[Agenda Suicide]

(Original post by Chrosson)
Apparently you do?

Those that protest the loudest...something something something?

I appreciate some petty and well constructed attempt to try and attack me or show me up (how long did you spend searching through my posts?).

You miss a fundamental point though, there is a difference between genuinely asking people why and crying saying please don't neg me or saying hey don't neg me that's not fair

I think you'll find that most are simply questioning why, in genuine curiosity. This sometimes leads to responses you wouldn't otherwise get and keeps the thread going and interesting. But you can miss all that out can't you?
And also, that second link was merely a post I made when I first started wondering how it works, I don't see how asking a question and trying to understand something makes me cry about rep. You forget that at that time I didn't know whether it was worth anything or not or realise it's true usefulness.

I bet you also skipped the posts where I actually ask for neg rep in response to people like you and rightly so get it?

Oh well, what was that you said?


Apparently you're wrong?

[Chrosson]

(Original post by Agenda Suicide)
I appreciate some petty and well constructed attempt to try and attack me or show me up (how long did you spend searching through my posts?).

You miss a fundamental point though, there is a difference between genuinely asking people why and crying saying please don't neg me or saying hey don't neg me that's not fair

I think you'll find that most are simply questioning why, in genuine curiosity. This sometimes leads to responses you wouldn't otherwise get and keeps the thread going and interesting. But you can miss all that out can't you?
And also, that second link was merely a post I made when I first started wondering how it works, I don't see how asking a question and trying to understand something makes me cry about rep. You forget that at that time I didn't know whether it was worth anything or not or realise it's true usefulness.

I bet you also skipped the posts where I actually ask for neg rep in response to people like you and rightly so get it?

Oh well, what was that you said?

Apparently you're wrong?

Not long, just two searches - 'neg' and 'rep'. Hardly an investment of effort.
I'm not going to enter into a big debate, your posts about it just strike me as analogous to someone being self-deprecating as a defense against insults.

In my mind, someone who truly doesn't care about rep wouldn't find it interesting enough to even mention - i.e. apathy (which is what my 'those that protest the loudest' quote was about). Whatever, I won't derail the thread further.

[Beska]

(Original post by Miracle Day)
People neg others simply because they don't agree with their post.

Clearly abuse of the reputation system...?

[Chrosson]

(Original post by Beska)
Clearly abuse of the reputation system...?

How so? I would imagine that's one of the most common cases...

[Beska]

(Original post by Chrosson)
How so? I would imagine that's one of the most common cases...

Exactly...

[Chrosson]

(Original post by Beska)
Exactly...

To clarify: on what grounds is it an abuse of the rep system?

[Beska]

(Original post by Chrosson)
To clarify: on what grounds is it an abuse of the rep system?

The OP uses "people use neg to disagree" as a negative with the system, with some kind of implication that it isn't the correct way to use it. I was just being sarcastic - the whole point of the system is to neg people you disagree with.

[FormerlyHistoryStudent]

The only thing I find frustrating about the rep system is the fact that you can't say anything that even implies any negativity about or disagreement with certain users (well, user), without getting a load of negs from their fangirls/ fanboys. I've seen it happen to other users as well. The fangirls'/fanboys' obsequiousness gets on my nerves, to be honest.

I suppose that's not actually a problem with the rep system as such, though, but more with the users themselves.

[Ape Gone Insane]

(Original post by FormerlyHistoryStudent)
The only thing I find frustrating about the rep system is the fact that you can't say anything that even implies any negativity about or disagreement with certain users (well, user), without getting a load of negs from their fangirls/ fanboys. I've seen it happen to other users as well. The fangirls'/fanboys' obsequiousness gets on my nerves, to be honest.

I suppose that's not actually a problem with the rep system as such, though, but more with the users themselves.

I've never seen users with fangirls or fanboys. Though there is sort of that element, of clique like behaviour, if you are new in a society thread amongst the regulars.

[Miracle Day]

(Original post by FormerlyHistoryStudent)
The only thing I find frustrating about the rep system is the fact that you can't say anything that even implies any negativity about or disagreement with certain users (well, user), without getting a load of negs from their fangirls/ fanboys. I've seen it happen to other users as well. The fangirls'/fanboys' obsequiousness gets on my nerves, to be honest.

I suppose that's not actually a problem with the rep system as such, though, but more with the users themselves.

"The Reputation system on The Student Room enables members to give and receive reputation points for good posts, bad posts, or to thank a member for another reason. This can be done via two methods; personal reputation and post rating reputation."

Since when was an opinion classed as a good or bad post? I would see trolling as a bad post, and normal posts as a good post. Half the time people on TSR troll, they get rep for it because it's funny but that does not help in relation to the OP's question or problem.


If it's a simple case of agree/disagree it'd be more effective to just add a thumbs up/thumbs down for each post. TSR won't do this because they like to cling on to the fact their forum is 'Unique'. I've seen a few other forums with that system, or similar with the same principle.

[FormerlyHistoryStudent]

(Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
I've never seen users with fangirls or fanboys. Though there is sort of that element, of clique like behaviour, if you are new in a society thread amongst the regulars.

Well, they probably wouldn't describe themselves as fanboys/girls, but that's the impression I get from the way that they post - I've only seen it in one subforum, with one user, but it does happen all the time

[thunder_chunky]

(Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
I've never seen users with fangirls or fanboys.

Enter thunder_chunky stage left (he says thinking wishfully)

[cambo211]

(Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
I've never seen users with fangirls or fanboys. Though there is sort of that element, of clique like behaviour, if you are new in a society thread amongst the regulars.

Toto has quite a following.

[Unkempt_One]

In essence, praise the social butterflies who can subconsciously expose agreeable and intelligent-sounding orthodox arguments, banish those who don't maintain an atmosphere of fresh, studenty Liberal-leaning psuedo-intellectualism.

Well, that's the atmosphere I got from the way rep is given out on the current affairs forum, so I guess I'll just find somewhere else I can discuss such things in my favourite manner of slightly hate-tinged but nonetheless in good humour sarcasm without burning away rep I gain from giving academic advice. I like my pretty green gems.

[Unkempt_One]

(Original post by S-man10)
Here is a secret: most of the users who have high reps don't really care about it

That doesn't say very much. Not caring could work if you have certain personality types, but if I stopped caring about rep and posted what I actually think in more debate-oriented forums, I'm fairly certain my rep would plummet.

[Mequa]

I do wonder how much of an agenda many of those defending the current system actually have. The current system breeds anti-intellectualism and politically correct majority groupthink. It discourages honest debate, as frequently those who use well-reasoned arguments against a popular opinion get the thumbs-down from people who don't even add a reasoned argument back to defend their stance - dare I say, they often don't have a reasoned argument. Just take a cursory look at the religion forum for proof. PC goes much further than critical thought when it comes to rep.

Its only virtue is that it's popular with those who benefit from it. "It makes the site what it is" is not an argument, merely defending the status quo.

Fact is, people do care about rep (just look at those who want to keep the current system for one - the fact there would be an "uproar" if it changed because of their own rep), and the current system actively discourages independent thought. It generates much bad blood between members.

If it's broke, fix it. "Popular" sure does not mean right.

And for Christ's sake, if you're going to leave neg rep on a post in a debate which uses reasoned arguments in that post, at least follow with a reasoned argument countering the position. I don't think "anti-intellectualism" is an unfair term to use to describe the prevalence of the absence of this. "Meh, I don't like your opinion but don't have any intelligent rebuttal to your logical argument, so I'll just press the thumbs-down button and not bother responding." Yup, very mature and intelligent.

I've been voting with my feet mostly on this issue. I don't use TSR that much nowadays for intelligent discussion. I prefer to post honest opinion and reasoned argument elsewhere where groupthink and popularity is not valued over independent thought and critical thinking. I'm sure I'm not the only one put off TSR by the current rep system and its consequences. But hey, it makes the site what it is, right? Well my counterpoint to that is that the site could be better, more suited to giving honest opinions backed up with critical thought. But people are scared of change. I'd argue that a lot of the negs on this very thread on posts calling for change are largely motivated by fear. People care deeply about their high rep and don't want it threatened by a change (such as having to do the hard work of critical thought instead of pandering to popular opinion to get rep), and are scared of good arguments fairly criticising the current system which they benefit from. Cui bono, anyone?

[EierVonSatan]

(Original post by Mequa)
I do wonder how much of an agenda many of those defending the current system actually have.

What kind of an agenda, out of interest?

The current system breeds anti-intellectualism and politically correct majority groupthink. It discourages honest debate, as frequently those who use well-reasoned arguments against a popular opinion get the thumbs-down from people who don't even add a reasoned argument back to defend their stance - dare I say, they often don't have a reasoned argument. Just take a cursory look at the religion forum for proof. PC goes much further than critical thought when it comes to rep.

Not everyone on TSR is here for debate. The rep system is here to cater for the whole site - and yes it's a visual representation of opinion. As with any system that ultimately depends upon individual users making up their mind how to give out reputation (positive or negative) then it's always going to be open to the problems you've listed.

Fact is, people do care about rep (just look at those who want to keep the current system for one - the fact there would be an "uproar" if it changed because of their own rep), and the current system actively discourages independent thought. It generates much bad blood between members.

Assuming you weren't a member in late 2010, the rep system was dramatically overhauled from being one where the top rated members had hundreds of times (even thousands) as many rep points to give out everyday as newer members. Everyones reputation was recalculated based on every rep they ever had only counted for 1 point and the rep power of members now varies by far, far less. The bad blood that is presently seen is a shadow of what it once was as you could go from being a member well into the green to being in neg rep territory within a single post.

And for Christ's sake, if you're going to leave neg rep on a post in a debate which uses reasoned arguments in that post, at least follow with a reasoned argument countering the position. I don't think "anti-intellectualism" is an unfair term to use to describe the prevalence of the absence of this. "Meh, I don't like your opinion but don't have any intelligent rebuttal to your logical argument, so I'll just press the thumbs-down button and not bother responding." Yup, very mature and intelligent.

I've been voting with my feet mostly on this issue. I don't use TSR that much nowadays for intelligent discussion. I prefer to post honest opinion and reasoned argument elsewhere where groupthink and popularity is not valued over independent thought and critical thinking. I'm sure I'm not the only one put off TSR by the current rep system and its consequences. But hey, it makes the site what it is, right? Well my counterpoint to that is that the site could be better, more suited to giving honest opinions backed up with critical thought. But people are scared of change. I'd argue that a lot of the negs on this very thread on posts calling for change are largely motivated by fear. People care deeply about their high rep and don't want it threatened by a change (such as having to do the hard work of critical thought instead of pandering to popular opinion to get rep), and are scared of good arguments fairly criticising the current system which they benefit from. Cui bono, anyone?

Okay, instead of just criticising, how would you alter the system to encourage said honest opinions and critical thought? Given that total removal of the system isn't an option.

[Rhiani-ani-on]

Well personally, I think it should go or be changed.

For a start something needs to be done about neg rep given for seemingly no reason, for example, I recently posted on a thread about nail art where people posted pictures of there nails. I recieved neg rep for my post. Now can anyone explain how my post, which was similar to many posts in the thread could be considered a bad post??

I think the biggest problem is that rep is given, both pos and neg, with no reason. So people can just pos rep friends and neg rep people they don't like/opinions they don't like.

The current system does not work.

EDIT: again with the neg repping.... who's the funny guys??

[North Irelandman]

Yesterday I got a visitor message from someone saying "Don't be a jealous ****" after negging him for a post in the Oxbridge forum I found useless and only posted to cause argument (and already had one neg). I also had my most recent post in a completely unrelated forum (Relationships) negged by him for -6.

People like that are the reason why reputation needs changed or gotten rid of. (Of course I didn't send anything back to him, reported the post and thankfully it was deleted quickly)

[Unkempt_One]

I suppose my problem with the current system is that I can't see the merit of neg rep being given to posts that wouldn't warrant moderation in the first place, or at least vocal condemnation. It seems to me to mostly be used to lash out at users or express disapproval at styles of posting or opinions that are disliked, which doesn't necessarily mean they are bad. At least, whenever I've seen heavily negged posts in the past, they rarely strike me as being genuinely deserving of it. If the feedback given to users by neg rep is essentially 'I dislike you' as opposed to being constructive, then what I think would be best is nerfing the power of neg rep to affect a user's overall reputation count. That would at least make it easier to express more honest opinions without fear of backlash.