Reputation take 2

[Teddy]

Hi,

We've added a new reputation system that actually shows who is giving rep and negative rep. For those of you cry babies, you can also hide your reputation publicly.

Changes:

- This is per post and you need to add a comment to why you are voting that specific way.
- You need to have reputation power to perform reputation actions.

[Salmonella]

Is this also an experiment?

If not, the function seems unnecessary and useless, unlike the emoticon stuff you added. I like the concept of giving likes/respect to POSTS -not users- on certain forums but in this community even that will only serve to personify grudges, hatred and ''negativism''. 

[Axison]

Considering changing the forum theme too?

[Teddy]

This is something I would like to keep based on user input on the last experiment. This is "per post" but collective for the poster.

[Teddy]

Considering changing the forum theme too?

I would love too =)

[Salmonella]

The collective thing doesn't really serve a good purpose, though. What use does ''Teddy has no influence'', or ''Axis is looked down upon'' have next to people's profiles? What do you want users to do with this? Do you want them to aim for better rep, please a certain crowd that gives it out by making posts filled with popular opinions? Is this to do away counterweight to certain topics in the community like Monte was doing in the other topic?

Lots of stuff comes to mind but to say I see any good aspect of it would be a lie.

[Teddy]

I believe with a good balance we can use this to really begin to separate the trolls from the legitimate users of this forum. The way it is setup, those who want to simply use this to troll and abuse won't get far with it. Only reputable people can actually contribute to this system.

[Salmonella]

How?

How would you define 'legitimate users of this forum' by their use of this function? Is there such a thing as an illegitimate opinion on Argonath forum posts? What would trolling with this system consist of and who are really ''reputable people'' in this community? The ones online enough to get a ''veteran'' status? What kind of consequences will those who give negative rep to someone for no clear reason, where there may be a very good one, face? Will the forum administration actually keep up with everything that's going on in this oh so vivid, multi-platform community to be able to effectively judge what's legitimate and what's ''trolling''?

No, what happens is people are going to look at someone's profile, see they have a low or high reputation and with that, draw some sort of a conclusion about them based on that, depending on who it is and what kind of relation the two in this scenario have. It helps to fuel a very human character trait; prejudice.

[Teddy]

How?

How would you define 'legitimate users of this forum' by their use of this function? Is there such a thing as an illegitimate opinion on Argonath forum posts? What would trolling with this system consist of and who are really ''reputable people'' in this community? The ones online enough to get a ''veteran'' status? What kind of consequences will those who give negative rep to someone for no clear reason, where there may be a very good one, face? Will the forum administration actually keep up with everything that's going on in this oh so vivid, multi-platform community to be able to effectively judge what's legitimate and what's ''trolling''?

No, what happens is people are going to look at someone's profile, see they have a low or high reputation and with that, draw some sort of a conclusion about them based on that, depending on who it is and what kind of relation the two in this scenario have. It helps to fuel a very human character trait; prejudice.

We'll see how the community feels about it before making any more choices. I am totally fine with people using their reputation to determine credibility of a poster. This also isn't a matter of opinions as opposed to people who just spread and talk shit without any signification contributions. Not per-say trolls, but people who don't add to the value of conversation or do just run around trolling.

We will deal with consequences of those who give negative rep without legitimate reason. We will ensure the forum staff is aware of the responsibility and actually enforces it.

[Conk]

If we can downvote users, we should be able to downvote topics... like this one 

[Teddy]

I've added a poll, people can share their opinion on it there.

[Salmonella]

How is it not a matter of opinion, though? Should those giving out reputation points look at posts objectively and somehow determine if they're worthy of a point regardless of how they feel about it?

Determining one's credibility using a system like this can be extremely deceiving. That's one lesson the previous 'take' on this system taught us.

Definitions of trolling differ just as much as definitions of contributions. I think all voices should be heard, however contrarian, anti-establishment or pleasing to one's ass they may be and this implementation gives a whole dimension to the kinds of sounds we'll be hearing on the forum from now on. It's not gonna be very diverse I'm afraid.

I understood that things will be dealt with, I was just wondering how, since without a proper understanding of the entire social cohesion in Argonath that's gonna be nothing but double-sided razors and rectifications.

[[NP]Monte Montague]

I voted no.
This reputation system is just pleading to be abused & will encourage bad girly high school politics into Argonath RPG.

"Oh that guy has like 100 reps... he is like... big cajones and all... We should totally give him hugs & kisses"
"Oh look that cunt has -100 (hopefully you will all vote me down so I can be the first with -100 and be special), fuck him and everything about him, you know what? we should go and tell him hes worthless and he should fuck off; clearly the reputation system tells us its ok "

I'd say a vote no on this poll equates to a vote yes in the fight against bullying, prejudice, hatred, and fear mongering.  But hey ho we will see that in the way people vote.

We don't want Community where hatred and discrimination is justifiable and I think that allowing this will just cause more harm then any possible good.

[hunteD.]

I'm voting No



In my eyes it's useless and it will be abused a lot, they'll tell their friends to go give them +rep or give someone else -rep for no reason, It's useless and in my eyes it will turn into a bullying lol. Some people can't handle getting this shit on them, people will spam skype's and such to give -rep to their enemies. It's literally useless and time wasting. Loads of groups that are rivals will flood eachother with -rep.

[Leon.]

No.

I believe people here should form their opinions on others by themselves, not based off of what other people say about them - which is in this case is in the form of positive or negative reputation. Not to mention favoritism/bias, one-upping, so on...