Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wilfred Little)
    Rep should be gotten rid of, or at least change the rep system and remove anonymous negs, and I'm not saying that because I have low rep either.

    All the rep system does is prevent people from posting their real opinions for fear of being negged and ruins potential discussion, internet forums do not work when you take away a person's freedom to speak their mind (which is exactly what happens with rep). It encourages bandwagon negging as well.

    The current rep system is classic TSR logic, i.e. it makes no sense. Like that time that little message was stickied onto each forum instead of sending a mass PM about our accounts and emails being hacked, yet we get 3 mass PM's in the space of 2 minutes to vote in some pointless forum award.
    I've repped you too recently to do it again, but I agree with your post

    Taking away rep might also discourage serial trolls since they wouldn't get their red bar of 'achievement'.

    Not having rep would also stop bias in discussions. I even admit to perhaps giving more consideration to the opinions of a person with a high amount of rep (perhaps rightly, as it shows that they don't troll or be offensive) and it means that users who are newer or who haven't got the ability to make witty comments near the start of a thread aren't given as much credibility.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Well, I assume the main use of reputation is to distinguish posts from good users and posts from bad ones. I like the thumps up/down feature (with a 'meh' sideways one to come soon), but I think it should be used just to rate posts rather than affecting a user's reputation. It's like on other forums where individual posts can have likes/dislikes, or have features which say 'the following users groaned/say thank you to this post', but also have a separate rep feature for people who make good posts.
    On this site, say, for example, you mention that you don't like a movie that other people happen to like -- you can get negged profusely for that and hence your reputation bar would be negatively affected. If the old rep system still remained that wouldn't happen as much because a poster isn't likely to have the thought of "This post isn't helpful because the guy doesn't like the film I like -- I'm going to navigate to the small star-like symbol by his username, click the 'disapprove of post' option in order to deduct some of his reputation points, and write a comment of why the post was bad" . Not to mention, for those trolls who seek to achieve multiple red bars, the old rep system would counter that as well.

    As someone else said it'll remove anonymous neggers too.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Assassin)
    On this site, say, for example, you mention that you don't like a movie that other people happen to like -- you can get negged profusely for that and hence your reputation bar would be negatively affected.
    Yep that's another good point.

    I think everyone can agree the current rep system is daft.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tuerin)
    QFA
    In your deleted post you suggest comments be required for neg rep. Well that's exactly what was available with the old rep system though it was optional. A comment box was there be it for neg rep or pos rep and you could write what you like, if you wanted to. It was abused though which is why it was removed when the rep system was updated. There could be a drop down box of the most common reasons to choose from perhaps.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thunder_chunky)
    In your deleted post you suggest comments be required for neg rep. Well that's exactly what was available with the old rep system though it was optional. A comment box was there be it for neg rep or pos rep and you could write what you like, if you wanted to. It was abused though which is why it was removed when the rep system was updated. There could be a drop down box of the most common reasons to choose from perhaps.
    What I was intending was that if people did abuse the (obligatory) comment box, the good folk of TSR would rightly neg them to death. Any attempts by the original abuser to neg these avenger negs would become ineffective before long as they became red and lost rep power, preventing possible further abuse.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Assassin)
    On this site, say, for example, you mention that you don't like a movie that other people happen to like -- you can get negged profusely for that and hence your reputation bar would be negatively affected.

    (Original post by Wilfred Little)
    Yep that's another good point.

    I think everyone can agree the current rep system is daft.
    With the old rep system people with high rep had rep power in the hundreds. You could give a person one pos rep and they would get one or maybe two green gems, of course it worked the other way too. So following on from what you both said above, the user Jangafress use to have **** loads of green gems so he had a lot of rep power. I remember someone once saying Janga negged him because he said he liked a certain pokemon or didn't like a cetain pokemon and that guys rep dropped by a number somewhere well into three digits.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tuerin)
    What I was intending was that if people did abuse the (obligatory) comment box, the good folk of TSR would rightly neg them to death. Any attempts by the original abuser to neg these avenger negs would become ineffective before long as they became red and lost rep power, preventing possible further abuse.
    You can't expect or rely on people to rally to your aid or to anyone else's, especially for a bit of neg rep and a nasty comment. As for the perp having their rep power zapped, I suppose that is one way however I think before the update the mods dealt with a lot of nasty comments so to save time they just decided to do away with it altogether. Which you can understand. One less thing for them to worry about.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thunder_chunky)
    You can't expect or rely on people to rally to your aid or to anyone else's, especially for a bit of neg rep and a nasty comment. As for the perp having their rep power zapped, I suppose that is one way however I think before the update the mods dealt with a lot of nasty comments so to save time they just decided to do away with it altogether. Which you can understand. One less thing for them to worry about.
    The proposed system relies on self-regulation, which you dismiss unfairly. Already if you look over threads where someone is clearly trolling / someone is being unreasonable etc. there can be quite a few negs from more than those involved in the conversation, depending on how moronic the offender is being. The mods could get some sleep.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I don't really the negging system as sometimes I get negged for voicing an opinion (sometimes just for making jokes)

    I would like to rebel and get a really low rep but I'm a perfectionist so I try to keep it positive. Oh well....
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tuerin)
    The proposed system relies on self-regulation, which you dismiss unfairly. Already if you look over threads where someone is clearly trolling / someone is being unreasonable etc. there can be quite a few negs from more than those involved in the conversation, depending on how moronic the offender is being. The mods could get some sleep.
    I don't dismiss unfairly I just don't trust people to be entirely honest when it comes to self regulation. Self regulation is good in theory but in practice that's something else. I'm not just being cynical, there are a more than a few sneaky opportunistic ***** on TSR.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thunder_chunky)
    With the old rep system people with high rep had rep power in the hundreds. You could give a person one pos rep and they would get one or maybe two green gems, of course it worked the other way too. So following on from what you both said above, the user Jangafress use to have **** loads of green gems so he had a lot of rep power. I remember someone once saying Janga negged him because he said he liked a certain pokemon or didn't like a cetain pokemon and that guys rep dropped by a number somewhere well into three digits.
    Wait, perhaps I'm unfamiliar with what the old rep system on this site was... I know on many forums people have 'reputation power' and 'reputation'. Say if you have 1000 displayed reputation you'll have 1,000,000 reputation power, and when you rep someone they'll go up by 1 point (so if someone who's 1000 rep repped someone who had 900, they'd be 901). Likewise with other numbers (another example - if someone had 95,000 reputation and repped someone who had 20,000, they'd go from 20,000 -> 20,095). Half those numbers when you want to neg someone. Anyone who had 10+ displayed reputation would have full green bars just like if someone had 95,000 reputation. To me that sounds different - or perhaps I just misunderstood what you said... lol.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wilfred Little)
    Rep should be gotten rid of, or at least change the rep system and remove anonymous negs, and I'm not saying that because I have low rep either.

    All the rep system does is prevent people from posting their real opinions for fear of being negged and ruins potential discussion, internet forums do not work when you take away a person's freedom to speak their mind (which is exactly what happens with rep). It encourages bandwagon negging as well.

    The current rep system is classic TSR logic, i.e. it makes no sense. Like that time that little message was stickied onto each forum instead of sending a mass PM about our accounts and emails being hacked, yet we get 3 mass PM's in the space of 2 minutes to vote in some pointless forum award.
    i pretty much agree
    i think removing the anonymity would help with getting better comments and more appropriate rep/negs (e.g. no random neg for liking a pokemon no one else likes). along with this, id say another improvement would be to allow removal of rep e.g. accidental

    i dont say this because i already have green gems, but i think the rep system is productive, just like the point system in yahoo answers. both are physically useless, they cannot help you in any way, you will not get money for them, etc etc. but despite that, it is still treated like currency... well for those that dont constantly troll/make delusional comments anyway it can
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    There seem to be two ways you can end up with a string of gems - your opinions are worth commenting on, or you've been on TSR since the beginning of time. It would be good if rep decayed over time, IMO
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pastaferian)
    There seem to be two ways you can end up with a string of gems - your opinions are worth commenting on, or you've been on TSR since the beginning of time. It would be good if rep decayed over time, IMO
    it does decay over time... provided you dont comment for a long time... think 100 days or something?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Assassin)
    Wait, perhaps I'm unfamiliar with what the old rep system on this site was... I know on many forums people have 'reputation power' and 'reputation'. Say if you have 1000 displayed reputation you'll have 1,000,000 reputation power, and when you rep someone they'll go up by 1 point (so if someone who's 1000 rep repped someone who had 900, they'd be 901). Likewise with other numbers (another example - if someone had 95,000 reputation and repped someone who had 20,000, they'd go from 20,000 -> 20,095). Half those numbers when you want to neg someone. Anyone who had 10+ displayed reputation would have full green bars just like if someone had 95,000 reputation. To me that sounds different - or perhaps I just misunderstood what you said... lol.
    I don't remember exactly how it worked but I think after three or four green gems you had rep power that was three digits and it steadily grew from there. After 3 or 4 dark green gems you got light green gems, after three or four more light green gems you got a yellow gem and after three or four yellow gems you got what was known as a "disco gem" which was a gem that flashed. The people who had one of those had a ton of rep power. It was thought that those sort of people had too much rep power I think.
    One of the old timer mods or admins who were around then and who probably can remember how it was will be able to explain it better I'm sure.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by James A)
    Abolish the rep system.

    It just encourages people to dish out unnecessary rep, if someone already has like 100 thumbs down for their comment.


    It reminds me of ISA -700(and counting) thumbs down comment.
    Agreed.m
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thunder_chunky)
    I don't dismiss unfairly I just don't trust people to be entirely honest when it comes to self regulation. Self regulation is good in theory but in practice that's something else. I'm not just being cynical, there are a more than a few sneaky opportunistic ***** on TSR.
    I thought we were discussing the will of the TSR community to neg unhelpful posters? What do 'opportunistic *****' have to do with anything? From my experience, the community tends to be pretty solid in negging unhelpful posts. There's a reason all the trolls have strong red sabers.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Problem is even if the vast majority of members want rep to go, the admin won't do anything anyway. Remember the layout change and the poll? Think it was about 75% in favour of changing it back yet nothing done despite promising they would change it.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pastaferian)
    There seem to be two ways you can end up with a string of gems - your opinions are worth commenting on, or you've been on TSR since the beginning of time. It would be good if rep decayed over time, IMO

    (Original post by Dmon1Unlimited)
    it does decay over time... provided you dont comment for a long time... think 100 days or something?
    Yep.

    "Reputation will stay with members so long as they remain active. If a member has not logged in for over 100 days, their reputation will start to decrease.

    Once a user has not logged in after 100 days, their reputation points will multiply by 0.98 each day giving a gradual decrease should the user not log in.

    This is to ensure that only active members can hold high reputations."
    • Community Assistant
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    PS Helper
    (Original post by thunder_chunky)
    I personally wouldn't care since I don't really care about rep.
    He says wielding his +8 green e-penis. You'll take someone's eye out.

    I'm not that bothered about rep either. I'd like to be red barred for a day but hate the length of time it takes to change gems at high levels in either direction.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.