Is Reputation Anonymous?

[Littledragon]

Hmmm...It seems to me that reputation points are a bit like the belt ranking system...it really shouldn't matter but when you read this thread, it seems that to some people it really does! I think this is very real for some, and maybe should be rethought a bit because of that. I also do kind of think that in most cases it is a bit cowardly to leave negative comments for someone without identifying yourself. It's like talking behind someone's back where they can't see you, but loud enough so they can hear.

I just think the positive approach is always preferred. For people who take this all very seriously I think negative rep points are doubly hurtful. If reputation on this forum matters to someone a lot the comments alone may be taken as personally hurtful and then on top of that losing points creates further hurt.

I'm not sure what the purpose of the anonymous negative messages are, but while cowardly, if it is to promote free speech, why not allow positive rep points but also anonymous negative comments that can send a message, but don't affect a person's rep. This way people would hear from the anonymous party but not have to "pay" for it. Maybe even the flip side would be less hurtful take away rep points but don't allow unkind messages to accompany it. One of the negative comments that was shared here was really unkind and might be upsetting to anyone. I just don't see what purpose it serves. Knock someone down enough times and they may not get back up, and lose interest in being here - and I doubt this is a conscious part of the plan. :idunno:

Just my thoughts...

I totally agree with you. I think we should emphasize more of a postivie repuation while clicking instead of negative. If you don't like a post be a man and leave it at that but don't try to get some one out for it.

 

[arnisador]

Ya know, now that I have had some time to reflect on it, I think Reputation SHOULD remain anonymous. It is just a serious way to start flame wars and keep old battles raging.

I agree. I'm not sure that reputation is needed, but if it were to be non-anonymous, what would it add? People can PM non-anonymous one-on-one comments, and they can post non-anonymous comments that are intended for all to see...non-anonymous rep. doesn't seem to add much functionality.

Of course, that leaves the question as to whether anonymous rep. adds positive functionality. I know this feature has been controversial wherever it's been used.

I note that rep. is awarded by post but accrues to a member. Has there been an official statement as to how it should be used? I know originally it was considered somewhat experimental by Kaith, and so resetting it has something to be said for it...but it might also be useful to have the admins make a statement like, "We recommend/request/insist that you award rep. to posts with which you agree or disagree, not to people whom you like or dislike" (or whatever the policy is). It'd be hard to enforce, but it would give some guidance.

There might be something to be said for not displaying the red/green boxes. Let people leave anonymous feedback, but don't let them see the effects (like course evaluations for teachers at many schools--at others they are made public). It would have the advantage of allowing quick, anonymous corrections that don't risk pulling the commenter into a drawn-out PM exchange, but wouldn't allow anyone the satisfaction of seeing a new red box appear. The "in-spite" comments would still occur, I'm sure.

It would also be nice if it could be made so that a variable amount up to that person's maximum rep.-altering ability could be given.

Rep. will cause problems, but they're in the same kind as those caused by actual posts--people will use Report to Mod. for posts disagreeing with what they said, or questioning their background. The complaints I've seen about rep. are in the same vein as those for posts, esp. for posts by members whose public profiles don't contain much identifying info. To my mind, it isn't new--not even the anonymity part. But unlike a flamewar started in a single thread involving a member whose real identity isn't given, the public rep. lives on after a thread might be closed and serves as a reminder.

On the other hand--in favor of rep.--given the problems the site has had with being able to roust out frauds at an acceptable rate, I'd think more people would like having the rep. feature available. There are many past cases where people would have liked to have been able to give a fraud (in their eyes) nine red boxes. I think it would have lowered the heat in many threads we've seen in past years.

 

[someguy]

To some xtent you can tell if some people have given you points. As arnisador posted last I will use him as an example. Well he probably is the best example. If I suddenly go from 100 points to 150ish then i could tell it was probably him. Well there are a couple of other people who could do that. Kaith could. Umm probably more that I'm not thinking of.

 

[Littledragon]

The only major problem I see with Reputaition feedback is if someone does not agree with your posts or holds a grudge against you they will give negative feedback. But if someone is expressing their opinion in a mature way and the person has a grudge against you and does not agree with you they will still leave negative feedback. But that doesn't really bother me because no matter what forum site you will go on there will always be somebody who doesn't like you.

Tarek

 

[Tgace]

I just find it very "high schoolish" in a popularity contest sort of way. Dosent really bother me much though. (as Im a "jewel in the rough" )

 

[loki09789]

I just find it very "high schoolish" in a popularity contest sort of way. Dosent really bother me much though.

Agreed, and since it makes more 'brushfires' for the admins/mods to deal with than needed and doesn't really seem to mean much to most members I still say get rid of the popularity token reward system.

Arnisador makes a good point. People aren't scoring pos or neg the post or the point being made, they are crediting/discrediting the poster for that post.

As far as using it as tool for newbies to use to assess the validity of current member credibility, the above point undermines that reasoning IMO. Besides which, they will form their opinion based on the presentation/posts of the member not the number/color of squares attached.

Just get rid of it. No matter how well intentioned the reason for installing it (but actually Bob said he didnt have an intention, just wanted to try it out), it is getting abused in that high school kind of way, don't promote that abuse by leaving a tool for that purpose in place.

 

[Tgace]

But the jocks and cheerleaders wouldnt like loosing their status just to be fair to the geeks would they?

 

[Littledragon]

I just find it very "high schoolish" in a popularity contest sort of way. Dosent really bother me much though.

I totally agree with you, either they like you or don't like you and that is the main factor while giving reputation to another member.

 

[Tgace]

what others are doing.....

http://www.vbulletin.org/forum/showthread.php?t=62015
http://toolshed.down.net/opinion/forum/archive/index.php/t-7967

 

[mj-hi-yah]

what others are doing.....

http://www.vbulletin.org/forum/showthread.php?t=62015
http://toolshed.down.net/opinion/forum/archive/index.php/t-7967

This is good stuff Tgace...very proactive of you, and I think a good idea presented here is to leave reputation in the hands of the ones in charge!

 

[dearnis.com]

I know for myself I try to leave feedback as well, and yes I sign it. As a supporting member I have no interest in access to anything more. It is another feature, kind of amusing, but nothing to take too seriously.

 

[7starmantis]

It is another feature, kind of amusing, but nothing to take too seriously.

Exactly my thoughts!! It seems people are getting quite serious about a fun feature that isn't meant to be taken so hardcore seriously!

7sm

 

[MA-Caver]

Well, I'd still like to know who's been giving mine... some have been signed and I really appreciate that. I try to remember to sign all of mine. I think it would be nice to know who's being nice... err, yeah. :uhyeah:

 

[Littledragon]

Well, I'd still like to know who's been giving mine... some have been signed and I really appreciate that. I try to remember to sign all of mine. I think it would be nice to know who's being nice... err, yeah. :uhyeah:

Ye same..

 

[GAB]

I think the reputation points are childish and not something that should be on the board at all. If someone has a problem and they have to tell the moderator, then that is the moderators job to moderate not to put a little mark for or against.

I have been suspended and given red, gry and green. Tgace is right, it is a highschoolish type of thing but the problem is, it is not highschoolish it is elementaryschoolish, lets make them mind by depriving them of a brownie point. Or give them one and they will be good and lay down and take a nap.
I believe the Board is a good one, you make the rules and we go by them, if someone disagrees with another big deal. If the flame is to high then someone will get burned.

I see someone coming in and deleting something and then giving days off if they feel it is a correct procedure, what other thing have the moderators to do?

When a moderator is visible then it should show. The invisible is also a childish item.

When somebody is on the board that is just what it should show. If you are on a thread or watching, it should show.

Last but not least when some one says something anonymous because they are afraid to say it on the board, that is truly punk stuff, on a Martial arts board no less. LOL
Just my thoughts, Regards, Gary

 

[Andrew Green]

I got some mixed feelings on the reputatation thing as well, but overall I'd say it is a decent addition to the site.

Those that can influence it the most are those with the most. Which would hopefully prevent people from giving and taking based on whether they liked or disliked the person and not based on the quality of there ideas.

Those in the red cannot influence anyone, so people that would do that should hopefully not be able to do much.

This is a large forum, and it helps give an idea on whether someone is worth responding too or not. My observations have been that it is really not all that inaccurate as far as whos posts I want to read, and who's I don't.

As far as invisible mode goes, it does have it's uses and that is something that people should have the option of. Would you prefer it just not show who is online at all? Sometimes people have problems with other people and would really rather not have them following them everywhere they go, it's childish and annoying. So I got no problem with people being invisible.

As for moderators, I think it is a good idea for them. If you can always tell when a moderator is online you always know when to behave yourself, giving mods the element of suprise might help cut down on trolls and flames that might get posted if the person posting knows that no one will be around to delete it for a while.

Moderators also get to see everyone, so they can sit in the shadows and watch you if they need to, even if you are invisible

 

[Sarah]

How do you get/give reputation points??

 

[bignick]

click on the scales on each post...in the upper right corner of each post

 

[GAB]

Hi Andrew,

I have to say that you are mistaken regarding people who are in the red not being able to give good advice.

I have seen many of the better advice givers in the red at times, someone wants to disagree and then they use their influence or position to slam the other.
I say shame on the slammers, who have their own agenda, or don't like what the person said previously, or at the present.
In Japan there is/was a saying "the nail that sticks up gets hammered down". Petty come's to mind. Lack of free speech is another.

Can't we agree to disagree and occasionally say something that is not quite right without going down the tubes. Or better yet put the person on the avoid list and don't go there, if it is going to bother you so much.

Your assessment of red is not valid, I think someone who is always the goody goody, needs to be assessed, maybe they are just a political
person.

We need Politicians, we also need Generals, we need Soldiers, more in the trench means more fighting, well, is not this the board of Martial Arts, do all warriors not fight with weapons? Swords or empty hands or the typewriter?

Maybe the persons who are always green don't post anything except I pat you on the back and you pat me, we are all in the same dojo so we are all good guys?
Or they have a niche, followers, don't post outside of their Art don't disagree, Boring.

We have a two party system in this country and when it comes time to a vote we see it as a very narrow margin 2% or??? We still have differences of opinion, but we still should be able to state them without flaming on, or not?

The silent majority is 80% of the board and so in real life, the other 20% probably the split is 12%/08% Pro or Con, but when they meet it is 100% one way or the other, that is the job of the moderator. IMO...

Again when you don't like it, speak up, if you can't, that is sad.

A quote comes to mind...He that cannot reason is a fool, He that will not is a bigot, He that dare not is a slave.

Many persons have been credited that statement. Andrew Carnegie for one.

Regards, Gary

PS. I have been given 40 - points for my opinions on reputation points read my posts does that seem fair? I will probably get some more - points. Oh well...G

 

[Sarah]

I agree with you there GAB, but IMHO I think its the way in which people choose to give their opinion that counts. When someone is being aggressive or close-minded it can be really hard to understand where they are coming from, and have an open comverstaion where everyone gets to express themselves.