Reputation?

[TuNnL]

Re: Reputation?

To whoever gave the me the red chicklet anonymously for the message I posted in this thread, thank you for proving my point. As for your comment in anonymous feedback to “stop whining,” I will get to work immediately on trying to make my posts more gay, upbeat, and happy-happy joy-joy just for you.

[anapuni808]

Re: Reputation?

I'm kind of curious: what are "red chicklets" and why does anyone care? It seems to me that we should just be able to post our responses & opinions about other posts in an open democratic manner - as long as we are polite and don't "flame" each other. If someone wants to dis me for something I post, then that is their privilege. but, I'm certainly not going to worry if someone doesn't like what I post.

oh wait - does that mean I can get kicked off this board? oh dear

[Menehune Man]

Re: Reputation?

It seems to me that we should just be able to post our responses & opinions about other posts in an open democratic manner - as long as we are polite and don't "flame" each other. If someone wants to dis me for something I post, then that is their privilege. but, I'm certainly not going to worry if someone doesn't like what I post.

Exactly... OPEN, not behind the scenes sneaky like. That's what I have a problem with and I think that's the same with the others that dislike the reputation system.

[LikaNui]

Re: Reputation?

Six minutes after I posted something about Joe Moore in the Hawai`i Media section, some anonymous dweeb gave me a red reputation point for it, and included the comment "I've held back long enough, ZINGGGG!!! - Joe Moore - Now figure out my handle".
Man, am I ever gonna lose sleep over that.

I agree with you folks who say it would be nice if any red chiclets required the giver to identify themselves. But if the system won't allow that, no big deal.

[helen]

Re: Reputation?

I got 4 green messages with commentary on why and one red with no comment at all for this very same post. See how weird this whole thing is?

Could you please clarify about this weirdness? What part was weird, that you got a total of 5 reputations for one post or 4 out 5 people approved of your post?

[1stwahine]

Re: Reputation?

dances into room!!!!

I solved it!!!!

k-DEN. Listen up.

I went ova the light greens last week.

...many of you are getting there too.

when everyone reaches that divine status ~ Poof-Be-Gone! No Moa!

Why? The system can't give out anymore light greens!

Am I right Helen? hahahahahaha

[Leo Lakio]

Re: Reputation?

or 4 out 5 people approved of your post?

Maybe they were dentists; you know, 4 out of 5 tend to agree on things...

[Menehune Man]

Re: Reputation?

Could you please clarify about this weirdness? What part was weird, that you got a total of 5 reputations for one post or 4 out 5 people approved of your post?

Okay Helen... To run by it one more time. I think it's weird that there is in place a system that allows someone to anonimously affect (rep or otherwise) another poster and that they would do that without even leaving a comment on what their reasoning was. Both of those instances happened on that post through one disapprove rep award. Then on the otherhand four other posters awarded aprove rep awards with commentary as to what they liked or agreed with concerning the very same post. That's weird to me.

Feels as though you(Helen) keep rewording the same question while I've had to repost my stance again.

This is my very last post in this thread. Aloha.

See you elsewhere on HawaiiThreads!

[adrian]

Re: Reputation?

If I'm getting graded, then I won't be mouthing on about topics here; that's the main purpose for forums.

I don't want to speak my mind, only to let the opportunity for someone who completely disagrees with me give me a red dot for that.

Heck, I don't even like the way we're ranked (but that's for another thread). But this is someone else's forum, not mine; so I'll just go with the flow.

[TuNnL]

Re: Reputation?

That’s very diplomatic and agreeable of you, Doc. Someone will give a you a green chicklet I’m sure.

[mel]

Re: Reputation?

I got another f****ng red square because I just posted a factual item that referred to the whitehouse.gov website.

This is the post.

http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showthr...7244#post57244

The asshole who gave me the red square only gave me a red square, left no ID and no comment.

This f****ng reputation system has got to go. It is being abused!!!!!!




Am I unhappy? You damn well better believe it. The reputation system is truly a divide and conquer mechanism that only hurts the community and nothing else.

[1stwahine]

Re: Reputation?

Mel, sent you a greenie to offset the red!

...I'll probably get a red for this too. It's ok.

The system is abused. We know that already. Let's not waste anymore energy.

Auntie Lynn

[helen]

Re: Reputation?

7 months ago someone posted that someone else was abusing the reputation system by leaving offensive comments. Is this is still true as the definiation of abusing the reputation system or is it now defined as simply leaving a negative reputation with no comment at all?

[TuNnL]

Re: Reputation?

7 months ago someone posted that someone else was abusing the reputation system by leaving offensive comments. Is this is still true as the definiation of abusing the reputation system or is it now defined as simply leaving a negative reputation with no comment at all?

I would say both should be considered abuse, but to me, it’s far more abusive if it’s negative reputation with no comment at all, and even more offensive if they do it anonymously (which really shows no spine at all).

I don’t understand why members here can’t make their displeasure known by simply posting a rebuttal in the thread in which the post they disliked appeared. Why punish someone with a red chicklet? The answer is because it’s there and people will be immature.

So we basically, this system is about stifling free speech. To me, chicklets, red or green, should only be given out by moderators or the administrator. Right now it’s a toy for the kiddies to play with.

[helen]

Re: Reputation?

I would say both should be considered abuse, but to me, it’s far more abusive if it’s negative reputation with no comment at all, and even more offensive if they do it anonymously (which really shows no spine at all).

I understand the frustration of getting a negative reputation with no comment, I know what it feels like, you try to figure out why, sometimes it obvious, other times it's not. Sure it can be a pain in butt but you know what if I got a negative reputation that was worth 1 to 10 points I am not going to worry about too much. I might scream to myself if I got a -30 reputation.

Currently there is no rule that says you have to leave a comment with the reputation. And even though if there was such a rule that made leaving comments mandatory how does it know that the comment is meaningful? Someone could simply leave 'bbbxxxxqqqq' as a comment.

I don’t understand why members here can’t make their displeasure known by simply posting a rebuttal in the thread in which the post they disliked appeared. Why punish someone with a red chicklet? The answer is because it’s there and people will be immature.

To me at least there are times when assigning negative (or postive} reputation would be preferred than adding a response to thread that would either fuel a flame war or drifting the thread off-topic.

So we basically, this system is about stifling free speech. To me, chicklets, red or green, should only be given out by moderators or the administrator. Right now it’s a toy for the kiddies to play with.

No, the reputation system was meant to be used by all registrated users of that forum. Guest can not assign reputation to post, moderators are treated no differently than regular users.

The administrator on the other hand if memory serves can give out unlimted reputation assignments, I know they are not bound by the 24 hour limitation rule of 10 reputations during that period but I am not sure about the reputation spread (the one that enforces you have to give it to 10 other users before giving it to that person again).

I am also guessing that the administrator used to give out 4 points of reputation but I am guessing that is no longer the case since there is a good number of people who can give 20 or more reputation points.

The real question is not 'if the reputation system is flawed or not' but rather 'how well do you trust your fellow HawaiiThreads user in using the reputation system wisely?'