Problems with the reputation system

  • Hey - turns out IRC is out and something a little more modern has taken it's place... A little thing called Discord!

    Join our community @ https://discord.gg/JuaSzXBZrk for a pick-up game, or just to rekindle with fellow community members.

Ice

Ice

New Member
Oct 15, 2001
14,218
0
Hamburg, Germany
Let's start a discussion about this once again, because the system as it is now just doesn't work. I will take my own reputation points as example, but I am sure that it is the same for others.
First of all, I don't care about having many rep points, but I do care about people giving negative reputation points for normal posts (best example is people digging up threads from more than half a year just to give bad reputation on the posts there).
If some nice people wouldn't give me green reputation points, then I would go lower and lower although i don't deserve to. But I don't want to have to rely on others to even out the (unjustified) negative points.

The system is obviously one big flaw, because there are no rules to enforce that it is used properly, users are just messing around with it.
Now there would be some very simple solutions to this.

1. Allow only green points, so people who care can go on and it doesn't disturb the others.
2. (similiar to 1.) Allow deactivating of the rep system for every user.
3. Have the names send with the rep points to avoid abuse.
4. Disable the reputation system.
(5. Give me a black point and deactivate it for me, then I am happy...)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AnTi, Turha. and subZ
If it didn't work we'd all be -50 and not be able to post new threads. The fact is the rep system is currently only affecting 1 person, everyone else has just got pretty little coloured boxes and a few comments.

Giving negative rep is half as effective as giving positive rep, when giving positive you give the value of your "power", when giving negative you give half the value of your "power". The fact that your in the top 50 of highest rep shows that on the whole people like what you post, people will give you rep when they agree with your post. They will give you negative when they don't - people don't have to agree with your point of view. Take this thread you've started as an example, there will be some that agree with you and give you positive, there will be others that don't and are fed up with the moaning about the rep system and give you negative. Their comment may not make sense but that doesn't make it any less deserved. Same goes for this reply of mine.
Yes a few people are messing around but on the whole their impact is minimal. And you have to "rely" on people giving you reputation as there is no other way of getting it, make popular posts and it's easy.

Showing who gave rep is possible, but the view is it'll just result in people just negging back purely for revenge which will end up going round in circles.

Edit: Forgot to say that if anyone is getting reaccuring bad rep for things that are clearly not deserved you can contact an admin such as me who will be able to look at all the rep you've had and from whom.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CeCe
I dont want to have to care about it, but because of the unjustified negative points I have to. I hardly got any real negative points, most are only non-sense and it's stupid to have a system that makes this possible, in my opinion (especially if it could be solved very easily).

People who obviously give stupid negative reputation should be punished at least, that way you can even make the biggest morons learn to use it properly or just not to use it.
 
Last edited:
As I said, you don't have to care about it, it'll balance out on it's own. Just let it be.

Unjustifed negative points? Lets examine your rep so far this month (13 for 13 days):
02 June +02 Agreeing with your clarfying of your 'killing dogs is fun' thread
04 June -03 Arguing about sig abuse/limit
04 June +10 Agreeing about sig abuse/limit
07 June -01 Raichu getting back at the comment aimed at him
11 June -03 Something about a friendly match
12 June +02 Liking A joke
12 June +03 Liking a Post explaining something from Troy
13 June -03 Not liking your comment about france 'assraping' england
13 June -02 Not liking your comment about france 'assraping' england
13 June +05 Liking your comment about france 'assraping' england
13 June +03 Agreeing with your first post in this thread
13 June -01 Not agreeing with your first post in this thread
13 June -01 Not agreeing with your first post in this thread

All of those are completly valid imo, except the 11 June one which I don't quite get but looks like it may have some meaning to you and the giver.
 
the one with the friendly match is such a stupid point, as are the two for the france vs england. obviously two funny nerds who give bad rep for the same post at *almost* the same time (4:30 AM, quite usual.. not :rolleyes: ). that's about 50% of the negative rep, and if you look back a bit further you will find more.

as i said, i don't care about how much rep i have, i can probably have 1000 points in two months if i go for it, but i don't wanna have to care about it. there's so many stupid things about the system i could talk on for ages, like why would someone give me bad rep when he disagrees, but not post in that thread to share his opinion with others? most likely because he doesn't really disagree...

such a system should be implemented only if it works, and there's enough undisputable arguments that it doesn't.
 
I'm sorry but you don't make any sense.
Reputation is there to agree/disgree approve/disapprove posts. If you post x is going to assrape y then of course supporters of y will bad rep you!!! It's called disapproving!! Put it in a less offensive way, try and make intelligent conversation rather than flame and curse and go for the shock factor.
And what has the time you got the rep got to do with it? You got the rep shortly after you posted - makes perfect sense!

Not posting publically? Whats the point of taking a thread off topic into a flame fest. Sure they could have told you to fuck off in that thread (for your comment) as well giving rep, but I don't think that would be better. Give a neg rep and maybe a comment and the pov is given, nothing of value to add to the thread so no post. If you want everyone who gives rep to make a post instead of a rep comment then we'd have a lot of 'i agree'/'i dont agree' type posts to read through as well as the flames.

You say you don't care about your rep, you say you don't want to care about it, then stop posting about it!!! Quite honestly you have no reason to complain. And you've not given a single undisputable argument that it doesn't work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: §phere
:lol: Ice, you gave Munkz -1 bad rep on the 1st post of the England/France thread after you got your neg with the comment "same goes for you"...... you must have thought it was him huh?..... well he's never ever given you bad rep.......yet. So who's abusing the system? :nono:

Masterrr, look at your post. Your calling Psy a "Power abusing Fuckhead". Now think how people reading it will interpret that. Think. Harder. Ok. The obvious possible reasons you got that all so important -1 given to you:
a) People who don't like psy who think your serious = potential good rep
b) People who like psy who think your serious = potential bad rep
c) People who don't even like such terms used jokingly = potential bad rep.

Yes there are some posts with content, well lack of content, that wouldn't be appropriate for any rep, but that wasn't one of them. And yes there is a minority of users abusing it, but a few points here and there is doing nothing to your ratings!!
 
let's have all threads closed after the first post and just reply via rep points :thumb:

and if you check my post more closely you will find that i never said that i use it correct, you made that up. i gave up using the system properly ages ago (when the last thread started, same arguments same non-sense replies) to make people see how stupid it is.

i can't look into all the negative rep points (limited to 5), but if you post all the negative rep i got, then you will see how stupid the system is - many, many, many negative rep for "normal" posts.
just as stupid as publicating who i gave my rep to. do it for everybody to make the system work or leave it.

furthermore, your posts don't give us one reason to keep the system, because the main problems (unjustified reputation, reputation groups, some people putting alot effort into it - others don't -> makes it unbalanced) can't be solved.

if i am correct, you can give 10 rep points per day and have to give 10 before you can give rep to the same person again. now if i form a group with 11 peeps, and everybody gives one point to everybody in that group every day... guess what happens. i am also pretty sure that you could make a html file that gives you positive rep from every logged in member who clicks it.
please accept that the system is one big abuse and not worth any time. :\
 
Last edited:
Jesus. There are some things that arn't worth posting because they'll either take the thread off topic, has already been covered, will start a flame in the thread etc.... Besides you don't even know if they posted in the thread or not!! Ok those two didn't at that point in time, but later in the morning?

So you admit abusing it. Yet you complain about abuse. I can give you -50000 if you want, u'll get a grey box, have no impact on anyone elses rep, get no significant rep yourself, but be limited to the 'restricted users' group, ok?

Yes limited to 5, but I just gave you two weeks worth i.e. those 13. If I remember correctly you had the 'its fun to kill dogs' thread before then so i expect you got a lot of neg and prolly some more from abusers because they felt so strongly about that subject.

Give me the names of 11 people doing it.... Sure it's possible but thats not happening, not on any significant scale anyway.

If you don't care about it then IGNORE IT completly. It's not going to hurt you unless you piss a hell of a lot of people off. OK? You don't like it, you don't care about it, then YOU ignore it!
 
so you want me to take as many bs rep points until i can't post anymore? that's a solution aswell... the only one if you don't react to the possible abuse, but oh well you decide and i'll just give up now, just a try to make you see things more clearly.
 
You started with 10, you got 60 odd (after i've just bad repped u -10 for admitting your an abuser), thats an upward scale, you ain't anywhere near -50 so stop shitting your pants! It ain't gonna happen unless you piss a significant number of people (or a few admins) off.

And you have no right to complain about abuse as you are one of the ones abusing the system!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Turha.
at least i am not abusing it because of stupidity, i am abusing it with the aim to destroy it (well "abuse"... one wrong point heh).

make ready for lots of PM with people who are abusing it :bow:
 
Last edited:
just leave me alone with reputation and i am all fine. i am pointing out that the system doesn't work, doesn't make me a gimp if you can't see it or want to leave it like that :|
 
No it makes you whatever I decide you are.

And you aren't pointing out that the system doesn't work, you're pointing out that you're a gimp. :dog:
 
I concur. Remove this bollocks rep system shite.

I ask everyone who doesn't like it to abuse the shit out of it until it is gone.
 
ar·gu·ment ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ärgy-mnt)
n.

A discussion in which disagreement is expressed; a debate.
A quarrel; a dispute.
Archaic. A reason or matter for dispute or contention: “sheath'd their swords for lack of argument” (Shakespeare).

A course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating truth or falsehood
 
  • Like
Reactions: Moon
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back