gametechmods
Site Information => Site News and Feedback => Topic started by: Reier on March 30, 2016, 09:36:36 AM
-
disclaimer: no flame wars please. I know you people. keep it civil.
anyway
what is the point
people are just like "lol its rep who cares why its here!!!". Yeah it's dumb and ineffective. So...why have it then
It doesn't achieve its intended purpose, to show members who is respected and who isn't - which in itself only helps newbies who don't know all the users yet. But right now it's completely useless for them because of people just rating people randomly for "lols" ie andy currently has 14 for instance.
if someone has a legitimate point to keep the rep system that's fine but if your only reason to keep it is "because its funnyy xdddddd" that's a lame excuse.
Valid Reason — Things like “’cuz he’s cool” or "'cuz he's not cool" are not valid reasons for changing someone’s reputation. If you want to change someone's rep than please say what they did to earn their "cool" or "uncool" status. The logs will be scanned on a regular basis to ensure that people are providing valid reasons for changing someone else's rep. It’s all fun and games until an administrator sees it and decides to take away your rep powers.
yeah like anybody's done that in the past 2 years.
of course with a system like this people are going to abuse it and its almost impossible not to because there's no reason to anyway. that was like the entire point of the racecarlock episode was to show how pointless it was if people somehow didn't know already
i couldnt care less what my rep is or what anyone else's is because i know it's moot, but frankly i'm in favor of doing anything to make this forum less easy for stupid people to be stupid. right now it's just a vent for petty people to click a button and take it out on their target or just a lame avenue to spam memes and crap. as it is the only ones who may be helped by the system are the ones most likely to be hurt by it. I'm all in favor of removing it.
-
I like the rep system, but I'd prefer if everyone could +rep and -rep, like it used to be. It's good to have a system to indicate that you liked/didn't like a user's post without having to make a reply.
-
Yeah, I don't see the point either. We didn't have this 10 years ago and it was fine without it.
I can see how it can be abused, trolling some people for some meaningless reasons for it and attacking someone's opinion, which isn't valid enough to warrant it.
-
I mean, if we have to have it at all, I guess we can just let the members who are mature and trusted by the community to have it and let those who are just using to troll people should just lose it. But otherwise, I'm fine with it just gone. Maybe if there were true incentives for positive rep from respected members, then maybe I'd have a reason to stick with it and have a reason to even care for it.
-
I like the rep system, but I'd prefer if everyone could +rep and -rep, like it used to be. It's good to have a system to indicate that you liked/didn't like a user's post without having to make a reply.
Well, other forums have a system in which you can like individual posts and not a rep system. From what you said, I'd imagine you'd like that better.
I dunno, it seems like something that can definitely be monitored if someone were to be given that specific task on the moderating team but it does seem to be so insignificant that monitoring it would be useless. I have never really had a strong opinion on this and I think I could probably be convinced either way, at this point. However, my current view is that, if we got rid of rep, it might make users more inclined to be a good member of the forum on a regular basis because they no longer have something already established for them (their rep) to tell the new guys how good they are. I don't know if anyone does anything here 'for the rep' but I suppose it would be a downside to get rid of the system if some people's good deeds were based on the assumption that they'd get rewarded with +rep later on. I also think that titles (AU, Vet, etc.) are a good way of judging who's a good person for a newbie to listen to, even though it isn't always reflected in their actions. On the other hand, the rep system isn't doing any damage to the forum and proportions are usually right (see Trov, Craaig, RedAce, etc.) Those blown out of proportion are HA and Racecarlock and I can't particularly think of any other user that has rep out of proportion with what they're actually like.
Basically, I'm teetering on the edge of wanting to remove the rep system but I could vote either way, so I'm going to abstain from the vote, for now.
-
This coming from the guy behind a movement to give a random inactive member 100 rep....
And despite all the shenanigans, decent members tend to have positive rep, while n00bs have negative rep, so it does serve its purpose to an extent.
-
I couldn't agree with you more, Reier. Rep is a virtually useless system, as those who can give or take rep just spam absolute sh**e with it. An example of this is how I quickly gained masses of -rep. Sure, I was a total noob and a bit of a dick back then, but I have nearly as much -rep as playzooki, and that's not good.
If you want to see some examples, just take a look:
(https://gametechmods.com/uploads/images/43288wp_ss_20160330_0001.png)
My personal favourites are "everyone else is doing it" and "gives better head than Reier"
-
I like the rep system, but I'd prefer if everyone could +rep and -rep, like it used to be. It's good to have a system to indicate that you liked/didn't like a user's post without having to make a reply.
Well, other forums have a system in which you can like individual posts and not a rep system. From what you said, I'd imagine you'd like that better.
I dunno, it seems like something that can definitely be monitored if someone were to be given that specific task on the moderating team but it does seem to be so insignificant that monitoring it would be useless. I have never really had a strong opinion on this and I think I could probably be convinced either way, at this point. However, my current view is that, if we got rid of rep, it might make users more inclined to be a good member of the forum on a regular basis because they no longer have something already established for them (their rep) to tell the new guys how good they are. I don't know if anyone does anything here 'for the rep' but I suppose it would be a downside to get rid of the system if some people's good deeds were based on the assumption that they'd get rewarded with +rep later on. I also think that titles (AU, Vet, etc.) are a good way of judging who's a good person for a newbie to listen to, even though it isn't always reflected in their actions. On the other hand, the rep system isn't doing any damage to the forum and proportions are usually right (see Trov, Craaig, RedAce, etc.) Those blown out of proportion are HA and Racecarlock and I can't particularly think of any other user that has rep out of proportion with what they're actually like.
Basically, I'm teetering on the edge of wanting to remove the rep system but I could vote either way, so I'm going to abstain from the vote, for now.
I'm actually on another forum that uses the "like" system. It's OK, but I prefer the rep system since you can -rep stupid posts, and a like counter doesn't really mean anything, whereas a rep counter is actually a decent indicator for newbies for whose advice to listen to in showcases.
I couldn't agree with you more, Reier. Rep is a virtually useless system, as those who can give or take rep just spam absolute sh**e with it. An example of this is how I quickly gained masses of -rep. Sure, I was a total noob and a bit of a dick back then, but I have nearly as much -rep as playzooki, and that's not good.
If you want to see some examples, just take a look:
(https://gametechmods.com/uploads/images/43288wp_ss_20160330_0001.png)
My personal favourites are "everyone else is doing it" and "gives better head than Reier"
tbh you gained a lot of -rep quickly for doing a lot of stupid stuff quickly. You gained rep back because you got better, I think it shows the system working.
-
In all fairness, I got muted before I could do a lot of stupid stuff. The rest of it is literally just spam. One of them says "pointless bumping", BECAUSE I mentioned that someone had bumped a thread pointlessly. Another, I believe is simply labelled "spam".
-
the problem isn't so much whether it's accurate or inaccurate, but that it's way too easy to exploit. and as there's no way/reason to moderate stupid reps there's not really much of a point for the system at all.
-
Well, I don't see everyone with rep powers exploiting it, so why not just restrict certain people from being able to affect rep?
-
the problem isn't so much whether it's accurate or inaccurate, but that it's way too easy to exploit. and as there's no way/reason to moderate stupid reps there's not really much of a point for the system at all.
But you only got butthurt about it when it started affecting you. ;)
-
Well, I don't see everyone with rep powers exploiting it, so why not just restrict certain people from being able to affect rep?
but the thing is it would be a pain in the butt to do all the time and it would be "subjective" etc, because nobody would stay consistent in their rep quality. its much easier to just ditch it.
either everyone should be able to do it or nobody imo. but everyone getting to do it would be a disaster so just don't.
-
Well, I don't see everyone with rep powers exploiting it, so why not just restrict certain people from being able to affect rep?
but the thing is it would be a pain in the butt to do all the time and it would be "subjective" etc, because nobody would stay consistent in their rep quality. its much easier to just ditch it.
either everyone should be able to do it or nobody imo. but everyone getting to do it would be a disaster so just don't.
If you see an unjustified rep you can just rep in the other direction to nullify it tho
-
It wouldn't be subjective if we were to judge those exploiting the system using the rules already stated about affecting rep. From then on, it wouldn't be difficult to just restrict rep powers from those who exploit the system if people raise a concern about a certain member.
Well, I don't see everyone with rep powers exploiting it, so why not just restrict certain people from being able to affect rep?
but the thing is it would be a pain in the butt to do all the time and it would be "subjective" etc, because nobody would stay consistent in their rep quality. its much easier to just ditch it.
either everyone should be able to do it or nobody imo. but everyone getting to do it would be a disaster so just don't.
If you see an unjustified rep you can just rep in the other direction to nullify it tho
However, that could just turn into a rep war between those two and clog up the karma change history of the unfortunate person they're fighting over.
-
It wouldn't be subjective if we were to judge those exploiting the system using the rules already stated about affecting rep. From then on, it wouldn't be difficult to just restrict rep powers from those who exploit the system if people raise a concern about a certain member.
Well, I don't see everyone with rep powers exploiting it, so why not just restrict certain people from being able to affect rep?
but the thing is it would be a pain in the butt to do all the time and it would be "subjective" etc, because nobody would stay consistent in their rep quality. its much easier to just ditch it.
either everyone should be able to do it or nobody imo. but everyone getting to do it would be a disaster so just don't.
If you see an unjustified rep you can just rep in the other direction to nullify it tho
However, that could just turn into a rep war between those two and clog up the karma change history of the unfortunate person they're fighting over.
With how infrequently rep is given ATM I don't think anyone cares enough to do that. Anyway you could set it so you can only rep someone once every X days? And give warnings for blatant abuse?
I think its a cool system and I would be disappointed if it were to go
-
But, imagine if someone were to do it for TRB and the amount of times he has received a -rep that contained an insufficient reason. That would definitely look very messy and those who want to keep his rep higher would probably just end up giving up.
I think keeping this system would probably mean reform and I wouldn't mind seeing that, even if it's just banning certain users from having rep powers.
-
But, imagine if someone were to do it for TRB and the amount of times he has received a -rep that contained an insufficient reason. That would definitely look very messy and those who want to keep his rep higher would probably just end up giving up.
I think keeping this system would probably mean reform and I wouldn't mind seeing that, even if it's just banning certain users from having rep powers.
Personally, I think having a 3-day cooldown (to encourage careful use) on repping a person (+ve or -ve) and giving XX% warning level for abuse, and opening it to everyone would be pretty cool. I don't think a week trial of whatever system would hurt either
-
But, imagine if someone were to do it for TRB and the amount of times he has received a -rep that contained an insufficient reason. That would definitely look very messy and those who want to keep his rep higher would probably just end up giving up.
I think keeping this system would probably mean reform and I wouldn't mind seeing that, even if it's just banning certain users from having rep powers.
Yeah, I we keep it at all, it DEFINITELY needs some changes.
-
or we just get rid of it and avoid all this crap because it adds nothing anyway
-
racecarlock
-
exactly
its pointless
-
Reputation is probably the most worthless thing on the site apart from gigafrost's fear/respect rating hogwash (that nobody's bothered updating for years btw).
If you look at the most recent upreps/downreps on the first 10 or so pages, half of them are just sh**posts, and the other half are MNB's (which are also sh**posts).
Some gems include:
pizza toppings
I DEFY YOU HEART MAN (<--- this one's mine btw)
gf93 pt cassius 2
me
know yourself
koll dod
squirrels
probably has had sex with a possum before (<--- also mine)
ayy lmao son
because he's a cuck
he just triggers me i guess
40
ban when
insulting a family man
he has gameranger now
along with pretty much every rep MNB has given, like I said earlier
plus if we get rid of it, it'll stop arbitrary "why did u guise downvote me!!!1" GF-esque situations.
and opening it to everyone would be pretty cool. I don't think a week trial of whatever system would hurt either
Fun fact: it was originally open to everybody to use, but people abused it and it was restricted to AUs/vets/mod/admin only.
-
It does allow new users to quickly point out those they should probably be listening to over others. It's also a nice, little incentive to those that do good stuff. It doesn't mean much but when it accumulates, like in Craaig's case, he knows that what he does/did is/was appreciated. Also, because it's pointless, it's also harmless, so there's no point in getting rid of it, surely.
And, for what AS pointed out, I get that MNB has been going off on people's rep lately but that's why a very simple solution is to ban a few people from repping others. The entire, harmless system doesn't have to go just because a few people abuse it.
-
It does allow new users to quickly point out those they should probably be listening to over others.
Also, because it's pointless, it's also harmless, so there's no point in getting rid of it, surely.
[...] but that's why a very simple solution is to ban a few people from repping others.
that's what the colored names are for tbh. what i'm saying is the system doesn't do its job because its so dang easy to exploit and doesn't really give an accurate image for the newbs- the only ones who would in theory benefit from the system.
thing is that its too easy to care about your rep. i know it means nothing but its still annoying to see permanent pointless insults on your userpage or "compliments" that mean squat. it's just dumb and i'm of the mindset that "if it's useless then get rid of it" as opposed to "if it's not harmful it's helpful"
besides like i said a few posts back you'll have to constantly be monitoring who gives rep "correctly" (and have to constantly be sifting through the rep logs :rage) and having to ban and unban people from giving rep and listen to people whining about being banned and yadda yadda and it'll get obnoxious really fast.
-
All you'd have to do for monitoring is to see someone's rep and think "ooh, that's not what it is usually, let's see what happened to it." It won't be a hassle to monitor and if someone is abusing the system, people will kick off, kind of like how this is cropping up due to MNB's antics. Also, you're saying that it doesn't give an accurate representation for the newbies, but, like I said, I can find a lot more instances in which rep is accurate and has not been exploited to the point of being inaccurate than not. All I can find is HA and Racecarlock. The only reason Racecarlock has a lot of rep is because you spearheaded a craze to get his rep up to 100. From what I have read from the op, I can only guess you did this to prove a point but for what cause? Before him, it was only HA and that's only because he and MNB have a gay relationship or something.
-
I've only been repping HA for like the past 3 weeks. Racecarlock came first actually. Also, besides Reir and HA my reps are mostly legit, even if the reason given isn't. Also Reier is now getting downrepped for caring about rep.
-
this is the kind of stuff i'm talking about. it's all pointless, so why have it?
-
Because, it has a point! Even if it's minor, such as allowing noobs to determine who to turn to for help or justify a response to, it serves at least some purpose. It's a divide between those without coloured names because, otherwise, new members may not listen to those without coloured names because they don't know how to distinguish playzooki from Geice. It's also a nice and quick way to scold those in the community who are not following rules or just not being a nice guy in general.
When thinking about this, disregard what is currently happening and think of what purpose the system actually serves. After that, we can see if we can fix what is currently happening to the system.
-
I've only been repping HA for like the past 3 weeks. Racecarlock came first actually. Also, besides Reir and HA my reps are mostly legit, even if the reason given isn't. Also Reier is now getting downrepped for caring about rep.
Oh? So "enjoyed daddies cummies" and "gives better head than Reier " are legit reasons?
-
it has no point, no matter what anyone says. Noobs don't look at rep.
it's like, kinda fun, but that's it. it would be (and was) way more fun if everyone could vote. either do that or get rid of it. the elitism of rep is the dumbest part of it
-
it has no point, no matter what anyone says. Noobs don't look at rep.
it's like, kinda fun, but that's it. it would be (and was) way more fun if everyone could vote. either do that or get rid of it. the elitism of rep is the dumbest part of it
Quoted for truth. Thus could not be any less accurate.
-
I've only been repping HA for like the past 3 weeks. Racecarlock came first actually. Also, besides Reir and HA my reps are mostly legit, even if the reason given isn't. Also Reier is now getting downrepped for caring about rep.
Oh? So "enjoyed daddies cummies" and "gives better head than Reier " are legit reasons?
Nope, you just didn't deserve to have -25 rep anymore.
-
Allowing everyone to affect rep wouldn't be a good idea. I wouldn't like to think that deciding whether or not someone is reputable is down to those who are not reputable themselves. Rep, to me, allows those who are reputable in the community to stand out, at least somewhat, without having to give everyone a yellow name. I think the principle of rep still stands and it allows others to see how reputable you actually are in the eyes of those that have been granted coloured names for being reputable and good members of the community themselves.
-
it has no point, no matter what anyone says. Noobs don't look at rep.
it's like, kinda fun, but that's it. it would be (and was) way more fun if everyone could vote. either do that or get rid of it. the elitism of rep is the dumbest part of it
This, it's just a fun part of the forum. I was disappointed when it was made AU-only and I'd be disappointed if it was removed
Allowing everyone to affect rep wouldn't be a good idea. I wouldn't like to think that deciding whether or not someone is reputable is down to those who are not reputable themselves. Rep, to me, allows those who are reputable in the community to stand out, at least somewhat, without having to give everyone a yellow name. I think the principle of rep still stands and it allows others to see how reputable you actually are in the eyes of those that have been granted coloured names for being reputable and good members of the community themselves.
Make it so you can only -rep people with less rap than you. Noobs should be able to show appreciation for help given.
-
Allowing everyone to affect rep wouldn't be a good idea. I wouldn't like to think that deciding whether or not someone is reputable is down to those who are not reputable themselves. Rep, to me, allows those who are reputable in the community to stand out, at least somewhat, without having to give everyone a yellow name. I think the principle of rep still stands and it allows others to see how reputable you actually are in the eyes of those that have been granted coloured names for being reputable and good members of the community themselves.
Make it so you can only -rep people with less rap than you. Noobs should be able to show appreciation for help given.
Well, that's also in the hands of AU's and up because, if they see that someone's been helping out the noobs lately, they can reward that person. It's not a bad idea, but I think it'd be much easier for Trov to implement if those without coloured names could simply not affect rep at all.
-
what happened to roboteers being able to rep
seriously
-
who cares
-
i used the rep and the names to see who is cool here on the forums when i made bots just starting out.
-
I haven't been repped since last year. I don't think it tells you that much about a member tbh.
-
I'm the most hated member in the community, yes
-
I'm the most hated member in the community, yes
Nope, ACAMS is.
lol
on an other note, we should keep it. i like reading MNB's meme rep up/downs. xddd
-
I'm the most hated member in the community, yes
Nope, ACAMS is.
but he cheated
-
keep it, let everyone past Heavyweight + colored names use it. Done.
If not the above, then remove it.
-
keep it, let everyone past Heavyweight + colored names use it. Done.
If not the above, then remove it.
^ This
I don't see the harm in opening it up for a week or 2 to see how it goes. If it goes well then great, if not it can be disabled.
-
I think everybody (heavyweights and higher + color names) should be able to use it but if someone acts up it could be taken away from just them.
-
I don't pay much attention to it.
Martymidget basically only logs in now to downrep me and when I notice I'm just like 'oh okay'.
I don't think it's worth paying attention to, just a number.
-
I don't mind it that much. Its a good thing for instand feedback but people tend to abuse it some times.
-
i like it that we are meta-complaining about rep... is this worth a -rep ? :trollface
I don't mind it. Of course it is ripe for abuse but it is generally accurate in, as Yugitom said :
It does allow new users to quickly point out those they should probably be listening to over others. It's also a nice, little incentive to those that do good stuff. It doesn't mean much but when it accumulates, like in Craaig's case, he knows that what he does/did is/was appreciated. Also, because it's pointless, it's also harmless, so there's no point in getting rid of it, surely.
we just need to stop the mnb nonsense.
-
I don't pay much attention to it.
Martymidget basically only logs in now to downrep me and when I notice I'm just like 'oh okay'.
I do still lurk, though I've lost interest in pretty much everything RA2 related. Lurking for something that might bring it back mostly.
you're the only person who I don't rep seriously though (mostly); because you don't care and everyone with half a brain knows that you're one of the best members.
-
Hey MM, if dsl2.2 hasn't resparked your interest hopefully RA3 will (and everybody else's interest for that matter).
Back on topic and I don't believe rep is particularly important at the moment. In the past people seemed to get more wound up about it, but I think that the coloured titles are more obvious signs of reputation to n00bz nowadays.
It may do little/no good, but i dont see how it does any harm since it shouldnt take long for newcomers to be able to seperate the helpful posters from the attention-seekers themselves, so is it even worth removing?
If you want the rep system to be more relevant again, then maybe it should be available to all so it can police itself, or have a set amount of reps per year for each user, or even perhaps reset it on a yearly basis. There are many more options for reform rather than removal.
-
keep it, let everyone past Heavyweight + colored names use it. Done.
If not the above, then remove it.
That, and maybe reset the reputation of certain members if they are not properly represented by it (ACAMS -100? What even?) if we want to make it a more serious affair. That, and remove certain member's priviledges to it. If you wanted a total reform for some reason then you could totally reset rep but that's probably not going to be necessary.
-
keep it, let everyone past Heavyweight + colored names use it. Done.
If not the above, then remove it.
That, and maybe reset the reputation of certain members if they are not properly represented by it (ACAMS -100? What even?) if we want to make it a more serious affair. That, and remove certain member's priviledges to it. If you wanted a total reform for some reason then you could totally reset rep but that's probably not going to be necessary.
acams's rep is obviously a joke.
-
keep it, let everyone past Heavyweight + colored names use it. Done.
If not the above, then remove it.
That, and maybe reset the reputation of certain members if they are not properly represented by it (ACAMS -100? What even?) if we want to make it a more serious affair. That, and remove certain member's priviledges to it. If you wanted a total reform for some reason then you could totally reset rep but that's probably not going to be necessary.
acams's rep is obviously a joke.
Thank you, Captain Obvious.
-
keep it, let everyone past Heavyweight + colored names use it. Done.
If not the above, then remove it.
That, and maybe reset the reputation of certain members if they are not properly represented by it (ACAMS -100? What even?) if we want to make it a more serious affair. That, and remove certain member's priviledges to it. If you wanted a total reform for some reason then you could totally reset rep but that's probably not going to be necessary.
acams's rep is obviously a joke.
Thank you, Captain Obvious.
-rep for being rude
-
keep it, let everyone past Heavyweight + colored names use it. Done.
If not the above, then remove it.
That, and maybe reset the reputation of certain members if they are not properly represented by it (ACAMS -100? What even?) if we want to make it a more serious affair. That, and remove certain member's priviledges to it. If you wanted a total reform for some reason then you could totally reset rep but that's probably not going to be necessary.
acams's rep is obviously a joke.
Thank you, Captain Obvious.
-rep for being rude
Well, I am scarred for life.
-
keep it, let everyone past Heavyweight + colored names use it. Done.
If not the above, then remove it.
That, and maybe reset the reputation of certain members if they are not properly represented by it (ACAMS -100? What even?) if we want to make it a more serious affair. That, and remove certain member's priviledges to it. If you wanted a total reform for some reason then you could totally reset rep but that's probably not going to be necessary.
acams's rep is obviously a joke.
Thank you, Captain Obvious.
Which means no-one is actually going to take his rep seriously, except you, who seems to think it's a point worth discussing.
-
keep it, let everyone past Heavyweight + colored names use it. Done.
If not the above, then remove it.
That, and maybe reset the reputation of certain members if they are not properly represented by it (ACAMS -100? What even?) if we want to make it a more serious affair. That, and remove certain member's priviledges to it. If you wanted a total reform for some reason then you could totally reset rep but that's probably not going to be necessary.
acams's rep is obviously a joke.
Thank you, Captain Obvious.
Which means no-one is actually going to take his rep seriously, except you, who seems to think it's a point worth discussing.
Do you not realise that I was joking?
-
That's enough, both of you.
Will apply warns if you guys can't behave.
-
i'll be watching this thread as well. considering this is a somewhat flame-prone topic BUT a good discussion nontheless, no flaming or trolling will be tolerated.
-
Honestly, I'm on board with the trial period idea. Give everyone past X number of posts rep power for like a week or so and see what happens.
-
Reputation on a forum really depends on how seriously posters generally take it. Obviously, you'll have dissidents and staunch supporters regardless of the respect the system has in place, but the best indication is not the support of the system, it's the respect.
In my opinion, the rep system here is worthless to the point that I really don't care whether it stays or goes. If you need or are concerned about numerical validation through a forum concerning a relatively obscure 12-year old game, you probably need better activities.
-
Playing Devil's Advocate - not necessarily my own views - I could argue that more limitations over less would be the way to make this fairer.
If only select people can rep, people that could be 'chosen' to spot the good and bad over the forum, you add some accountability which is always important.
Also, with more people able to rep you just end up with any action getting more response, so if someone did something 'nooby', they would end up with minus a lot more than they may deserve.
Just a few points to discuss.
-
If the staff really do value its importance for newbies to recognize helpful users, there should be a drop-down list of reasons that you can select from when you give rep and abusers should simply have their privileges taken away. Otherwise, it can stay as a fun but meaningless way to show appreciation for other users - if people think the numbers will confuse new people, just don't show the totals or only show the sum of the 5 most recent actions.
-
Playing Devil's Advocate - not necessarily my own views - I could argue that more limitations over less would be the way to make this fairer.
If only select people can rep, people that could be 'chosen' to spot the good and bad over the forum, you add some accountability which is always important.
Also, with more people able to rep you just end up with any action getting more response, so if someone did something 'nooby', they would end up with minus a lot more than they may deserve.
Just a few points to discuss.
And good actions would result in more +ve rep. It's all relative.
-
If the staff really do value its importance for newbies to recognize helpful users, there should be a drop-down list of reasons that you can select from when you give rep and abusers should simply have their privileges taken away. Otherwise, it can stay as a fun but meaningless way to show appreciation for other users - if people think the numbers will confuse new people, just don't show the totals or only show the sum of the 5 most recent actions.
Playing Devil's Advocate - not necessarily my own views - I could argue that more limitations over less would be the way to make this fairer.
If only select people can rep, people that could be 'chosen' to spot the good and bad over the forum, you add some accountability which is always important.
Also, with more people able to rep you just end up with any action getting more response, so if someone did something 'nooby', they would end up with minus a lot more than they may deserve.
Just a few points to discuss.
Why not have the drop down list, but then also have the other members write extra comments upon this one down or up rep so that it only counts as a single point but can have lots of people's inputs?
-
Y'all are turning this into a serious discussion when it was really just Reier being butthurt that I repped him down a couple of times.
-
He raises interesting points about abuse of the system though in fairness.
-
Well, he raises the point that it can be abused and has been but it's not as if we have loads of AU's and vets running around attacking people's rep for no reason at a large scale. Like MNB says, I just think this issue has been pushed due to his recent actions and I think Reier's argument of abuse is blown out of proportion, as it would be if you only looked at the change history very recently with what MNB has been doing.
Plenty of ideas have cropped up to improve the system such as a 'cool down' system so rep can only be affected by a certain person so many times a day and there's also the simple method of choosing those we deem shouldn't be affecting rep and stripping them of their power to do so. I think there's no major issue with rep, especially not to remove it.
-
i like the idea of a rep system, mainly cause i like reading the karma stats page and that it really doesn't hurt anything.
but thinking that rep actually helps noobs is pretty dumb imo. like sage said, noobs generally don't look at rep/understand it and anyone who has lurked for more than a week is going to know who they should and shouldn't listen to. besides, most new users are gone within a day
-
Well, it's also a matter of respect. A +rep is kind of like a pat on the back for something someone thinks you've done good at. How that differs from just posting 'good job' is that, after a while, you and others get to see how much respect and 'pats on the back' you've garnered and that's a nice thing to look back on and it really puts into perspective how good a member someone has been when you look at outstanding rep counts such as Craaig and RedAce's.
And, just like a pat on the back in real life, no one really cares but it's a nice thing to have regardless.
-
If you want a legit suggestion. The one other small forum I frequent has a rep system where you can only give positive rep, and your member ranking, instead of by post count is based on how many rep ups you've gotten. If you want a system that's good at pointing out who's most respected for newbies, that's a pretty good one. And you don't have the drama of "waaah someone repped me down and it's not fair!" (a la GF39, Reier.)
-
Maybe we should just all agree that rep is like religios belief, everybody has one, some people care too much about it, and in the end it really doesnt matter anyway.
-
Rep in a nutshell:
It does matter, but only as far as a general indicator of good behavior/who should be trusted in the forums, also as a general way to communicate and say "thank you for what you did" or "no, you shouldn't do that" to someone else.
Fighting and causing drama over a few points of rep isn't worth it, however someone like Andrew having 15 rep is problematic. See my former point about it.
Rep is only as important as it's pragmatic uses are. Otherwise, it isn't. But yet, it should be kept because of those points I brought.
Simply, rep abuse should be fought, as in MNB's sucking Andrew's dick or massive rep circlejerks which are no longer common since not everyone can rep.
-
Mfw nobody cared when it was racecarlock getting 100 rep. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :cool:
He's perma banned anyway, it's not like newbies are going to be tricked into thinking he's a respected memeber. (See what I did there?) :gawe:
-
If you want a legit suggestion. The one other small forum I frequent has a rep system where you can only give positive rep, and your member ranking, instead of by post count is based on how many rep ups you've gotten. If you want a system that's good at pointing out who's most respected for newbies, that's a pretty good one. And you don't have the drama of "waaah someone repped me down and it's not fair!" (a la GF39, Reier.)
Is that a Xenforo system by any chance? That's one of the few rep systems that can actually work for its intended purpose.
-
Rep in a nutshell:
It does matter, but only as far as a general indicator of good behavior/who should be trusted in the forums, also as a general way to communicate and say "thank you for what you did" or "no, you shouldn't do that" to someone else.
Fighting and causing drama over a few points of rep isn't worth it, however someone like Andrew having 15 rep is problematic. See my former point about it.
Rep is only as important as it's pragmatic uses are. Otherwise, it isn't. But yet, it should be kept because of those points I brought.
Simply, rep abuse should be fought, as in MNB's sucking Andrew's dick or massive rep circlejerks which are no longer common since not everyone can rep.
I agree with everything being said here.
-
i'm cool and gtms top dsl builder apparently can i rep people please
-
Rep in a nutshell:
It does matter, but only as far as a general indicator of good behavior/who should be trusted in the forums, also as a general way to communicate and say "thank you for what you did" or "no, you shouldn't do that" to someone else.
Fighting and causing drama over a few points of rep isn't worth it, however someone like Andrew having 15 rep is problematic. See my former point about it.
Rep is only as important as it's pragmatic uses are. Otherwise, it isn't. But yet, it should be kept because of those points I brought.
Simply, rep abuse should be fought, as in MNB's sucking Andrew's dick or massive rep circlejerks which are no longer common since not everyone can rep.
I agree with everything being said here.
lol i was just paraphrasing your own words
i'm cool and gtms top dsl builder apparently can i rep people please
wait, what ? you aren't an AU ? this needs to be solved
gtms top dsl builder
Them's fighting words.
-
lol mnb muted
-
Rep in a nutshell:
It does matter, but only as far as a general indicator of good behavior/who should be trusted in the forums, also as a general way to communicate and say "thank you for what you did" or "no, you shouldn't do that" to someone else.
Fighting and causing drama over a few points of rep isn't worth it, however someone like Andrew having 15 rep is problematic. See my former point about it.
Rep is only as important as it's pragmatic uses are. Otherwise, it isn't. But yet, it should be kept because of those points I brought.
Simply, rep abuse should be fought, as in MNB's sucking Andrew's dick or massive rep circlejerks which are no longer common since not everyone can rep.
I agree with everything being said here.
lol i was just paraphrasing your own words
i'm cool and gtms top dsl builder apparently can i rep people please
wait, what ? you aren't an AU ? this needs to be solved
gtms top dsl builder
Them's fighting words.
voted it by the extremely huge plurality of 4 to 3 people :cool:
-
(https://gametechmods.com/uploads/images/94774asd.png)
"Stop liking what I don't like!"
Classic 2013.
-
(https://gametechmods.com/uploads/images/94774asd.png)
"Stop liking what I don't like!"
Classic 2013.
You mean you weren't trying to purposefully cause drama with your furry avatars back then ? right son
-
No idea what's going on, but my rep has suddenly shot up by, like, eight points.
-
No idea what's going on, but my rep has suddenly shot up by, like, eight points.
Maybe we just love you that much <3
Or MNB is righting some wrongly dished out relative rep. Either is possible.
-
*Triggered that rep is now -9*
-
But the odd thing is that the karma changes aren't any different. I mean, there's no new comments.
-
(https://gametechmods.com/uploads/images/94774asd.png)
"Stop liking what I don't like!"
Classic 2013.
You mean you weren't trying to purposefully cause drama with your furry avatars back then ? right son
I never did.
-
trov was going through and deleting all the bs reps
-
pretty sure just all of mnb's reps got deleted tbh
-
pretty sure just all of mnb's reps got deleted tbh
Nah, at least one from J got deleted too. He had given me a +rep with the message "pizza toppings" that has since been banished to Tartarus.
-
Now that I've gotten some sleep, allow me to explain myself.
The poll was a wash so I decided to clean it up rather than delete the whole thing. If you got positive or negative rep for reasons that didn't make sense or no reason at all, those records were removed. If the person who applied the rep wanted it to be kept, they should have used a reason that followed the rules. The members who made the biggest mess have had their rep powers removed. I could have saved some time by wiping the whole system clean but I thought it was important for me to get a list of the culprits (not just the people that had their rep powers removed).
After removing all of the blatant trash, the list looks better and I plan to keep it this way. When I get the chance, I'll look into solutions as opposed to band-aids but, in the meantime, stop making a joke of things.
-
Impressive you got through them all Trov GGWP
Now if everybody remains calm, rep can once again at least mean something (kinda i think).
-
I know taking away rep privileges was supposed to be a quick and simple solution, but I don't see why it couldn't work in the long run as well.
After reading over the thread, it seems like those who voted No think the system is just useless. I don't think that's the case; at the very least the idea of being able to give and receive quick feedback (without anyone else seeing it) should hold some value. For making it public, I can see why people don't want to be misjudged based on a number, but if only responsible users are allowed to rep then you should have around what you deserve. Again, a compromise could be to only show the 5 most recent rep changes if people are still worried about abuse. But personally I think simply limiting privileges to the responsible users is enough to make a public system work. The one thing I would add is to have a clear set of rules written out to ensure every change has a legitimate reason, which could be supported by the drop-down list I mentioned earlier.
Also if people feel like they're missing out on the fun aspect, you can let regular users do it except their changes don't affect the public score. This would also give an idea of whether or not someone would rep responsibly if they had the actual power.
-
Just a quick question. How far back are these recorded? Because I have no idea where my rep is from apart from "good meme"
-
Now that I've gotten some sleep, allow me to explain myself.
The poll was a wash so I decided to clean it up rather than delete the whole thing. If you got positive or negative rep for reasons that didn't make sense or no reason at all, those records were removed. If the person who applied the rep wanted it to be kept, they should have used a reason that followed the rules. The members who made the biggest mess have had their rep powers removed. I could have saved some time by wiping the whole system clean but I thought it was important for me to get a list of the culprits (not just the people that had their rep powers removed).
After removing all of the blatant trash, the list looks better and I plan to keep it this way. When I get the chance, I'll look into solutions as opposed to band-aids but, in the meantime, stop making a joke of things.
rip repeating digits reputation
-
Gonna be that guy now. Worked hard to build some respect to my rep counter with building and advice, and I'm back down to 1. Sweet.
-
but, in the meantime, stop making a joke of things.
I feel like the reason people treated rep as a joke (myself included) is probably because it is a joke. One of the things that people have been told time and time again when they say "wowie my rep went down u guise sux" is that rep is just a number on the internet and that it doesn't really matter, and they're right. Rep is so incredibly flawed right now that getting rid of it or completely reworking it would be way better than what it currently is. Rep in general mostly works (people who contribute in a meaningful way generally have + rep, people who post dumb things generally have - rep), but the exact value of how much rep in either direction seems to be completely random and all over the place.
For example, why does Serge have 5 rep when he's contributed multiple tools that furthered modding RA2, compared to toAst who's 5 rep can be summed up with "made some funny posts". How come Lemonism has 15+ rep for basically "making cool bots" when Sage only has 10, considering he did the same thing for far longer and way more frequently? How did Jonzu manage to amass negative a billion rep? Certainly his drama queen asshattery (which was mostly in junkyard anyway IIRC) would validate at least some antireputation, but wouldn't his frequent showcasing and hosting of multiple tournaments cancel that out for the most part? How come Joeblo has ~10 rep for doing a lot of tournaments and RA2 modding progress (not to mention being a moderator), while I have ~20 for doing the same thing?
(nothing against you personally Lemonism/toAst, just using you as examples )
Reputation doesn't actually reflect what someone's done for RA2. It really seems that it's mainly a popularity contest as opposed to a measuring how much people have done for RA2, along with not taking contributions made before the latest rep reset into consideration. When it doesn't actually mean anything important, why take it seriously? A spam rep has about as much worth as "funny post!" or "shut up".
This is as opposed to marking people AU/vet, which is at least kind of an indicator of who's done things for furthering RA2, and honestly makes rep a bit redundant. People can get colored titles that say "this guy's good with robits", and you can get numbers that (supposedly) say "this guy's good with robits". Why? IMO you should keep the less flawed system and scrap the other one.
BTW, you said you cleaned up the garbage reps, but you didn't even get all of them. That might be because you decided to manually go through the bazillion pages of meme reps. 25 reps per page, (currently) 51 pages, and assuming you went through all of them means you reviewed roughly 1275 reputation changes... wow. I actually happened to be on when you started doing this, and you were undertaking all this work at 2 or 3 AM. Don't do that to yourself dude. :dumb)
-
You have a very valid point. The only reason Serge doesn't have as much rep as me or anyone else you'd think perhaps deserves it less is because those that hand out rep don't do it as an obligation and do it on a whim. I understand that the system is useless when you look at it like that but I don't see why people can't just see the system as something that just 'is' and is a part of the forum. I was not part of GTM prior to the introduction of reputation, so the rep system has always been there for me and I haven't really questioned it or looked too much into it until lately, it's just always been there. I never saw Serge and toAst as equals (even though Serge would have had more rep than toAst at the time, this is just an example) because of their equal rep. When I ever take notice of rep, I never usually compare it to someone else's and then make judgments and compare, I would make simple judgments on that one person and the rep they have. It also comes with context. I know how toAst is reputable as, whenever I would see him, it'd be him making a 'funny' post. I know how Serge is reputable as he's a Technical Adviser and I usually see him (when lurking past threads) posting about RA2 mods and the like.
Basically, the furthest someone would go into delving into someone's rep is, "is it positive or negative?" Not, "is it higher than that other builder/modder/member?" I know that doesn't excuse misrepresentation but I do think those that argue to remove the system only focus that it doesn't add anything. So, why complain? Why can't it be something GTM has? Something in GTM that just 'is'. We don't necessarily care or know why it's there in the first place but we don't mind living alongside it.
That being said, why was rep introduced? If we can ascertain why it was made in the first place, perhaps we can make things right in order to achieve the goal it set out for.
-
It's funny, I leave with my rep on 0 but when I come back it's -3. How or why is beyond me but it's part of the reason I'm leaving.
I remember when it used to mean something, if you had worked goddamn hard you deserved something in return,but as someone starts abusing this everyone that could jumped on the bandwagon "haha lol it's funny to downgrade someone for doing nothing" or "he hasn't been here for ages let's put him at the very top rank for nothing" why?
When I first joined reputation... was reputation! A symbol of how much effect you had on the site. If you were a great builder, an awesome tech guy, or a troll with a great number of downvotes. Now, what is it worth? If you've done something good... what recognition do you get? I'm not saying that from a personal viewpoint with my builds, I'm stating a point.
You guys will probably down my rep even more for this, but dammit at least I tried to be helpful and make contributions to the site that newbies and others could find helpful. If I was another user and went on to my guides, I'd probably think bad of myself due to the reputation I had.
"Reputation" is a reputation. Not a stupid number to be messed with. It's a mark of how good you are on the site.
-
Dude rep meant nothing before you got to GTM.
And the reason yours went down was explained by Trov, all the stupid reps were removed. Also mine went down by twice what yours did. Do I care? No, it's a largely irrelevant number. Chill yo, it's not the end of the world.
-
Dude rep meant nothing before you got to GTM.
And the reason yours went down was explained by Trov, all the stupid reps were removed. Also mine went down by twice what yours did. Do I care? No, it's a largely irrelevant number. Chill yo, it's not the end of the world.
Yeah but we could still do something about that instead of just say there's nothing to worry about it. I feel like I'm one of the worst members around here with this reputation.
-
What do we do then?
Resetting rep isn't an answer if your argument for rep being important is that new guys make judgements based on it as then anyone new will see literally everyone on equal footing.
-
Let everyone above a certain no. of posts rep, hand out warnings/bans for abuse of the system. This makes it actually useful.
-
Let everyone above a certain no. of posts rep, hand out warnings/bans for abuse of the system. This makes it actually useful.
then banish people for things the staff sees as abusing but the person didn't make others complain about the staff attacking the staff making the staff banish them makes people complain about the staff attacking the staff...
-
What do we do then?
Resetting rep isn't an answer if your argument for rep being important is that new guys make judgements based on it as then anyone new will see literally everyone on equal footing.
Well, that's only temporary unless by resetting you mean removing.
I don't think the rep system is flawed, IF the people who can do it follow the guidelines. Like Mr. AS mentioned, ranks do a better job of measuring lifetime contributions, but I like being able to see how appreciated some of the regular members are and I'm sure new people would too. Yes it is somewhat of a popularity contest because that's the basis of the system, you will get rep if those who can rep like you (which I think is fine, I value being able to see who is liked) but also for legitimate contributions or achievements. It especially shines in the case of underappreciated users without a rank (Geice) who would be otherwise indistinguishable from others like them. Sure, Sage wouldn't receive rep for posting a typical bot while a new user might get +3 instant rep for a Sage-level bot, but Sage is already an established builder with recognition as a Veteran and from the GTM Awards (he also gets rep every now and then anyway). Rep should be a (more subjective) complement to ranks, not a replacement.
-
Right, this is why rep was a thing, in the first place:
Its just a system to reward good/helpful/nice members, and help new members know who the people they can trust are.
I think the first point is enough to keep the system.
Also, why isn't this a thing? (Obviously, the boundaries would have to be lowered because no one has anything near 150 rep.)
right now only Admins can give out and remove reputation. However if you reach a "rep" level of 150, you will be able to give people positive rep. When you reach 300 you will be able to give both positive and negative.
-
right now only Admins can give out and remove reputation. However if you reach a "rep" level of 150, you will be able to give people positive rep. When you reach 300 you will be able to give both positive and negative.
That is actually perfect. +5 for +rep, +10 or 15 for both?
-
I think it is a good idea, but what about titles and rep ? Do we use this rep system just for non-colored usernames or do we use it for everyone ?
However, what I can see is rep wars being more frequent with this system, since now rep actually means something (the power to rep or not).
-
I kinda like the idea of the Fear/Respect thing from the Wiki. Something like that but more forum-y or advice-y ratings would be pretty cool.
-
I kinda like the idea of the Fear/Respect thing from the Wiki. Something like that but more forum-y or advice-y ratings would be pretty cool.
It didn't worked, because nobody cared enough in the long term.
-
new guys make judgements based on it
Again, I feel like AU titles already accomplish the "who's who" game. Maybe instead of getting rid of reputation entirely, it could be reworked to have a different enough purpose from titles to make it non-redundant. Here's a 5-minute MS paint mockup of what would be a good solution IMO:
(http://i.imgur.com/rkYFXYt.png)
(craaig's post in the pic is really cheesy, but you get the point)
It's basically an upvote/downvote system for individual posts rather than permanently marking someone's profile for something they posted. Similar systems are used on Facepunch and Reddit. People can upvote exemplary posts that new guys should be modeling thier own posts around and downvote bad posts. Voting should be fairly anonymous though, so people don't start flame wars over "HEY SO-N-SO WHY DID YOU DOWNVOTE MY POST? FITE ME IRL" or whatever. Although moderators/admins should be able to see who's doing what.
It should also be as available as possible to people so you don't have the same few people giving out all of the rep. Maybe you get voting privileges after being a member for a year? Feedback is appreciated.
-
My biggest problem with the whole rep thing going back is that it has no relation to the post or posts that you are being repped up or down on, so there's no visible correlation with what's going on. For that reason, the rep doesn't amount to anything whatsoever for the individual getting repped or the people who view the rep stats. If the system is supposed to show other members what a quality post looks like, then it is falling short in this aspect. And if you are getting repped down off of a single post, you would never know it. There is nothing telling you what specific behavior is causing the rep drop.
-
Isn't that what 'Reason' is for?
-
To an extent yes, but it's not like 'reason' has ever been used appropriately. And even if it was, it can still be pretty vague and users may fail to make the connection. I'm talking about having a real, solid correlation that can be seen with minimal chance for discrepancy.
-
To an extent yes, but it's not like 'reason' has ever been used appropriately. And even if it was, it can still be pretty vague and users may fail to make the connection. I'm talking about having a real, solid correlation that can be seen with minimal chance for discrepancy.
Then, maybe we could have a system where someone could dispute a rep change, so the reason for the rep change could be shown to a moderator/admin, and it can be up to their discretion whether or not it is valid. (Obviously, if a moderator or admin DID that rep change, it'd have to be directed towards other mods/admins)
-
Every change we make to the system suggested so far will just make mountains of drama and/or be tons of work to manage
The system doesn't do anything helpful despite what some people are saying, just ditch it already
-
Every change we make to the system suggested so far will just make mountains of drama and/or be tons of work to manage
The system doesn't do anything helpful despite what some people are saying, just ditch it already
Then make a person specifically rep mod if they are responsible, as its a small role, meaning they can dispute any dodgy rep themselves.
-
There's no reason to change or abolish the current rep system. There are no outstanding problems that I can see. However, perhaps more moderation of rep 'reasons' is needed but that isn't a tough or tasking job. I'd prove it by doing it myself, if I have to. I'll report all reps that do not have a sufficient reason and they'll be dealt with, simple as. Other than that, I cannot see anything wrong with rep.
-
There's no reason to change or abolish the current rep system. There are no outstanding problems that I can see.
The "outstanding problems" with rep is whole point of the thread though, innit?
-
The whole point of this thread has seemed to point out outstanding problems with how the rep system is being executed, something which can be easily monitored and something which is being dealt with right now, as seen with Trov's clean up of the karma history. Every problem with the rep system that has been put forward I have either tried to refute or I believe it's a minor detail not worth worrying about. I know people have put forward problems with the system but they haven't convinced me enough to want the system to be abolished, too.
-
tbh nothing has been said so far to warrant keeping it.
-
tbh nothing has been said so far to warrant keeping it.
You can say the same about removing it.
-
Both sides have no strong argument because it's so insignificant. As goose said, it was implemented to reward helpful and nice members and help new members know who they can trust. All I can say is that it is doing it's job fairly well because, as I've said before, it's pretty much just a pat on the back for nice members. It doesn't matter what people have been doing with the rep system that matters, because those people that have previously abused the system can be dealt with. It also doesn't matter that there is room for more people to abuse the system because it's restricted to AU's and up. As long as newly appointed AU's and up are reviewed by moderators as to whether or not they may abuse the system, it'll be fine.
-
My favourite system that I have encountered combines by-post ratings with overall stats.
Each post can be voted as "Informative", "I agree", "Funny", "Disagree" and "Off-Topic/Pointless".
Then on your profile your totals are displayed.
The main problem I see with our system is we don't have a consensus as to what a +/- rep should be for. SOme people give rep for useful advice or cool stuff they've done. Others give it for funny posts etc...
Having multiple options allows different forms of "good points" to be distinguished.
-
What do we do then?
Everything was better back in the day when there was no reputation.
My other suggestion is that everyone is able to rep.
-
I don't see a good reason to restrict it to coloured usernames only.
-
Those deemed reputable (via coloured names) are the ones who decided who else is reputable. That sounds good to me. I think that allowing more people to use the rep system allows more opportunity for some people to abuse the system. For example, when deciding whether someone should be an AU or Vet, the mods can decide then and there whether or not that member is suited to have rep powers. If it's a matter of, you can rep anyone as long as you have a certain amount of rep, that means mods have to actively keep an eye out for those that can rep and, if they abuse the system, the mods must act on it after the fact, when they could have debated it or prevented it from happening if it were simply AU's and above only being able to rep.
-
So does this mean that you guys are counting 'complaining about rep' as an actual reason to downrep someone?
Lookin' at you, Frenchie.
-
Don't worry. I received one of those on a post where I didn't even MENTION rep once. No idea if that's deleted, though.
EDIT: That one's deleted. Although, two are labelled 'spam' on completely random posts that aren't spam. Oh, well. I lost rep just for using a meme in a meme thread (looking at you Illuminaryar), so...
-
So does this mean that you guys are counting 'complaining about rep' as an actual reason to downrep someone?
Lookin' at you, Frenchie.
It always has been a reason.
-
So does this mean that you guys are counting 'complaining about rep' as an actual reason to downrep someone?
Lookin' at you, Frenchie.
It always has been a reason.
Yes, but you're downrepping for someone complaining about rep in a thread about rep. Don't you think that's, oh I don't know, total BS?
-
What do we do then?
make me au :^^^^^^)
-
So does this mean that you guys are counting 'complaining about rep' as an actual reason to downrep someone?
Lookin' at you, Frenchie.
It always has been a reason.
Yes, but you're downrepping for someone complaining about rep in a thread about rep. Don't you think that's, oh I don't know, total BS?
You misunderstand. "complaining about rep" as a repdown is complaining about your own rep going down, not arguing against the rep system.
-
Now that I've gotten some sleep, allow me to explain myself.
The poll was a wash so I decided to clean it up rather than delete the whole thing. If you got positive or negative rep for reasons that didn't make sense or no reason at all, those records were removed. If the person who applied the rep wanted it to be kept, they should have used a reason that followed the rules. The members who made the biggest mess have had their rep powers removed. I could have saved some time by wiping the whole system clean but I thought it was important for me to get a list of the culprits (not just the people that had their rep powers removed).
After removing all of the blatant trash, the list looks better and I plan to keep it this way. When I get the chance, I'll look into solutions as opposed to band-aids but, in the meantime, stop making a joke of things.
>stays up all night deleting reps
>rep is still meaningless
-
Now that I've gotten some sleep, allow me to explain myself.
The poll was a wash so I decided to clean it up rather than delete the whole thing. If you got positive or negative rep for reasons that didn't make sense or no reason at all, those records were removed. If the person who applied the rep wanted it to be kept, they should have used a reason that followed the rules. The members who made the biggest mess have had their rep powers removed. I could have saved some time by wiping the whole system clean but I thought it was important for me to get a list of the culprits (not just the people that had their rep powers removed).
After removing all of the blatant trash, the list looks better and I plan to keep it this way. When I get the chance, I'll look into solutions as opposed to band-aids but, in the meantime, stop making a joke of things.
>stays up all night deleting reps
>rep is still meaningless
>literally everything you do on this forum is meaningless
-
Now that I've gotten some sleep, allow me to explain myself.
The poll was a wash so I decided to clean it up rather than delete the whole thing. If you got positive or negative rep for reasons that didn't make sense or no reason at all, those records were removed. If the person who applied the rep wanted it to be kept, they should have used a reason that followed the rules. The members who made the biggest mess have had their rep powers removed. I could have saved some time by wiping the whole system clean but I thought it was important for me to get a list of the culprits (not just the people that had their rep powers removed).
After removing all of the blatant trash, the list looks better and I plan to keep it this way. When I get the chance, I'll look into solutions as opposed to band-aids but, in the meantime, stop making a joke of things.
>stays up all night deleting reps
>rep is still meaningless
>literally everything you do on this forum is meaningless
>everything you do in life has no meaning
>life is meaningless
>there is no purpose
>in the infinite timeline of the universe, your lifespan is insignificantly small
>an extra 40 years doesn't make a difference to the eons that you will miss, and there is literally nothing you can do about it
>may as well kys
-
>everything you do in life has no meaning
>life is meaningless
>there is no purpose
>in the infinite timeline of the universe, your lifespan is insignificantly small
>an extra 40 years doesn't make a difference to the eons that you will miss, and there is literally nothing you can do about it
>may as well kys
Who? Trov, MNB or Avalanche?
-
>everything you do in life has no meaning
>life is meaningless
>there is no purpose
>in the infinite timeline of the universe, your lifespan is insignificantly small
>an extra 40 years doesn't make a difference to the eons that you will miss, and there is literally nothing you can do about it
>may as well kys
Who? Trov, MNB or Avalanche?
really there's no reason anyone shouldn't tbh
-
Now that I've gotten some sleep, allow me to explain myself.
The poll was a wash so I decided to clean it up rather than delete the whole thing. If you got positive or negative rep for reasons that didn't make sense or no reason at all, those records were removed. If the person who applied the rep wanted it to be kept, they should have used a reason that followed the rules. The members who made the biggest mess have had their rep powers removed. I could have saved some time by wiping the whole system clean but I thought it was important for me to get a list of the culprits (not just the people that had their rep powers removed).
After removing all of the blatant trash, the list looks better and I plan to keep it this way. When I get the chance, I'll look into solutions as opposed to band-aids but, in the meantime, stop making a joke of things.
>stays up all night deleting reps
>rep is still meaningless
>literally everything you do on this forum is meaningless
rekt
-
>may as well kys
Just do it, dont let your dreams be dreams, kys.
-
Now that I've gotten some sleep, allow me to explain myself.
The poll was a wash so I decided to clean it up rather than delete the whole thing. If you got positive or negative rep for reasons that didn't make sense or no reason at all, those records were removed. If the person who applied the rep wanted it to be kept, they should have used a reason that followed the rules. The members who made the biggest mess have had their rep powers removed. I could have saved some time by wiping the whole system clean but I thought it was important for me to get a list of the culprits (not just the people that had their rep powers removed).
After removing all of the blatant trash, the list looks better and I plan to keep it this way. When I get the chance, I'll look into solutions as opposed to band-aids but, in the meantime, stop making a joke of things.
>stays up all night deleting reps
>rep is still meaningless
>literally everything you do on this forum is meaningless
rekt
by LRA2, I don't think so?
-
Now that I've gotten some sleep, allow me to explain myself.
The poll was a wash so I decided to clean it up rather than delete the whole thing. If you got positive or negative rep for reasons that didn't make sense or no reason at all, those records were removed. If the person who applied the rep wanted it to be kept, they should have used a reason that followed the rules. The members who made the biggest mess have had their rep powers removed. I could have saved some time by wiping the whole system clean but I thought it was important for me to get a list of the culprits (not just the people that had their rep powers removed).
After removing all of the blatant trash, the list looks better and I plan to keep it this way. When I get the chance, I'll look into solutions as opposed to band-aids but, in the meantime, stop making a joke of things.
>stays up all night deleting reps
>rep is still meaningless
>literally everything you do on this forum is meaningless
rekt
by LRA2, I don't think so?
The truth hurts.
-
i'm PRETTY sure you guys were warned not to start flaming beforehand...
-
Murphy's law + G(TM)odwins law: What can go wrong will go wrong, which corresponds to GTM+Godwin's law: The longer any discussion goes on, thr closer the topic gets to flaming and "kys" being mentioned/invoked and/or Hitler.
-
Tbh, all my reps were legit. Reier really is unfunny, Nary really doesn't appreciate ponies, TRB really did enjoy daddy's cummies, and HA is literally better than Hitler.
-
I locked this topick as it seems that everything about it has been said. If you have something importand to add pm me and I will unlock it again