Reputation?

[scrivener]

Re: Add trolls to "Ignore List"

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]

Re: Add trolls to "Ignore List"

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" 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]

Re: Reputation?

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

[kimo55]

Re: Reputation?

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]

Re: Reputation?

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]

Re: Reputation?

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]

Re: Reputation?

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.

[Peshkwe]

Re: Reputation?

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]

Re: Reputation?

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]

Re: Reputation?

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]

Re: Reputation?

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]

Re: Reputation?

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

[mel]

Re: Reputation?

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]

Re: Reputation?

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]

Re: Reputation?

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.