Reputation System - Yay / Ney?

[BlackCatBonz]

i think if you can see who left you the negative, along with what they may have said, allows you to a) take the comment into consideration, b) take into consideration who the comment is coming from.

if someone like Doc, Dr Dave, Arnisador, et al. to all of the senior guys on the board, i think i might take their comments a bit more seriously.
its pretty easy to separate the wheat from the chaff on this board.....and when the wheat starts talking........

 

[Marginal]

I've had two or three dings where the comment left made me think about the post I made to the extent that it changed my mind. Usually it's just a disagreement or something that could have been posted in thread for discussion rather than a feeling on what I said.

Isn't that what reputation is all about?

Perhaps, but nobody really needs a row of green or red boxes to get a feel of the pecking order, to pick out the royals etc.

Judging by the actual rep points I've accumulated, the whole point of the rep system is to tell people to shut up without ever actually talking to them. Approval of cornball jokes, that's what the green stuff's largely comprised of.

All the rep system's demonstrated to me is that one should never, ever question the merits or demerits of capitalism and/or affirmative action. (Very few red staters actually post apparently.) Actual discussion of the MA's tho... That contributes little to rep either way.

 

[Bester]

Ya know, all these green dots, and a buck fifty will get me a large coke at Wendys.

 

[7starmantis]

Disabled rep just means the ranking's not displayed. Rep +/- can still be given.

On the topic of dings though, has anyone ever gotten a constructive one? Almost all of mine are from disgruntled right wing wannabe pundits and christian types who dislike my study postings. Not one of 'em was constructive or informative in any way.

Only told me I needed to do more of what they didn't like.

Thats the point, I'm trying to get a feel for what everyone thinks about this topic. I understand the rep system completely, I'm asking for opinions.

I get constructive positive ones, but most of my negatives come from unsigned people who like to just call names and such. Everyone like to call someone hypocritical when they dont have to sign it, right. I try to be pretty constructive if I give out a negative one, I also sign all of mine, so at least they know who its coming from and why. As a mod its a cool way for me to say "Good Job" or "Lets not get crazy" without coming across as "official" or a jerk.

Anyway, I agree with Sheshula, If one wants to disable rep, maybe they shouldn't be involved with it at all. Who knows, it really isn't the big deal its been made out to be.

7sm

 

[Michael Billings]

Considering we have only gotten 41 or so votes to date. Maybe it is only a big deal to a small percentage of users and needs no changing at all. Expecially since only 27 of the 41 voters want a change.

-Michael

 

[mantis]

Considering we have only gotten 41 or so votes to date. Maybe it is only a big deal to a small percentage of users and needs no changing at all. Expecially since only 27 of the 41 voters want a change.

-Michael

dude
democractic processes are messed up all over the world
even in a MA forum?!
why was the poll provided if the voters wont be considered?
now, im not bitter coz of the results, but because of the interpretation of the result!

 

[Bob Hubbard]

The bulk of those who voted prior to it's closure expressed a desire for the system to return.

It did.

Of those expressing a return, the majority expressed a desire for an open system.

This was not done.
Several reasons:
1- It would require a reset to zero, unless a way is found to save the score, but lose the comments. That is being researched.
2- Ease. It's easier to reactivate as-is while preparing for the upgrade. I have no desire to spend alot of time hacking code that will be dropped shortly.
3- Greater awareness of how to handle problems, and stiffer penalties for those who cross the line.

The system as-is was working fine, except for a few abusers. I feel that removing and restraining those abusers will allow the system to better function as-intended.

The numbers on the vote counted. The comments here balanced the numbers.

 

[Michael Billings]

Dude, it is more of an observation than an interpretation or decision regarding the outcome. But still, if only 27 of our 3,803 members want a change (0.7099658164606889 per cent of the membership), the evidence is certainly underwhelming, to say the least.

-Michael

 

[mantis]

Dude, it is more of an observation than an interpretation or decision regarding the outcome. But still, if only 27 of our 3,803 members want a change (0.7099658164606889 per cent of the membership), the evidence is certainly underwhelming, to say the least.

-Michael

okay
fine
i take that back now Mr. Bob has explained what's going on. if only 41 people voted that means the rest are happy with the 41's decision. the rest are only playing a "negative" role.
your comment sounded like a decision more than not to me
now im happy with the democratic process in this forum hehe
thanks Bob, thanks Michael