured out Xerox's code (but no one else's - yet.)
Why that statement bothered someone does mystify me...and why they couldn't tell me either. :p

[Menehune Man]

I wanted to give a "good" rep chicklet to a poster, but have forgotten how to do it? Oh well. Right on Lurkah! Had me seriously laughing with your latest (story) post. Especially the reason for editting. :D After I logged in to ask this question the "scales" reappeared and the light went on. Oh my...

[lurkah]

After I logged in to ask this question the "scales" reappeared and the light went on. Oh my...
I'm glad for both of us that your light eventually went on. :D

[Menehune Man]

I do have a "reputation" of being a flickering bulb though. :rolleyes:

[Menehune Man]

I do have a "reputation" of being a flickering bulb though. :rolleyes:

I actually got a red(bad) chicklet for this quoted post. With no explanation. Whatevers!

[lurkah]

I'm glad for both of us that your light eventually went on. :D

Same here, for the above post...also from "a nanny mouse". http://allthingshawaiian.com/lurkah/smileys/smileyroll.gif

Reputation. There. I'm on topic again. :rolleyes:

[mel]

The problem I find with the reputation system is that there is no accountability for those giving out reputation points. The receiver never knows who gives them a rep point, + or -, green or red. Because of that I have learned to stay away from the most controversial topics since my views are quite different from many on this board. Still I get bad points even for seemingly innocuous posts in non-political topics from time to time. It frustrates me (and I assume others) that you can get a red square but never know if you are being targeted by only one person or those red squares are being given by a small group or just randomly. Since we don't have user names attached to reputation points given out, we never know.

In this day and age we demand accountability for the actions of everyone. We demand accountability from elected officials, those people and agencies responsible for our children and the elderly, educational institutions, health care facilities, the military, businesses, others... you name it. Why can't we get accountability from our fellow users here at HawaiiThreads?

The reputation system is a huge point of contention on many Jelsoft vBulletin boards if I go by what I read at the vBulletin forum.

At great risk of getting another red square, I think we need a change to the system here.

[scrivener]

Because of that I have learned to stay away from the most controversial topics since my views are quite different from many on this board.
Mel, don't do that. What's worse: a few negative rep points, or people continuing to be wrong because they haven't heard an intelligent case for the other side? You, as a member of this community, are expected to chime in with your differing point of view. If you do it in a civil manner, which is all you seem to have, your positive rep points will far outnumber your negative--I guarantee it!

Ultraconservatives like me need moderate conservatives like you to keep things in balance. Without your input, I look like a nutcase, rather than just mildly idiotic.

[zztype]

Why can't we get accountability from our fellow users here at HawaiiThreads? ... At great risk of getting another red square, I think we need a change to the system here.
Hear, hear! I know PZ doesn't want to talk about it, but it's the same argument that was made last time. I feel the argument that Mel makes is sound. I do not think that granting Mel's (and my) request will negatively impact the reputation system. I believe it will enhance it greatly.

My two cents. I know what you think, Ryan, but really, listen to your users. If anyone is wont to shout me down on this, they will. But I really don't expect that to happen.

Blaine

[scrivener]

If anyone is wont to shout me down on this, they will. But I really don't expect that to happen.
Only because shouting is out of order. As the original thread on this topic shows, I was one of the few people using the rep system before Helen helped bring it to everyone's attention. I like it; I don't think I abuse it, and I use it BECAUSE it's anonymous. Secretly giving someone a pat on the back appeals to me. I think it's like leaving a little anonymous, encouraging note on a co-worker's desk or a classmate's locker. It's kinda fun.

[pzarquon]

I know PZ doesn't want to talk about it, but it's the same argument that was made last time... My two cents. I know what you think, Ryan, but really, listen to your users. If anyone is wont to shout me down on this, they will. But I really don't expect that to happen.Don't misunderstand, it's not that I don't want to talk about it, and certainly no one's going to shout you down. I just meant I didn't want the "Ignore List (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showthread.php?t=7386)" thread, which may be a good thread to have on a specific and useful function of this forum, to turn into another discussion about the reputation system.

We've got a substantial collection of related conversation in this "Reputation" thread, which is also where posts about the system from otherwise unrelated threads are usually moved. Like these latest comments have.

Carry on!

[Konaguy]

How do you figure the "reputation" points.Like for example if XXX is good or bad ?

[kimo55]

when you see that on a bottle, if it also has skull, that is bad. don't drink.
If its from mexico, THAT... is good. suk em up!

[Leo Lakio]

How do you figure the "reputation" points?
Read the FAQ section, under "General Forum Usage."

But be warned - in this case, ignorance may well be bliss. Some people (myself among them, not that long ago) put too much weight on the giving and receiving of gum. It works best for me now if I (a) only give out positive comments, and (b) sign 'em; otherwise, it's too easy to take cheap shots.

If I disagree with someone, I'd rather do it publicly, on the board, so they have an opportunity to give a rebuttal; that's the same courtesy I would ask of them.

That said, I still think the whole system should go away.

[helen]

How do you figure the "reputation" points.Like for example if XXX is good or bad ?
As long as your reputation points is 10 or higher you are okay. Of course the more points you have the better off you are. You can always view the member list and sort it by the Reputation field to see your standing with the rest of the registrated userbase.

[mel]

Just as I predicted. Commenting on something controversial earned me another stupid, unaccountable red square (in this very topic thread). I got a green square from Blaine on the same post, but some turkey who is probably singling me out because I am probably mostly conservative gave me a red square.

Why should I continue to participate in the political topics with my views when the great majority of the people here lean toward the left and a liberal viewpoint? Some of the more eloquent writers around here have managed to accumulate enough green squares so that one red square doesn't change their rating status within the reputation scale.

I tell you, we need accountability for this reputation stuff. Look at the vote so far, it is close but those who hate the reputation system have pulled ahead of those who like it. Of course I realize this is not a democracy here, since the board is privately operated.

If we cannot get rid of the reputation system, I think as a compromise, a system that identifies the person who gives out the reputation point is in order. Your user ID should be identitied with the reputation point given to the inidividual receiving the point. That will bring accountability to the reputation system.

Someone with a minority viewpoint stand more chances of getting negative reputation points vs. those who are in the vocal majority. So that is still another thing bad about the reputation system. The majority will opprese the minority.

Of course I just risked getting another red square. But then again even though the vote count currently says one thing in this topic, I must be in the vocal minority since the reputation system has not gone away or been changed.

:mad:

[Peshkwe]

I wanna be backwards!!

If you like something I say give me a red chicklet instead of a green one. I wanna see what happens.

[helen]

Someone giving you one negative reputation will only lower your overall score. From that it might lower you text level status from "spectacular reputation (550)" to "excellent reputation (450)". Maybe it might remove the bright green square from your ranking.

[helen]

Just as I predicted. Commenting on something controversial earned me another stupid, unaccountable red square (in this very topic thread). I got a green square from Blaine on the same post, but some turkey who is probably singling me out because I am probably mostly conservative gave me a red square.

I am curious if you click on the scale icon on that post what does it say?

[mel]

I am curious if you click on the scale icon on that post what does it say?

When I click on the scale icon for that post, it lists the comment. The comment was from the person who gave me the green square who voluntarily identified himself. The person who gave me the red square who left no comment is not identified. The automatic default for anyone giving a reputation point is "no comment" and "no ID" connected to the awarding of the rep point.

The system lacks serious accountability which should be a requirement of the reputation system. The anonymous reputation system can be abused if someone is targeted. Of course the targeted person never knows because there is no accountability associated with the + or - point that was given, unless that person voluntarily ID's him or herself, which is the major shortcoming of the system. It should not be anonymous.

[helen]

There is an overall score for that post. Did it say it was postive, negative or netural?

[mel]

Whether the post is positive, negative, neutral or whatever, the bottom line is that the colored square or chiclet that gets associated to your user name is what matters in this ranking system. Get too many red squares and that lowers you down to another level.

[helen]

The reason why I am asking about the overall reputation status of the post is because from my experince all of my post that have been award the reputation once. I never had one that was marked with a negative and a postive on the same post and I was just curious as to what it said.

[mel]

I've had a negative and positive rep point given to a small number of posts. I got one red square and one green square for the post in question. The reputation of the post itself was positive, but the red square which is attached to user name still brings the overall reputation of the user down.

[mel]

On another note, the vBulletin software allows the admin to offer users the option to opt in or opt out of the reputation system.

User Reputation Doc at vBulletin Site (http://www.vbulletin.com/docs/html/main/vboptions_reputation)



Allow Users to Hide Their Reputation

If a user hides their reputation, their reputation level will display "User has disabled reputation". The benefit of this is that it allows users who find the system distasteful can choose to not have their posts rated.



So how about that? Give the users the option to opt in or out of the reputation system. It can be done if the vBulletin doc is to be believed.

Let the 56% of the people who chose to do away with the reputation system to opt out.

People don't like spam here. Reputation points may be a close second to spam. Look at how many posts and views this topic has. Certainly a controversial topic that need not be here if there were no reputation system.

[helen]

Since you said Blaine was the one who gave you the postive reputation and his current power is at 24. The person who gave you the negative reputation must have given you a score of less than 24.

The bottom line it's not using the number of postive and negative entries but rather the entries actual reputation power to determine that post's reputation. For example if you gotten one postive reputation at 50 points and four negative reputations at 5 each, the actual score would be 50 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 = 50 - 20 = 30 points. Overall the net effect would postive even though it looks bad with 1 green and 4 red ones.

[Menehune Man]

So how can I opt out? What do I do?

I don't like the idea of annonimous comments to my posts.
If someone has something to say... do it on the boards for all to see.

[tutusue]

At the risk of redundancy (my own!)...I don't really care anymore if the rep system stays or goes. However, if it stays, I, too, feel that rep points, both + and -, need to be attributed to a user name. Yes...accountability. This debate was in full swing soon after I subscribed to HT. Because of that debate, if I leave rep, I make it a practice to always leave a comment and my user name, be it green or red. If a poster, esp. if given a red, wants to get into a tit for tat situation...so be it! It's only usenet! Well, not literally! I've received only one piece of cinnamon gum for which I felt I needed a reality check. So many of you were kind enough to respond in the affirmative. 99% of the time I feel red chiclets are just...well...little rectangles on a little dot of cyberland. In life's big picture...so what!! :D

[cezanne]

I suppose there can be a lot of cp-trading going on when the awarded knows who gave them the positive points too. But the anonymous neggo-givers... that's pretty chickensh!t.

Happy New Year! :D

[scrivener]

I keep hearing this word "accountability" tossed about, but really, what do you mean by it? If I give Mel some negative feedback and my name is attached to it, in what way will I be held accountable for this opinion? Will Mel tell everyone else that Scrivener gave him an unjust red square? Will everyone else gang up on me and repay the injustice with red squares of their own? Will I eventually be asked to leave for merely expressing my disapproval?

Look, I don't sign my positive or negative feedback because I want to avoid exactly what Cezanne is suggesting -- something that I suspect is already going on. When we sign our positive feedback, people often seem to feel led to return in kind, and that's bogus. If we approve of a post, we should indicate so, and when we disapprove, we should also indicate so. If we want to sign our feedback, I guess that's fine, but if we don't, that should be fine, too.

When people disapprove of the opinions I express, I don't really care (and neither should you, Mel). When people disapprove of the way I express my opinions, well, that's something I do care about. Have I been rude, uncivil, or insensitive? I'd like to know. And I'd like people to feel free to let me know without worrying that I'll focus on the person delivering the message and not the message itself. If Blaine sends me a red square, I don't want to start thinking, "Well, that's just Blaine," or "Of course Blaine disapproves -- he's a pinko commie." Rather, I'd like to focus on what it is I wrote that has led him to voice disapproval. That's why this stuff should remain anonymous. Blaine shouldn't have to worry about being held "accountable" for telling me that I've offended him. He's doing me a favor by telling me he disapproves AND by not telling me whose opinion it is.

[1stwahine]

...excuse me, what's a "pinko commie?" :eek:

Mahalo,


Lynn

[Peshkwe]

Someone giving you one negative reputation will only lower your overall score. From that it might lower you text level status from "spectacular reputation (550)" to "excellent reputation (450)". Maybe it might remove the bright green square from your ranking.

Would getting to many reds prevent posting? Disable my account? Anything like that?

Looking at the info for the rep system, I think the only thing it'd do would be to prevent me from giving gum.

Think of it as an experiment, just slam my rep with red to see if the red accumulates like the green...at a certain point would I get a bright red gum or is it limited to the one and they don't accumulate like the greens.

If my red chicklet remains at one red without gaining a second or more then the system is flawed.


At the end of the experiment if all I ever get is one red showing no matter how many reds get given experiment is over. Then all that'd have to be done is for every red anyone gives they do it up in green to get me back into at least two green marks again.

Otherwise I really don't pay attention to the thing...shoot I didn't realize I had a bright green mark till it was mentioned.

[Menehune Man]

In reply to Scrivener...

All those things you mentioned could be accomplished above board. If someone dislikes what another posted, let them say so and why, on the forum thread. I once got pretty nasty when fed up with a particular person following me around and posting only negative comments on my posts. I got red and green chicklets on the very same unsavory post. Most with no comments and only one identified herself-(Thanks). Maybe some feel that I shouldn't have posted such, but I did it in front of everyone, for all to see and agree or disagree. Not a sneaky behind the scenes slap and run. I feel the rep system is bogus and lame. I voted negatively on keeping it long ago. And I'd still like to opt out if can.

[cezanne]

Just wondering... what's the purpose of the poll and when does it end?

[helen]

Would getting to many reds prevent posting? Disable my account? Anything like that?
Right now, the answer is no, no and no.

Looking at the info for the rep system, I think the only thing it'd do would be to prevent me from giving gum.
Incorrect. Once your reputation score drops below 10 you still can mark post with your reputation, however the score you give to it will be awarded zero points and the recieveing user will get a gray square.

Think of it as an experiment, just slam my rep with red to see if the red accumulates like the green...at a certain point would I get a bright red gum or is it limited to the one and they don't accumulate like the greens.
I don't think this experiment will be nessecary, since we know by previous experience that the red squares will be added as more negative reputation is given to a user. You can check out the member list, sort by reputation and look at the last page (or click on the reputation column a second time).

[scrivener]

...excuse me, what's a "pinko commie?"
It's a derogatory way of referring to a communist. Which Blaine is not, of course. My point is that when people put their names on reputation feedback, there may be a tendency for the receiver of negative feedback to focus on the person who gave it, and not on the reason for the negative feedback.

[1stwahine]

It's a derogatory way of referring to a communist. Which Blaine is not, of course. My point is that when people put their names on reputation feedback, there may be a tendency for the receiver of negative feedback to focus on the person who gave it, and not on the reason for the negative feedback.

That I have to agree with you. When I give a reputation whether it's a negative or a postive I always leave my name. That way the person will know who sent it and if he or she wants to address why I gave it, we can discuss it. However, that is not always the case. I have always recieved a negative one back in retaliation.

Mahalo for the definition.

Lynn

[kimo55]

...excuse me, what's a "pinko commie?"
Back in the day, it was a way of insulting hippie types and/or those that had differing views from one's own. Archie Bunker and his ilk loved to use it.

[1stwahine]

Back in the day, it was a way of insulting hippie types and/or those that had differing views from one's own. Archie Bunker and his ilk loved to use it.

...so Kimo are you a pinko commie? :p hahahahahahahahah

no get mad, almost my birthday. :D hahahahahahahahahaha

Lynn

[kimo55]

I refuse to anwer that on the grounds it may incriminate me... as a thread derailer. Not that it's not too late already.

[mel]

So how can I opt out? What do I do?

Currently we cannot do anything unless admin activates the option. Doesn't sound very hard to do on his end. The user manual for this option applies to this version of vBulletin (3.0.9). I think once that happens, all we have to do is go to our User CP and click in the appropriate option.

The key here is to provide users with the option to opt out. It is like getting junk mail that you don't want. Reputable firms will allow you to opt out of their junk mail list. We should have the same option to opt out of the reputation system.


I don't like the idea of annonimous comments to my posts. If someone has something to say... do it on the boards for all to see.

I hear you on this one. If I had the power, I would have turned this reputation system off a long time ago. I just noticed the vote count against the system edged up another point.

And yes, I agree with you that if people have something negative to say against me, do it in the message area. Before the reputation system was widely used, I was more active in some of the hot button topics here. My posts were not at the time given red marks. The people who were against my viewpoint simply stated their own, which of course I shot back in the forum. I never used the reputation system then, and hardly ever use it now.

[mel]

I keep hearing this word "accountability" tossed about, but really, what do you mean by it? If I give Mel some negative feedback and my name is attached to it, in what way will I be held accountable for this opinion? Will Mel tell everyone else that Scrivener gave him an unjust red square? Will everyone else gang up on me and repay the injustice with red squares of their own? Will I eventually be asked to leave for merely expressing my disapproval?

All of the scenarios you outlined above seem to be possible if the reputation system had a user name tied to it. Currently it is not and upon further investigation into this problem, it seems that the software does not allow this option, which is indeed sad. :(

So by default the supporters of the reputation system and abusers of the red squares have won simply on the fact that admin will not at this time so far, bend to the will of 57% of the users who want to see the reputation system abolished.

So the only way a user like me who has strong but usually opposite political opinions from the majority of people here to at least maintain the green squares I now have is to not post on any of the highly charged political topics with my differing opinion. I have to play it safe and keep out of the political fire, at least over here at HawaiiThreads as long as the reputation system is in effect.


Look, I don't sign my positive or negative feedback because I want to avoid exactly what Cezanne is suggesting -- something that I suspect is already going on. When we sign our positive feedback, people often seem to feel led to return in kind, and that's bogus. If we approve of a post, we should indicate so, and when we disapprove, we should also indicate so. If we want to sign our feedback, I guess that's fine, but if we don't, that should be fine, too.

And that is where you and I differ on this. We should know who our accusers (or fans) are in relation to the reputation system established here by software default. As a person with a minority viewpoint I will always suspect that a group or even one person on this board is using the red squares against me whenever I post something that they don't like. But I don't know for sure because the sysem is flawed to the fact that we don't know who our accusers are. No accountability to the user who is subjected to the red square.


When people disapprove of the opinions I express, I don't really care (and neither should you, Mel).

This is very easy for anyone who is "pillar of the community" with 1,000+ reputation points to say. It is easy for the persons with a reputation at the very top to maintain and easily absorb a red square or two without tumbling into the next lower category.

Of course your writing talent here is most eloquent so that greatly helps your reputation scores as people are drawn to and reward those with a similar viewpoint or in many cases a good writing style.

Me, I occasionally get bopped not on the topic content, but because I made a grammatical or spelling error along the way. A red square for that?

The only red squares that I accept anonymously are the few that I have gotten as a result of a moderation action that had to be taken at the Hawaii Media section (like locking an off-topic thread or something). That comes with the territory of being a sub-board moderator.

[zztype]

And of course, somebody gave me an anonymous red mark for this (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showthread.php?p=52432#post52432) post.

There's not even any comment saying why the poster disagreed with my opinion. I don't really care WHO, but I really would like to know WHY. With no indication of WHY the red mark was awarded, it is just anonymous flaming. The coward is tossing an anonymous red rock from the shadows and running away.

It is nothing but an irritation and distraction to many in the community; a blemish on the system.

[helen]

By any chance you are aware of the amount of points that you dropped due to being set by that negative reputation? Did your score drop by 30 points? Did it drop by 20 points? Did it drop by 10 points? 5 points? 1 point?

For that post (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showthread.php?p=52432#post52432) in question, I don't agree with what you wrote but that in and of itself should not have been awarded reputation. How you said it was okay to me, you didn't swear in your post so that in itself would not have gotten a negative reputation, but then again I wasn't the one who awarded the reputation.

[Menehune Man]

Just wondering... what's the purpose of the poll and when does it end?

I'm the one who started the poll without consulting the "Powers that be". It's still negative. It's in your court as it always was. What'cha gonna do?

[Menehune Man]

So how can I opt out? What do I do?

I don't like the idea of annonimous comments to my posts.
If someone has something to say... do it on the boards for all to see.

Yep, Gotta Red Chicklet For This Post Annonimously. _ _ _ _ en lame. See.

[mel]

If anything, I think from now on I will be reporting red chiclets I receive in this topic area.

For this message (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showthread.php?p=52406#post52406) I got not one, but now 2 negative points, one being a test post (person identified himself) against one postive. Kudos to the person with the ID... bad karma points to the anonymous twerp.

I suggest that everyone who does not like the reputation system post their latest red reputation points and state whether or not the rep point was anonymous or credited to a user.

BTW, I have not given anyone a rep point + or - on this ongoing topic thread.

The system is bogus, time to get rid of it or let us opt out. (http://www.vbulletin.com/docs/html/main/vboptions_reputation)

[helen]

If anything, I think from now on I will be reporting red chiclets I receive in this topic area.

I suggest that everyone who does not like the reputation system post their latest red reputation points and state whether or not the rep point was anonymous or credited to a user.
I would suggest not to this or do this on another thread in this sub-forum. Let's keep this thread focused on the reputation which even after all this time and the responses in this thread there seems to be some confusion of what it can and can not do.

[scrivener]

mel:

If HT turns into a place where we all agree on everything, it is probably going to die. If someone like you, a person with a minority opinion, doesn't voice the differing view, nobody will ever understand how reasonable and right (no pun intended) your views are. If people begin to understand your points of view, the likelihood that they'll be less inclined to zap you with negative rep is decreased.

I give positive rep to good posts that I happen to agree or disagree with. The opinion itself should never be a reason for negative rep, and I don't believe that's how most people use it.

For the record, I'm against professional (not labor) unions, I voiced annoyance about the whole Little League World Series thing because I thought it sent a bad message, and I'm opposed to the increased involvement of government in our lives. So I'm with you on a lot of these issues.

Please, don't clam up.

[helen]

For this message (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showthread.php?p=52406#post52406) I got not one, but now 2 negative points, one being a test post (person identified himself) against one postive. Kudos to the person with the ID... bad karma points to the anonymous twerp.

So overall for that post and the three reputations it has now is it still postive, netural or is it now negative?

[mel]

The post itself is okay, it is the overall reputation that is attributed to the user ID that gets in trouble when one receives too many red squares. See post #339 above. This is what most people care about it terms of the reputation. It is the impact to their overall score.

[MadAzza]

And of course, somebody gave me an anonymous red mark for this (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showthread.php?p=52432#post52432) post.

There's not even any comment saying why the poster disagreed with my opinion. I don't really care WHO, but I really would like to know WHY.

I'll tell you why -- because the sad little guy *can*, that's why. He gets no satisfaction from his intellect, his job performance or his romantic life, so he takes anonymous, mildly vicious swings with his imaginary bat at people who make him feel inferior. Consider it a compliment.

Those who leave anonymous negative rep marks are no better than trolls.

OK, that's a little strong, but I've been up coughing all night and I'm pretty cranky and fed up. And the only reason I edited to add this is because I know those in favor of anonynous reps are going to zing me. Anonymously, of course.

[lurkah]

Those who leave anonymous negative rep marks are no better than trolls.
Something some of you may not realize is that the Administrator of this message board has always had the capability (http://www.vbulletin.com/docs/html/main/reputation_comments) to view any and all positive and negative reputations that are being given on this message board. Admin sees all and knows all, but whether he'll tell all or can be bribed into doing so is beside the point. ;)

Therefore, for those who thought they might have been sniping and giving people spiteful false-cracks anonymously and undetected, think again. :D

Now let's see how many of those red ones I get for this helpful and enlightening post. :o

[MadAzza]

The danger of anonymous negative rep marks is this: If someone leaves me cinnamon gum anonymously, I'm going to think I know who did it based on that person's posts, past interactions and so forth. That might color how I treat that person in the future. If I'm wrong, if I'm "punishing" the wrong person, well ... too bad, I guess.

I don't mean that I'd leave that person cinnamon gum -- I don't do that. Never have, never will. But even if the stink-eye I'm giving is only in my head ... it's still there.

I'm sure it's the same for anyone else who gets bad marks. There's a natural tendency to respond, "Who left that?? Ah ... I know, I'll bet it was THAT guy. Yeah, well, screw him!"

This could lead to all kinds of mayhem, if only in one's head.

[mel]

If HT turns into a place where we all agree on everything, it is probably going to die.


Nah! This place die? I doubt it. As long as people eat and want to discuss what they had for lunch, the place will continue to thrive. People like to have fun here and it is reflected on the great abundance of posts in the fun and light topics on this board. We all love movies, eating, TV, gossip about celebrities, and heck even the technology we use. Those topics are rarely political, and most of the time we are all in agreement.

The various "What for Lunch" today topics have had more than 10,000 views when you combine all 7 topic threads into one. The KauKau section of the board is spread to 13 pages. People here LOVE eating!!!!

I doubt too many people get red squares for posting about food.

And then there is "Lost" and soon again "American Idol." If there are a couple of Hawaii people on the latter show, I am sure a new American Idol topic will become extremely popular like the original ones did when Jasmine Trias was in the running. Throw in Tia Carrera in "Dancing with the Stars", there is no end to "safe" topics to keep the board alive.

Everyone here can just join in the big circle and sing "kumbaya!"

Just get rid of the reputation system and perhaps some of the other topics can be brought back to life without us posters having to worry about lousy red squares all of the time.

[1stwahine]

Hmmmm..I stopped drinking a long time ago. However, Mel just told it like it is - Point BLANK! Way to GO Mel! BRAVO! My Papale off to you! Gosh, that shot of Crown Royal just tasted sooo good! Mmmmm.

Yep. soooo good!

Auntie Lynn ;)

[scrivener]

...so he takes anonymous, mildly vicious swings with his imaginary bat at people who make him feel inferior.

Those who leave anonymous negative rep marks are no better than trolls.
You're saying that there is no way to use the rep system without abusing it, and I don't think that's correct. Are people misusing it? Sure. Is that the only way it can be used? I don't think so.

As I've said, I don't sign any of my rep comments, positive or negative, and it's got nothing to do with people making me feel inferior. As for trolling, it seems to me that trolling is the opposite of anonymous reputation -- trolls just want to get a rise out of you. Anonymous negative-rep-leavers are trying to express something without turning everything into a war.

Confronting a user like DannyCouchFanAddicts (or whatever the heck her name is) after the initial helpful, constructive posts is useless. It wasn't until posts got downright nasty that she got the message. I don't think this was the only way to get her to stop. In fact, I went to her website to get an email address (her profile didn't list it) and attempted to communicate with her that way, but my emails were ignored.

Call it chicken**** if you want, but I prefer to settle things peacefully. I said what I had to say, and beyond that the only recourse that gave me any satisfaction was to leave negative feedback. It wasn't a drive-by shooting; it was voicing disapproval without adding fuel to the fire.

I'm sure I can think of other examples, but in truth, I don't find many reasons to award negative rep at all. I understand that you don't, but to make a sweeping generalization that anyone who does is lily-livered and weak-kneed is perhaps not considering everyone's perspective.

As for anonymous positive rep, I'm not one for hugs (ask Ryan), but I'll send someone a friendly encouragement to continue to contribute when someone posts something especially insightful, well-written, or helpful. I don't see a dang thing wrong with that. Sometimes when people post positive responses, it seems their primary interest is calling attention to themselves. I prefer not to play that way, and it annoys me that you're suggesting it's wimpy or useless. Have you truly never received anonymous notes of encouragement (I don't mean just here -- I mean wherever) that you appreciated?

[Leo Lakio]

some turkey who is probably singling me out ... gave me a red square.
Make it "doubling" you out. Some chicken-sh!t anonymously gave me a red one for a post in this thread, too.

[lurkah]

Some chicken-sh!t anonymously gave me a red one for a post in this thread, too.
And the "mayhem" continues.

Try thinking about it this way: who has the most to lose if the Reputation System goes away? http://allthingshawaiian.com/lurkah/smileys/smileyeyebrows.gif And I don't necessarily mean in the form of green chiclets, either.

[helen]

On another note, the vBulletin software allows the admin to offer users the option to opt in or opt out of the reputation system.

User Reputation Doc at vBulletin Site (http://www.vbulletin.com/docs/html/main/vboptions_reputation)

So how about that? Give the users the option to opt in or out of the reputation system. It can be done if the vBulletin doc is to be believed.

From the manual that mel found:

Allow Users to Hide Their Reputation
If a user hides their reputation, their reputation level will display "User has disabled reputation". The benefit of this is that it allows users who find the system distasteful can choose to not have their posts rated.

This generates more issues and questions. For instance if one hides their reputation that means whatever post they did can't be rated (either postive or negative) which is what you wanted. Now can they rate other people's post? If not that's okay with me. If so I hoping that whatever post their rate will be a grey squared zero valued reputation.

And even if the vBulletin system prevents users who hide their reputation from awarding reputation, what's to stop a user from temporary turning this feature off, rate someone else's post with their fully rated reputation power and then turning the feature back on.

[MadAzza]

You're saying that there is no way to use the rep system without abusing it, and I don't think that's correct.


No, that is NOT what I'm saying. Not at all. Please don't put words in my mouth (unless they're somehow chocolate flavored). I'm saying the system lends itself to abuse. The potential is there. I certainly did not suggest that every single use of the rep system is corrupt.

I prefer not to play that way, and it annoys me that you're suggesting it's wimpy or useless. Have you truly never received anonymous notes of encouragement (I don't mean just here -- I mean wherever) that you appreciated?

1. You're annoyed at your misinterpretation of my post. Easy fix.
2. Yes, of course I have received anonymous notes of encouragement that I appreciated. Do you have me confused with someone else? I honestly don't know what you're referring to here, but none of this sounds like anything I said.

[MadAzza]

I'm sure I can think of other examples, but in truth, I don't find many reasons to award negative rep at all. I understand that you don't, but to make a sweeping generalization that anyone who does is lily-livered and weak-kneed is perhaps not considering everyone's perspective.

OK, now I get it. I was referring specifically to Blaine's post with the link to his earlier post that garnered a red mark. The reason you are offended or "annoyed" by my post is because you are the one who left that red mark. Now I get it! I didn't understand that before. I didn't sleep at all last night, so please forgive my lapse. I'm a little slow today.

OK, so yes, I do think that was pretty wimpy of you. See? I can say it up front; I'm not going to scurry around trying to find a post of yours to put a red mark on. I don't think Blaine's earlier post was at all deserving of a red mark. Obviously, you feel otherwise. Would you mind explaining that one? It seemed like a pretty innocuous post.

[Leo Lakio]

I've given in to the dark side.

[kimo55]

Nah! This place die? I doubt it. As long as people eat and want to discuss what they had for lunch, the place will continue to thrive.
well, mel, it would be a dead board if it is reduced to:
i had waddah today!

[glossyp]

What I wonder about and have no data to confirm is whether or not the reputation system discourages new members from staying and actively participating - perhaps admin could do an analysis to find out. I do agree with Mel that I rarely post opinions on controversial subjects. I got red squared for doing so and though that's not the sole reason for avoiding such topics, it isn't ecouraging.

[LikaNui]

Can some of you please explain to me exactly why reputation points on a message board have become a matter of such apparent importance to cause all this fuss?
This isn't life or death here, folks. There are starving children in third-world countries... hurricane victims... and an endless supply of things right here in Hawai`i that need and deserve our attention. I can't help but wonder how much good we could do (like we did with Auntie's slippah project) if we spent more time on those subjects and a helluva lot less time on worrying about freakin ' reputation points on a message board.
I've earned a whole lot of red chiclets, mostly from the Honolulu Weakly and Tiny and DCFanAddict threads, but frankly... who cares? I care what my family thinks of me, but other than that... pfffbbbtttt. Red chiclets don't affect my family or my career or my health one iota. And I also don't think most people here even bother to check someone else's reputation.
The whole reputation thing is a cute little function, but basically totally meaningless.
So why all the fuss?
Just curious.
Carry on.
:rolleyes:

[Menehune Man]

Guess there's just enough negativism in the world. I come to HawaiiThreads to learn what's going on, to share ideas, laugh, offer suggestions and of course state my opinion. Who needs red or for that matter green chicklets. I say negative because those are the ones (Red Rep) that the poster is not willing to say in front of the crowd. The green ones though nice really make no difference. Just write what you think in the forums.

[kaneohegirl]

Im new so I can only go by what I have read.... it seems that if you dont like what someone says you ding them... how can that create a feeling of aloha if everytime you say something that might be against the grain or a different side of a subject you get demerit points put next to your name.

so instead of weighing in on a forum you sit back and dont participate... what fun is that? shouldnt everyone be welcome to post their feelings or opinions without fear of reprisal? of course there are some who wont care about the dings an just post what they want anyway

so really whats the point?

[scrivener]

OK, now I get it. I was referring specifically to Blaine's post with the link to his earlier post that garnered a red mark. The reason you are offended or "annoyed" by my post is because you are the one who left that red mark.
Actually, no. I don't give negative rep feedback for posts I disagree with, and in fact never clicked Blaine's link to see what post he was talking about. In not doing so, I sorta forgot that you were writing specifically about THAT user leaving THAT feedback, so the apology is mine to offer to you.

What I thought I was reading was that anyone who leaves negative feedback is a loser who "gets no satisfaction from his intellect, his job performance, or his romantic life..." when that's not what you said at all.

Again, sorry about that.

And just for clarity's sake: if I leave negative feedback, I'll do it anonymously, but you'll know why I left it. And it won't be for posting an opinion I disagree with.

[helen]

Can some of you please explain to me exactly why reputation points on a message board have become a matter of such apparent importance to cause all this fuss?
There is no one reason for this. There is a whole bunch of reasons/issues that go with the reputation system. If one reads through this thread one comes with the following points (with no order of importance):


Leaving offensive comments
Leaving no comments
Leaving comments without signing your name
Leaving negative reputation
System is flawed, it can lead to abuse
Why should I use the reputation system, I should just say it in the open
Hey this is something new, how does it work
How come I do this and nothing happens
Is a grey square bad or good reputation
Messages from other threads that got moved here because the topic drifted to mentioning the reputation system
I got a negative reputation for that post
Why are we discussing this got more important things to discuss
Disable the reputation system
off-topic responses
give me some negative reputation


There might be other issues I may have missed. But the above is what I remember from this thread.

[Leo Lakio]

And it won't be for posting an opinion I disagree with.
Scriv, can you give any examples (hypothetically, of course) of the types of postings that would be likely to elicit negative rep's from you? And, even if you did them anonymously, would you still be likely to add comments?

I think I would be more comfortable with anonymous negatives IF there were comments attached - that might help me to realize something I've said that really does need clarification, apology or retraction. That happened to me a couple times after my earliest HT postings, and it provided some guidance.

Anonymous negatives without comment, though, are like having your house egged; it just creates a sense that you are a victim of some drive-by, because you are left with the question "why?" resonating through your head.

[scrivener]

Guess there's just enough negativism in the world. I come to HawaiiThreads to learn what's going on, to share ideas, laugh, offer suggestions and of course state my opinion. Who needs red or for that matter green chicklets. I say negative because those are the ones (Red Rep) that the poster is not willing to say in front of the crowd. The green ones though nice really make no difference. Just write what you think in the forums.
First, we keep talking about the reputation system as if all it does is spread negativity, when everybody participating in this thread has far more positive reputation than negative. If this isn't validation that it's a positive, encouraging community, I don't want any of you around when I get diagnosed with some kind of illness with a 75% survival rate. Only two people who've posted in this very long thread ever showed a red square at all -- Palolo Joe and Kimo -- and neither of them has been in the red for more than half a year. The reputation system spreads good vibes, not bad ones.

Second, I've probably given one negative reputation feedback for every ten or twenty positive; to say that the positive feedback "makes no difference," is unfair. I mean, maybe it makes no difference to you, and that's totally fine, but I leave it because it's encouraging and because a little positive note is not always an appropriate response to a post.

Finally, perhaps we should all take a look at the kinds of posts left by those people who have (or have had) reputation scores in the negatives. New users and even veteran users who just don't want to get involved in verbal fisticuffs with agressive posters have a way to say, "whoa, whoa," without jumping into the fray. Look at some of last year's posts from some of these red-square users and you'll know why: as soon as someone jumps in to say, "Hey, let's take it easy," the ire is turned on them just for trying to encourage a little bit of positivity. Not everyone is willing to stand in the line of fire, but everyone should be allowed to voice disapproval of someone's behavior.

[Leo Lakio]

everyone should be allowed to voice disapproval of someone's behavior.
With that, I am in agreement; it's the anonymity that bothers me.

If you and I debate a point in a public forum, we can make our arguments and are given the opportunity for rebuttal and additional discussion. Others who care about the same issue can chime in, on all sides. If we get too heated or offensive, others can help to cool our ire and (I hope) keep us civil.

But if someone gives me a silent, anonymous, negative rating, it is as if they have jabbed me in the back and run away, and I am sometimes left wondering why I was attacked - I will re-read the post they noted, but may still wonder what was in it that bothered someone.

[helen]

Scriv, can you give any examples (hypothetically, of course) of the types of postings that would be likely to elicit negative rep's from you? And, even if you did them anonymously, would you still be likely to add comments?
If you don't mind me interjecting on this, I will say what I would consider the type of posts that would or might get a negative reputation from me.


Those fly-by-night users who post commerical stuff on HawaiiThreads (it happens from time to time)
people who use foul language in their post
users who engage in flame wars
posting inaccurate information (which is kind of rare, but I think it was meant for that)
going off-topic (normally I don't do this but I did award some negative reputation just recently)


Normally I don't sign my reputations that I award. There are times that I leave comments and other times I don't. I am more lax in awarding postive reputation than I do negative reputation.

As far as what kind of post do get a postive reputation from me:

posting helpful information (which is what the reputation system was designed for)
In certain threads I would award postive reputation for those who participate in it and kept the thread on-topic.
Maybe I might award one if post was kind of funny.

[Leo Lakio]

If you don't mind me interjecting on this
I'm always happy to read your comments, Helen - you are HT's resident "rocket scientist!" Mahalo.

[Peshkwe]

Hey Leo!!

Thanks for the cinno...erm.....cenn...uhhh....cinnimimin...

Shoot....the red stuff! :D

But I don't think the experiment will work, I looked at the member files and the only one to ever get more than one red gum was the news bot.

I look like crap in modern armour, the chrome accentuates my arse over much.

:p

[helen]

Im new so I can only go by what I have read.... it seems that if you dont like what someone says you ding them... how can that create a feeling of aloha if everytime you say something that might be against the grain or a different side of a subject you get demerit points put next to your name.
The Reputation system was never meant to be an agree/disagree system. If you agree or disagree with someone and you want to say it post it as a response or send them a private message.

If you come across a note and your only reaction is "thanks for the information", I say give that person your reputation and move on. At least that person will have their reputation score increased which overall most people would want to have.

Keep in mind it's approve/disapprove not agree/disagree.

[Leo Lakio]

Hey Leo!!

Thanks for the cinno...erm.....cenn...uhhh....cinnimimin...

Shoot....the red stuff! :D

But I don't think the experiment will work, I looked at the member files and the only one to ever get more than one red gum was the news bot.

I look like crap in modern armour, the chrome accentuates my arse over much.

:p
No sweat --- I'll counter it with spearmint after I spread some more aloha.
(And it really hurt to give you the cinnamon, but it was for science, after all.)

[Leo Lakio]

Keep in mind it's approve/disapprove not agree/disagree.
I think it's becoming "have fun with rewarding friends/messing with others."
If the reputation system is destined to remain in place, it will just have to be goofed up from within, by all my fellow subversives and anarchists. Guaranteed that no one will care about gum after that.

[Peshkwe]

No sweat --- I'll counter it with spearmint after I spread some more aloha.
(And it really hurt to give you the cinnamon, but it was for science, after all.)

No worries, I'm not all that fussed about it.

I just wanted to see how many one person could accumulate and if a glowing red one could be gotten. It's not like it'd be a permanent situation 'cause once the hot red one comes up then the process would get reversed until I was back to one glowing green.

But it seems no one but you wanted to play.

*hugs* for wanting to tho :D

[helen]

But I don't think the experiment will work, I looked at the member files and the only one to ever get more than one red gum was the news bot.
Newsbot has postive reputation, if you sort by reputation you will find the Newsbot account on page 6 (given time that position might change if this message is viewed a year from now). What you see at the bottom is an user who called themselves onlinereporter105, one of those fly-by-night spam posters. This person is not the first one who have gotten more than one red square. They have been others but since their accounts are marked as closed or banned they don't appear on the Members List or be able to recieve reputations from others.

[Peshkwe]

Newsbot has postive reputation, if you sort by reputation you will find the Newsbot account on page 6 (given time that position might change if this message is viewed a year from now). What you see at the bottom is an user who called themselves onlinereport105, one of those fly-by-night spam posters. This person is not the first one who have gotten more than one red square. They have been others but since their accounts are marked as closed or banned they don't appear on the Members List or be able to recieve reputations from others.

Ahhh..ok my mistake



Sooo...now that I won't have to anneal my behind to accept chroming, I'm still willing to test it out.

Is a glowing red gum possible? The world needs to know!

[Leo Lakio]

They have been others but since their accounts are marked as closed or banned they don't appear on the Members List or be able to recieve reputations from others.
I thought I remembered there being others in the past; sometimes, I wish I could see the list of "banned" or "closed" members - along with the ability to access their posts (to see what got them banned.)
Admin uses banning power so rarely, it might be like putting someone in the stocks as a public deterrent. Or it might be more like rubber-necking at a wreck on the highway.

[helen]

I just wanted to see how many one person could accumulate and if a glowing red one could be gotten. It's not like it'd be a permanent situation 'cause once the hot red one comes up then the process would get reversed until I was back to one glowing green.

Assuming Leo was the only one to help you on this experiment, his current reputation power is at 1 (base) + 4 (100 post bonus) + 1 (90 day bonus) + 26 (at least 1300 overall reputation score) = 32 points. Since he is going to give negative reputation, it will be half of 32 so that power is at -16 points.

Now your current score is roughly 550 points. 550 divided by 16 would yield 34.3. Go to the next highest number and that value would be 35. Leo would have to award you negative reputation 35 times. Since he is limited by awarding you one reputation per day, it will take him at least 35 days to do it, maybe longer since he has to find 9 or 10 more users to award before he can even award you the next reputation.


But it seems no one but you wanted to play.

*hugs* for wanting to tho :D
It's not so much giving you the negative reputation but rather going around and find 9 or 10 other people to give reputation to on a regular basis.

[Leo Lakio]

Assuming Leo was the only one to help you on this experiment, his current reputation power is at 1 (base) + 4 (100 post bonus) + 1 (90 day bonus) + 26 (at least 1300 overall reputation score) = 32 points. Since he is going to give negative reputation, it will be half of 32 so that power is at -16 points.

Now your current score is roughly 550 points. 550 divided by 16 would yield 34.3. Go to the next highest number and that value would be 35. Leo would have to award you negative reputation 35 times. Since he is limited by awarding you one reputation per day, it will take him at least 35 days to do it, maybe longer since he has to find 9 or 10 more users to award before he can even award you the next reputation.

It's not so much giving you the negative reputation but rather going around and find 9 or 10 other people to give reputation to on a regular basis.
Helen, you are SO HOT when you talk numbers!!! :D

Seriously, I am impressed that you can access (or calculate) our reputation power so concisely; I remember reading the description in the FAQ, but I'll be damned if I can calculate my own power (or anyone else's.)
Thanks for the clarity.

[helen]

I thought I remembered there being others in the past; sometimes, I wish I could see the list of "banned" or "closed" members - along with the ability to access their posts (to see what got them banned.)
Those post are still there, you just have to remember which thread it is at. I suppose the forum for Selling might have the most likey place to have them.

[Peshkwe]

Assuming Leo was the only one to help you on this experiment, his current reputation power is at 1 (base) + 4 (100 post bonus) + 1 (90 day bonus) + 26 (at least 1300 overall reputation score) = 32 points. Since he is going to give negative reputation, it will be half of 32 so that power is at -16 points.

Now your current score is roughly 550 points. 550 divided by 16 would yield 34.3. Go to the next highest number and that value would be 35. Leo would have to award you negative reputation 35 times. Since he is limited by awarding you one reputation per day, it will take him at least 35 days to do it, maybe longer since he has to find 9 or 10 more users to award before he can even award you the next reputation.



It's not so much giving you the negative reputation but rather going around and find 9 or 10 other people to give reputation to on a regular basis.


Dang!

I'm impressed! I never could deal with numbers, I transpose em to often.

[cezanne]

What I wonder about and have no data to confirm is whether or not the reputation system discourages new members from staying and actively participating - perhaps admin could do an analysis to find out. I do agree with Mel that I rarely post opinions on controversial subjects. I got red squared for doing so and though that's not the sole reason for avoiding such topics, it isn't ecouraging.

I get the same feeling. No more aloha. It doesn't seem to hard to get a posse to jump on the bandwagon to get someone off the board who happened ruffle some feathers. I mean some of these same peeps aren't saints themselves either.

Oh yeah, got another drive-by red square for my previous post in this thread. :confused:

[mel]

For about 10 minutes this morning I was hoping the reputation system would be deep sixed. So far it looks like not. New upgrade but same old rep system apparently here.

Folks, stay away from all of the hot button topics if you don't want to get the dreadful red square.

[Leo Lakio]

Folks, stay away from all of the hot button topics if you don't want to get the dreadful red square.
Or, mention here that you got a red one, and other people will probably give you green to balance it out.
Who cares? Let's just have fun with it. As others have said more eloquently than I, in the grand scheme of things - it really doesn't matter.

[Leo Lakio]

Btw, if you sort the Members List by "reputation," 1stwahine has just surpassed scrivener for the top spot. Scrivener has been there since I first joined HT (as far as I recall) - I suspect the number count separating the two of them is mighty small (and far out of reach of my liddle numbers.)

Bows of great respect to both of you.

[Leo Lakio]

Btw, if you sort the Members List by "reputation," 1stwahine has just surpassed scrivener for the top spot. Scrivener has been there since I first joined HT (as far as I recall) - I suspect the number count separating the two of them is mighty small (and far out of reach of my liddle numbers.)

...and MadAzza takes #2.

[MadAzza]

What??

ROTFL

That's crazy, baby!

(Elvis)

Thankyew ... thankyew very much.

(/Elvis)

[LikaNui]

What??
ROTFL
That's crazy, baby!
I finally looked at the list out of curiosity, and ya wanna know something just as crazy? I'm #4!
:eek:

:o

[lavagal]

At the risk of asking a dumb quesiton:

Why do I have a gray/blue chicklet in the midst of my green ones? We get an option to give a positive or a negative vote for feedback. Red. Green. Blue? Expiring minds want to know!

[helen]

The grey square (or blue to you) is considered netural. It does not add or subtract from your overall reputation score. As far as who can give out a grey square either of the following conditions needs to happen:


The person awarding the reputation has a post count between 0 to 9.
The person awarding the reputation has a reputation score of 9 or less.

[Leo Lakio]

I finally looked at the list out of curiosity, and ya wanna know something just as crazy? I'm #4!
No crazier than me at #5, after only five months here. (See? Now this is fun!)

BTW, Sciv's back on top, gor bless 'im.

[cezanne]

Or, mention here that you got a red one, and other people will probably give you green to balance it out.
Who cares? Let's just have fun with it. As others have said more eloquently than I, in the grand scheme of things - it really doesn't matter.

Thanks for those who gave me green recently, but if it was just to balance the red that I mentioned (as some had left in the comment box as that being the reason for the positive)... is that how the reputation system should work?

[kimo55]

in the grand scheme of things - it really doesn't matter.
hell; even in the minor scheme of things, it don't matter much at all either!

[backwoodlessons2]

keep it :) :)

[Leo Lakio]

keep it
As long as we keep it silly.

[lurkah]

I agree with not banning booze before and during, but... allowing drinking in the parking lot after? Just before they get in their cars and get on the road?!??

I was wondering if it might be possible or even legal for HPD to set up "random" DUI checkpoints on public roadways with their blue lights flashing in plain view of the parking lot near the stadium exits, but then I remembered that there's at least one exit that leads directly on to the H-1 freeway heading Koko Head bound. Just gotta pray that no fatalities result directly from the Aloha Stadium Authority's decision.

I just received a red chiclet for that post I made, which, after you think about it, could be quite revealing for whoever it was that did so AAnonymously. He or she should take a good look in the mirror and ask him or herself whether they might have a problem with alcohol since my anti-DUI post seems to have gone against the grain of their preferred lifestyle.

If the information my post contains might save even one life or someone from injury, I'd be able to say that I accomplished something good and worthwhile in this life. Moving on... ;)

[LikaNui]

I just received a red chiclet for that post I made (...)
I think I gave you a greenie for your original post, so that should cancel out whoever gave you the reddie. But I'm curious -- why did you quote me in your message above? (Before you quoted yourself.) I don't see the correlation.

[TuNnL]

The grey square (or blue to you) is considered netural. It does not add or subtract from your overall reputation score. As far as who can give out a grey square either of the following conditions needs to happen:


The person awarding the reputation has a post count between 0 to 9.
The person awarding the reputation has a reputation score of 9 or less.


Wow, that explains the grey square!!! I was wondering about that. Now we know who reads the fine print. :eek:

[helen]

I think I gave you a greenie for your original post, so that should cancel out whoever gave you the reddie.
You have to keep in mind the Reputation system is basically a numbers game and each red or green square may have different values based on who gave them. For you when you give reputation that value is currently roughly at 46 points (1 from the base + 9 for the number of post bonus + 6 for the 90 day bonus + 30 for the reputation bonus based on the number of squares you got). Right now the most anyone can give a negative reputation score is around the 30 to 35