Returning Banned Members

[diachi]

For every 100 rep, you have 1 rep power. IE you could give somebody 3 rep at the moment. I think when taking away rep it only takes away half as much. The rep system is mostly just a way of letting the forum 'self police'. Good contributing members will end up high into the green bars, while trolls, scammers and general trouble makers will go red.

Yep, negatives only take off half.

It is intended to self police, but hasn't always worked out that way ...

 

[Accutronitis]

So it's just a visual indication of other members overall opinion of you and how you behave here but other than that it serves no other purpose ?

 

[CurtisOliver]

Yes, if there rep is high, then they have done a lot for the forum. Whether it is through helping others, posting interesting stuff, or simply making the forum a positive place to be. The positives of gaining rep, is that you can give a more meaningful rep back. Like Razako and Diachi said, it is kind of a self policing/evaluating tool. If we see someone in the red bars. They are there for a reason usually, avoid. If someone has low rep, then they are probably new or don't post much. Those are the people that will benefit the most from high rep members.

 

[diachi]

So it's just a visual indication of other members overall opinion of you and how you behave here but other than that it serves no other purpose ?

Yep, basically just lets others know you can be trusted without having to do much further verification.

That said, there's members here that have good reputation as far as rep points go that I don't particularly trust. Best to form your own opinions too. We're too eager to dish out positive rep these days IMO.

 

[Accutronitis]

Yep, basically just lets others know you can be trusted without having to do much further verification.

That said, there's members here that have good reputation as far as rep points go that I don't particularly trust. Best to form your own opinions too. We're too eager to dish out positive rep these days IMO.

So it's accuracy is questionable ? That's not very good......

 

[diachi]

So it's accuracy is questionable ? That's not very good......

Not really, anyone that's an outright troll/scammer/problem will have negative rep. You can also go to peoples profiles and see who left them rep, for which post, when and any comments left with the rep to get a more complete picture.

I just don't implicitly trust someone because they have a positive rep, other people are more trusting than I. I need to see their actions/attitude prove they are reliable as well as see their rep from other members being good before dealing with them.

Yes, if there rep is high, then they have done a lot for the forum. Whether it is through helping others, posting interesting stuff, or simply making the forum a positive place to be. The positives of gaining rep, is that you can give a more meaningful rep back. Like Razako and Diachi said, it is kind of a self policing/evaluating tool. If we see someone in the red bars. They are there for a reason usually, avoid. If someone has low rep, then they are probably new or don't post much. Those are the people that will benefit the most from high rep members.

I disagree a little with that first sentence, there's people I've seen with high rep that haven't really contributed much, at least in my opinion. In fact - some that come to mind have been problematic in the past and are even returning banned members. I feel we should be a little more cautious with them. That said, it's up to the community, not me.

 

[Razako]

Yep, basically just lets others know you can be trusted without having to do much further verification.

That said, there's members here that have good reputation as far as rep points go that I don't particularly trust. Best to form your own opinions too. We're too eager to dish out positive rep these days IMO.

Part of the problem is how the system encourages rep spamming just so you can give it to a favorite, or hated member again. This was particularly notable during the sci-fi lasers mess. Everybody kept wanted to neg rep TheJoker301 into the red, so they would just go and spam positive rep on everyone else to refresh their rep giving ability. You would have new members end up with hundreds of rep in a day just by posting a negative thread about sci-fi or Eitan. I think it would be better if there were simply a set timer on giving a member rep again.

 

[Alaskan]

One member used to find dead or inactive accounts and positive rep them to allow him to swing around and neg rep someone he was miffed at over and over again. I can only imagine he did this because he did not feel most active members deserved a positive rep.

Also, there was one member in the past who had huge amounts of rep, at least, compared to most other members. Due to this, too many members were afraid he would neg them so let him get away with being extremely sarcastic as well as negging some members without a word against his actions, due to fearing a neg from him. This was when few members had more than 100 rep points which were hard won. After I saw that going on, I took it on to plus rep everyone who was being a positive member, or at least maintaining harmony in the group. I repped 10 people a day every single day for two years. I believe t this is probably why we have members with such high reps now. Today, reps don't mean what they used to, relatively new members, even new members who tend to be an arse can get 300 points in just a short time now. This has produced another problem, now we have part time trolls who can get a positive rep and the numbers keep growing, making the rep system rather useless anymore.

 

[diachi]

I'll link this here for our newer members that may not be aware:

http://laserpointerforums.com/f37/rep-system-not-moderated-96562.html

You can get a rep removed if it's one you left mistakenly though. For example, I've accidentally left negative reps when I've intended to leave positive reps - I've had the negatives removed in that case. That's pretty much the only time that'll happen.

You're not going to get one removed because you feel someone left you negative rep unfairly or anything like that.

 

[InfinitusEquitas]

I disagree a little with that first sentence, there's people I've seen with high rep that haven't really contributed much, at least in my opinion. In fact - some that come to mind have been problematic in the past and are even returning banned members. I feel we should be a little more cautious with them. That said, it's up to the community, not me.

Likewise I believe there is a lot of rep inflation going on. IMO rep should be reserved for actually notable contributions, not handed out just to have the ability to hand out more. That said, it's a free system, and I see no point in dwelling on it.

 

[Alaskan]

I have continued to inflate reps every day, maybe I should stop. Already out of hand now though, probably too late. I can stop and reps will still continue to grow and grow by large leaps because so many members have such high numbers now.

I have a question, didn't VG use this flaming GIF signature in the past? I've seen more than one member put it in their signature now, one I think might be him, another clearly not. Perhaps nothing, but only one member had this in their signature here for a long time. Maybe I should change my avatar to troll hunter Although, after awhile every new member who has had a bad day in their post responses begins to look like one.

When I posted this, I did not know the signature was an option within the forum software, I still have not seen it but haven't gone expressly looking for it either....

 

[lasersbee]

One member used to find dead or inactive accounts and positive rep them to allow him to swing around and neg rep someone he was miffed at over and over again. I can only imagine he did this because he did not feel most active members deserved a positive rep.

Also, there was one member in the past who had huge amounts of rep, at least, compared to most other members. Due to this, too many members were afraid he would neg them so let him get away with being extremely sarcastic as well as negging some members without a word against his actions, due to fearing a neg from him. This was when few members had more than 100 rep points which were hard won. After I saw that going on, I took it on to plus rep everyone who was being a positive member, or at least maintaining harmony in the group. I repped 10 people a day every single day for two years. I believe t this is probably why we have members with such high reps now. Today, reps don't mean what they used to, relatively new members, even new members who tend to be an arse can get 300 points in just a short time now. This has produced another problem, now we have part time trolls who can get a positive rep and the numbers keep growing, making the rep system rather useless anymore.

Yeah... since I've stopped posting over 3 years ago until
just recently... the rep system is no longer the same since
I'm back posting.

Hmmm... just got a Neg Rep from Accutronitis.... Thanks...
Hopefully I can return the favor soon for your behavior
on the forum.... .:beer:


Jerry

 

[InfinitusEquitas]

It's concerning for me to see really new members with 100+ reps after just a month or two. That kind of inflation provides said members with a level of implied trust that simply does not exist.

 

[diachi]

It's concerning for me to see really new members with 100+ reps after just a month or two. That kind of inflation provides said members with a level of implied trust that simply does not exist.

Yeah, that's exactly the problem I have too. Although there's been a couple where it is justified I think, like that Ukrainian guy with all the cool gas lasers. Contributing and clearly knowledgeable.

Returning banned members too ... a certain returning banned member has >1000 rep points. I don't think we should be so quick to trust them.

 

[lasersbee]

It's concerning for me to see really new members with 100+ reps after just a month or two. That kind of inflation provides said members with a level of implied trust that simply does not exist.

I agree 100%.... and a sense of impunity....:crackup:

Jerry

 

[Alaskan]

Maybe we ought to take a vote to have all of the reps divided by 10 to set them back to normal??