Reputation Change

The reputation feature:

  • Use positive and negative rep

    Votes: 6 27.3%
  • Use only positive rep

    Votes: 15 68.2%
  • What is reputation?

    Votes: 1 4.5%

  • Total voters
    22

tsptalk

Moderator
Staff member
Regarding the misuse of user reputations, I have done some research and apparently I can change a setting that would permit members to only leave poitive rep (no negatives). This way someone's reputation will be based on how many positives they receive only.

We have had a problem with members handing out way too much negative reps which causes an endless reciprocation. Other boards that have used this positive only rep said it works out much better for everyone.

What do you think?
 
I'd prefer just positive. I have recieved negative reputation marks on a couple of occasions for no good reason. I can deal with it either way.

Can you look up who has given out mostly negative and give them a stern warning?
 
Yes keep it positive. If there is a problem of abuse "out them" and let our little community know who we are dealing with. It's easy to be pain when you have the luxury of anonymity. It does not seem fair to allow us to continue to interact with persons who you are finding to be devious.:(
 
There are people giving bad rep for no reason, and other who give it where it is probably due, but maybe to excess. With a community this big and of this nature (bull/bear) we are bound to have personality conflicts and it's not a surprise to see this type of activity.

Maybe this will help. If I do make the change, I will delete any past negative rep and set anyone with a negative rep rating to the starting / neutral point.
 
I will delete the negatives and the software will (should) recalculate the reps. So don't be surprised if your reputation level jumps, but please let me know if you see anything out of whack.

Thanks.
 
By the way, myself and the moderators still have the ability to leave negative reputation for inappropriate posts. We will only use it when necessary in an effort to protect the board and its members, particularly new members. Thanks.
 
I know I am in the minority, but my opinion is reputation on this board is now worthless without the ability to post negative reps.

Dave
<><
 
how about weighting an individuals rating based on THEIR rep??..e.g. a person with a negative/lower rep has a lower weight to what they rate others...that might prove to be pretty enlightening...the value of one's opinion is rated.
 
That's the way it works now futurestrader, among other things - longevity, # posts, rep, etc.

Dave, I agree. The negative reps would work in a perfect world, but in the wrong hands it just became an under the table flame war with particular members bad rep'ing the same people over and over, with back and forth retaliation even though people didn't really know who left the bad rep.

Now you'll have people with either very high rep, high, med, or low rep - rarely negative. If posts are blantantly bad, the mods can step in and give the bad rep, hopefully without regard to any personality conflicts.
 
In Retrospect:

Here is some initial information about the use of reputation as posted by Tom in March of 2006: http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/showthread.php?t=2666 post #1 and post #4.

The administrator was alerted to some potential misuse of reputation.
The allegations were investigated, and there were findings!
Research was conducted into alternate options.
The options were discussed and members were allowed to express their opinions.
A majority decision was made!

Thats what should have been done!

As presented in Tom's thread above. If a member doesn't progress their reputation won't either.
 
If posts are blantantly bad, the mods can step in and give the bad rep

What if they are blatantly wrong, or blatantly foolish, or blatantly miss the point. You will only be giving bad reps for people mis-behaving. However it will do nothing to address the value, or lack thereof, of a person's post.

Dave
<><
 
Does this reputation feature really serve all that relevant of a function anyway? I suspect that mostly it is ignored or misunderstood, and does not ultimately add enough value to really make it worth the effort it takes to strategize a way to make it fair or useful.
 
There's a song called "Love me today, hate me tomorrow" by Blue October. Can we have that play when you log into the message board? :p

Please, no "We are family" requests...........:blink:
 
Does this reputation feature really serve all that relevant of a function anyway? I suspect that mostly it is ignored or misunderstood, and does not ultimately add enough value to really make it worth the effort it takes to strategize a way to make it fair or useful.
I think so. I go to different message boards when I have questions about programming, webhosting, whatever, and it matters to me who is giving the answers to my questions. I'm more apt to listen to someone with higher rep. I'd think that would be especially relevant with financial related topics.
 
What if they are blatantly wrong, or blatantly foolish, or blatantly miss the point. You will only be giving bad reps for people mis-behaving. However it will do nothing to address the value, or lack thereof, of a person's post.
Foolish posts don't warrant bad rep. We see them all the time (see mlk_man's post above :D). No harm - no foul. Blatantly wrong on the other hand - not so good. I'd suggest hitting the "report post" link to help us out if you see one.

Posts that miss the point can be ignored. :)
 
Foolish post? I think some nice music would make everyone feel better while they browse the MB. How about "Mony, mony" by Billy Idol.

Do we need to start a poll? :p
 
I think so. I go to different message boards when I have questions about programming, webhosting, whatever, and it matters to me who is giving the answers to my questions. I'm more apt to listen to someone with higher rep. I'd think that would be especially relevant with financial related topics.

Foolish posts don't warrant bad rep. We see them all the time (see mlk_man's post above :D). No harm - no foul. Blatantly wrong on the other hand - not so good. I'd suggest hitting the "report post" link to help us out if you see one.

Posts that miss the point can be ignored. :)

These are totally contradictory ideas. You want people to be able to come here and look at the reputation to help them decide who to listen to, but that person's reputation could be quite high despite repeated posts that are foolish, posts that miss the point, posts that are marginally wrong, posts that are incoherrent, posts that have any number of negative qualities, so long as they aren't mean spirited.

Dave
<><
 
The key would then to be to give out a lot of reputation points to those that deserve them so that they by far out distance those that post dribble...
 
Back
Top