• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

must spread around

I see.

Well I dont mind the rep being reset as I already have 0, haha.

Also I dont rep anyone because I cant see their rep page so I dont really see a reason as to why. Although I've been helped but a few members on here and would glady rep them.

I think it would be more benefical if you could go to a persons rep page and see what others have to say about them.
Is that already possible and Im just overlooking it?
 
Shady, rep is a personal* thing. If YOU like something that someone helped you with personally, or you thought was just an over all generally good post then you rep them for it. Not everyone is going to agree with what they think is worth rep or not.
Essentially, there is no "rep" page - it's just something the person being repped can see in their control panel.
 
Last edited:
I don't think people would view that favorably. Much of what is said in rep is along the lines of "I'm so glad you said that- I was afraid to say it myself" and so forth. It's private.
 
I don't mind the rep being reset, but was wondering, will that remove all the comments that came along with the rep? Not a big deal either, just wondering.

Most of the rep I give is for a post I found very well worded, insightful or very helpful and didn't want to post a reply thanking that person, generally because one or two people had already done so and I felt that would start to be redundant and take away from the discussion at hand but still wanted them to know that I appreciated what they had said.
And as Nanci said, I often rep posts in lively discussions that I liked or agreed with but felt that publicly agreeing with or adding to would just be wood on the fire and not conductive.
 
Nanci said:
I don't think people would view that favorably. Much of what is said in rep is along the lines of "I'm so glad you said that- I was afraid to say it myself" and so forth. It's private.
Click to expand...

I agree with this.

Rep is more of a private thing.

You can see the rep boxes under a person name and know if they have a high reputation or not.
 
I see rep is viewed differently here then other forums I participate in. Where as they are very public.

One example is I go to a memoribilia site for trading and selling. They rep is used to leave feedback on a trader with thing such as fast or slow shipping, condition as noted, good communication, etc. But they also put some like good posts, helped with some info and thing of that nature.

I understand you guys have the BOI, which I understand is very similair to what I described.

None the less, it seems this is more for the frequent posters versus the lurkers. I was just trying to give you guys the view of someone who doesnt post as much.
 
I guess for this site we don't really need trader rep. Fauna has trader rep, but it's for buying and selling. This is more of a chat site.

I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but for a chat site, it does not really matter if you see it or not.
 
Nanci said:
We used to be able to see the rep number display, but that is turned off. We have discussed the "like" feature in the past and it was decided not to do that.
Click to expand...

The number that used to be displayed was nothing more than the "power" the member could wield with their reputation. Since it was based on an algorithm that included factors such as amount of time registered on the forum, number of posts, etc., and it put a burden on the server having to calculate that value every time a thread was displayed, I felt that it didn't warrant the increased server load.
 
Kokopelli said:
The reputation system being reinstated is wonderful news.
I do think however that there should be some criteria...

Unlike what was suggested by Nanci( no offense meant ), I don't think that a person should be rated only because the rating user liked a post... the "like" concept going so strongly in Facebook is hardly a parameter for how seriously should said post taken seriously.

I think that it should serve as an indicator for keepers as to how experienced and professional the person who gives the answer really is- so, ratings in any form should be given for herp-related answers- not politics, not just posting pictures and so forth... but displaying knowledge.

As for negative feedback... is there a way to have it regulated by the admins? It should be rare enough to not cause a huge overload I think... if not, than I suspect that sooner or later, it will be used as means to anger and bash one another. I saw it happening on other forums.
Click to expand...

Although on the surface that sounds like a wonderful idea, it would be nearly impossible to write an algorithm that could programmatically determine such content. And I certainly am not going to implement anything here that myself or the mods would have to physically baby sit 24/7 to filter the use of such a function manually. As mentioned before, that page I posted earlier in this thread are ALL of the options at my disposal for the reputation function.
 
Tavia said:
I don't mind the rep being reset, but was wondering, will that remove all the comments that came along with the rep? Not a big deal either, just wondering.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I really don't know. Would that be important to anyone?
 
Rich Z said:
Honestly, I really don't know. Would that be important to anyone?
Click to expand...

I took a screen shot and saved it.

There were a couple little notes that had something important in there, but taking a screen shot for myself seems easier than trying to archive that somehow.
 
I was just going to say, a screen shot is probably the best way to solve that if you have a problem with losing the comments.
And they do eventually drop off when you receive more.
 
All those nice things people said are GONE???




(okay, I DO admit it would be neat to look up the rep and the post it was given to from way back)
 
One of the admin functions I have available to me is to be able to view ALL reputation actions, including comments. I can filter by date range, or by who the comments were "from" or "to". This can be useful to determine if someone is abusing the system and take appropriate steps. This will be especially pertinent if I decide to re-enable negative rep.

Anyway, here is a screen shot from the beginning of the year 2005.
cs_reputation_01012005_edit.jpg


And this one is from the beginning of this year.
cs_reputation_01012013_edit.jpg


Notice the enormous difference in the rep power numbers.

BTW, I can also control some options of the reputation system by member group. These options are:
  1. Can See Who Left User Ratings - Yes or No
  2. Can Use Reputation - Yes or No
  3. Can Hide Reputation from Others - Yes or No
  4. Can Leave Negative Reputation - Yes or No

So I may change those options as well while I am tinkering with the system.

Maybe it would be best if the rep points were completely anonymous? Or only visible to Contributor level members?

Maybe negative rep could be limited to Contributor level members only with the caveat that abusing the system will get you banned and you lose your Contributor membership?

Anyway, I've alerted my programmer about zeroing out the rep system, but I want to give this more time so more people might notice the announcement I put up about this impending change.

Bear in mind that nothing will be cast in stone about this, and I might change anything that doesn't appear to be working as I had hoped. Except recovering the zeroed out figures, of course. That is being done at the database level so once they are zeroed, they are GONE.

Oh, btw, I do appreciate the feedback about this, but I do hope that everyone realizes that I can't possibly implement everyone's suggestions, especially where there are directly contrary opinions about many of the options. My choosing something other than what YOU wish doesn't mean I didn't weigh in your opinion. It just means I decided that other criteria just carried more weight in my deliberations about this. And yes, I might be wrong about my decisions. If that proves to be the case, well, I'll just have to try to fix it. All of my pencils have erasers on them too.
 
Is there a way to make the weighting always stay the same? Or only increase to a maximum of, I don't know, 50?

If it was anonymous, I don't think it would be useful.
 
Rich Z said:
This will be especially pertinent if I decide to re-enable negative rep.

BTW, I can also control some options of the reputation system by member group. These options are:
  1. Can See Who Left User Ratings - Yes or No
  2. Can Use Reputation - Yes or No
  3. Can Hide Reputation from Others - Yes or No
  4. Can Leave Negative Reputation - Yes or No

Maybe it would be best if the rep points were completely anonymous? Or only visible to Contributor level members?

Maybe negative rep could be limited to Contributor level members only with the caveat that abusing the system will get you banned and you lose your Contributor membership?

Bear in mind that nothing will be cast in stone about this, and I might change anything that doesn't appear to be working as I had hoped. Except recovering the zeroed out figures, of course. That is being done at the database level so once they are zeroed, they are GONE.
Click to expand...

***IF*** negative rep is enabled, well, that would be a fun experiment to see from another perspective (not my own) I suppose.

re: "the caveat that abusing the system will get you banned"
How will "abuse" be defined?
Is it abusive of the system already in place to leave rep with a blank space, or to say LOL?
What if I leave negative rep today for a post which irks me a lot, but 3 days later, after I've thought it over, and accepted some of what is said, can I remove the negative, or change it to a positive rep? Or can I go back in 3 days time and leave a positive rep to zero-out the negative, without receiving a message saying I have to spread it around more before leaving any more rep of any kind- for said member/post?/
Sometimes it is difficult to tell if I am leaving rep based on -emotional or logical- conditioning/thinking.
Sometimes I'll rep a post that is over a decade old but still relevant to my today. Would I be able to give out negatives to posts made before negative rep was enabled?
Does something happen to a member if they receive lots of negatives?
Will there be a user dispute/resolution panel so you and mods and the person receiving negs and person/s dishing negs can discuss the problem?

to me, it seems a recipe for a lot of extra work, headaches, heartaches, bannings(?) , alienation, ostracism, even more trolling, & so forth. Sellers on eBay cannot leave negative feedback. Only buyers.
What if contributing members and mods cannot leave negatives, only non contributors? It does not seem fair when I reverse think it, but when given the chance to be able to give negatives to the new guy who hasn't learned to think with the clique, it's wonderful.
jmho.
 
dave partington said:
to me, it seems a recipe for a lot of extra work, headaches, heartaches, bannings(?) , alienation, ostracism, even more trolling, & so forth. Sellers on eBay cannot leave negative feedback. Only buyers.
What if contributing members and mods cannot leave negatives, only non contributors? It does not seem fair when I reverse think it, but when given the chance to be able to give negatives to the new guy who hasn't learned to think with the clique, it's wonderful.
jmho.
Click to expand...

I agree .
 
Tried to edit the post above but got booted.
Adding:
Maybe I would be encouraged to go back and edit 27,745 of my posts.

If someone's signature upsets my moral fiber, can I neg them?

On the one hand, enabling negative rep power might encourage non-contributing members to become contributing members so they can neg people. It might encourage persons to think carefully before making replies. It might slow down the inbox traffic of moderators. It might slow down the trolly posts. It might encourage some persons to never post at all. I don't know what might happen. It is an interesting topic to consider.
 
Last edited:
I don't think that neg rep is going to be nearly the problem people think it is.

Fauna has it and the system seems to govern itself fairly well. Once in a while someone will get a bug in their rear about something, but other than that it seems okay.

If the varied collection of fauna personalities can manage it, then I feel certain the people here will be fine with it.

Let it work the same as a fauna, contributors can give it and if you feel like you must give it out, then by all means become a contributor.

If someone is a big enough jerk to smear it all over everything, then that will need to be addressed, but splashing it here and there might encourage people to think before they post.

For me, if someone gives utterly horrible and potentially hazardous advice, that might warrant sprinkling of neg rep. On the flip side, if someone is a pompous rude jerk to someone then that might be worth a little neg rep too. This might encourage people to be less apt to dive down a throat or be a complete butt to someone.

For example, that recent "Am I sinister?" thread. There was some really out of line hate in there, and a gentle application of neg rep on some of those over the top posts might make people think a little harder before they lash out at someone.

I just don't see it being a problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top