Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But it is the problems that create the work. if you want non productive no laudable contribution like the the rep feature as a whole?
Most people enjoy the reputation feature as it is. People come to CD, make friends, exchange ideas, pat each other on the back, etc.
If you check out your reputation list under "Settings," you can see which posts received a reputation chit. And, which posts received multiple chits. This feedback has value, and lets the poster know which posts were most appreciated.
Lack of rep chits for a post can be construed to indicate that less appreciation is offered. Negative by passive implication? Works for me without trashing the place up.
I have collected 5 positive reputation chits so far in this thread. Makes me believe that there are people who agree with me on the point. If I had none, I would not need negative reputation to believe that fewer people agreed with me. I could infer that from the lack of reputation given.
When the Administrator took a poll, the results were 79-29 in favor of disabling negative reputation. And many of those who voted were moderators at the time. Good mods, too.
I have to disagree as well. Negative reputation is not the way to go, because people who like to "troll" or inflame others would just add to your negative reputation points just to "troll" you.
Trolls, or people with very few interesting or good ideas are usually noticed by their lack of rep points, especially if their number of posts is much higher.
Positive reputation is good, and people will only give it if well deserved. Negative reputation can and would be abused.
I have to disagree as well. Negative reputation is not the way to go, because people who like to "troll" or inflame others would just add to your negative reputation points just to "troll" you.
Trolls, or people with very few interesting or good ideas are usually noticed by their lack of rep points, especially if their number of posts is much higher.
Positive reputation is good, and people will only give it if well deserved. Negative reputation can and would be abused.
Usually a troll is found out and generally receive the reputation for trolling in that they may work themselves into the negative. It is a way to keep it somewhat honest.
If the feature were actually useful at convincing members to change their posting behavior and not make certain posts, it would make sense. I'm not convinced that it does.
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,134,829 times
Reputation: 36028
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD4020
Except that some people leave a nasty little message in a rep, which amounts to a personal attack. This requires a senior moderator to look into and address.
This is rare ... Out of my thousands of rep points, only two or three reppers made nasty comments ... Hardly a reason to abolish the rep system.
Negative rep points mean nothing to people who troll the site and enjoy creating trouble.
They'd heap those out quite plentifully, just to upset the people who enjoy the site while following the TOS.
And, we don't get too many complaints about negative comments left on rep points, not compared to, say, the number of reports we get of mischief-makers attempting to create discord on the board itself.
I can't see the value of negative reps except a way for people to vent their frustration at people they don't like.
And to them I say: Utilize the Ignore feature, already. Stop obsessing over people who annoy you.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
^^Agreed! NPR and my daily paper do reps by post, but not cumulatively. I like that, too. NPR's is especially nice, IMO, they show negative and positive points. The daily paper just does it mathmatically, e.g. if you get 10 positives and 1 negative, the rep for the post is 9.
^^Agreed! NPR and my daily paper do reps by post, but not cumulatively. I like that, too. NPR's is especially nice, IMO, they show negative and positive points. The daily paper just does it mathmatically, e.g. if you get 10 positives and 1 negative, the rep for the post is 9.
I like those systems, too.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
if you want non productive no laudable contribution like the the rep feature as a whole? 
