»

[Cloud]

Originally Posted by Neil

As I stated in my original announcements regarding the reputation system, there will be associated rewards and punishments for specific reputation levels announced in the future. The reputation system has not been put in place "as a bit of a joke".

Although I agree that the reputation comments in question are far from constructive, they have been made in response to some fairly ignorant and stupid posts made by the user in question. I hope the user might notice these comments and maybe think carefully about the content of their posts in the future.

I have great reservations about the use of the reputation system to decide punishments and rewards - particularly because of the potential for cliques to form. If a newbie decides to bad reputation someone for an idiotic post - they could find themselves under a deluge of negative reputation from said person's friends. You can already see some evidence of this happening on here - and I suspect any system of punishment/reward would make things worse. I know there's the case that you have to spread it round quite a bit before you can give it again, but where you have a group of members on 100 points and 10 influence points, they can quite easily protect their own position by stripping someone of their points.

Perhaps a more sensible system would be to only allow one set of reputation points to be given per post? Then you don't get issues where a multitude of people pick on one post - so it's fairer. Not sure if it's possible to do, though.

This is the question though - are comments like that going to be acceptable on here or not? There seems to be a blurry line between what constitutes abuse and what's acceptable, particularly when it's done in a pack mentality. Another example is the comments left on my reputation - calling someone "twat" does absolutely nothing for the site, though the name itself doesn't bother me.

What I also won't tolerate is the intentional provocation and winding up of other forum members. One of the primary reasons your reputation level is quickly decreasing. I strongly suggest you carefully think about what you post on this web site in the future, if you wish to continue to be allowed to post here.

Warning taken.

Any plans to completely cut out the personal abuse/provocation on this site? I'd be happy to take a few days suspension from the site along with Teabags if it meant that this type of nonsense wasn't going to be tolerated any more.

[Neil]

Originally Posted by milner

excuse me? Why would i want bad rep points?

I'm not referring to you, I'm referring to Ian_Brown. Read the thread.

[Neil]

Originally Posted by Cloud

I have great reservations about the use of the reputation system to decide punishments and rewards - particularly because of the potential for cliques to form. If a newbie decides to bad reputation someone for an idiotic post - they could find themselves under a deluge of negative reputation from said person's friends. You can already see some evidence of this happening on here - and I suspect any system of punishment/reward would make things worse. I know there's the case that you have to spread it round quite a bit before you can give it again, but where you have a group of members on 100 points and 10 influence points, they can quite easily protect their own position by stripping someone of their points.

As has been explained before, there are already controls in the system in place to try and prevent this kind of thing from happening. The users that will have the largest influence should be those users who have posted the most, been registered the longest and have both received and given positive reputation points to others. New users can't even give any negative or positive reputation until they have made a number of posts and all users can only dish out so much reputation in one day. Therefore, it should be difficult be possible for people to "gang up" and wipe out someone's reputation in one go.

The "end game" I'm looking for is effectively a self-moderating online community. You can see these systems work very well on even the very largest web sites (Digg.com for example) where even people's posts can become removed and themselves automatically banned by other users if enough people register negative opinions on their posts.

I'm still expecting it to need tweaked here and there and I've still to decide on punishments and rewards as well as what levels they will be triggered. I will try to make it as fair as possible though.

This is the question though - are comments like that going to be acceptable on here or not? There seems to be a blurry line between what constitutes abuse and what's acceptable, particularly when it's done in a pack mentality. Another example is the comments left on my reputation - calling someone "twat" does absolutely nothing for the site, though the name itself doesn't bother me.

That is a fair point. We have less visibly of the reputation comments people leave and well as the messages people leave on people's profiles. So this is something we will need to address.

Any plans to completely cut out the personal abuse/provocation on this site? I'd be happy to take a few days suspension from the site along with Teabags if it meant that this type of nonsense wasn't going to be tolerated any more.

We will, where appropriate, remove any personal abuse and provocation as well as punish those involved. As I said before, this has already been dealt with in the threads you have reported today.

[milner]

Originally Posted by Neil

I'm not referring to you, I'm referring to Ian_Brown. Read the thread.

ah ok sorry i was a bit confused there obviously.

[Cloud]

Originally Posted by Neil

As has been explained before, there are already controls in the system in place to try and prevent this kind of thing from happening. The users that will have the largest influence should be those users who have posted the most, been registered the longest and have both received and given positive reputation points to others. New users can't even give any negative or positive reputation until they have made a number of posts and all users can only dish out so much reputation in one day. Therefore, it should be difficult be possible for people to "gang up" and wipe out someone's reputation in one go.

That's interesting, I didn't realise that there was going to be differentiation between negative and positive points to others. As long as it's difficult for any cliques to do harm to others because of their opinions, then it's fair enough.

The "end game" I'm looking for is effectively a self-moderating online community. You can see these systems work very well on even the very largest web sites (Digg.com for example) where even people's posts can become removed and themselves automatically banned by other users if enough people register negative opinions on their posts.

What degree of self moderation are you aiming for? For instance - would the rules still stay in place, or would these be up for discussion? The example I'm familiar with from Digg is when the...was it the Blu-Ray crack? was posted on there, and the users voted to keep it on there, or are you envisioning something where clearly unpopular users would have limited functionality and popular users receiving extra functionality?

[Old Gold]

I fear that Cloud is abusing the reputation system.

[Cloud]

What, by....using it?

Clear cut case of abuse there!

[Old Gold]

Originally Posted by Cloud

What, by....using it?

Clear cut case of abuse there!

Not clear cut by any means, but just annoyingly juvenile. Was my mistake really offensive enough to warrant a cut in reputation? What's wrong with just pointing it out in the forum?

P.s. Too many dots in your ellipses, but I'll let it slide without tarnishing your wonderful rep.

[KimyReizeger]

Originally Posted by Cloud

I have great reservations about the use of the reputation system to decide punishments and rewards - particularly because of the potential for cliques to form. If a newbie decides to bad reputation someone for an idiotic post - they could find themselves under a deluge of negative reputation from said person's friends. You can already see some evidence of this happening on here - and I suspect any system of punishment/reward would make things worse. I know there's the case that you have to spread it round quite a bit before you can give it again, but where you have a group of members on 100 points and 10 influence points, they can quite easily protect their own position by stripping someone of their points.

Perhaps a more sensible system would be to only allow one set of reputation points to be given per post? Then you don't get issues where a multitude of people pick on one post - so it's fairer. Not sure if it's possible to do, though.

This is the question though - are comments like that going to be acceptable on here or not? There seems to be a blurry line between what constitutes abuse and what's acceptable, particularly when it's done in a pack mentality. Another example is the comments left on my reputation - calling someone "twat" does absolutely nothing for the site, though the name itself doesn't bother me.



Warning taken.

Any plans to completely cut out the personal abuse/provocation on this site? I'd be happy to take a few days suspension from the site along with Teabags if it meant that this type of nonsense wasn't going to be tolerated any more.

For someone suggesting the reputation system a 'bit of a joke' you seem to be taking it all rather seriously. I've never been so bored as when reading your posts, which rarely progress beyond this kind of pedantic, theoretical bullshit. Why not just shut up and start contributing, rather than sweating about fine points of the system.

[Neil]

Originally Posted by Cloud

What, by....using it?

Clear cut case of abuse there!

Giving someone negative reputation for simply swearing in a post (when swearing is permitted on the forums) is a pretty pathetic use of the reputation system in my book. Still, it doesn't bother me too much, it looks like you've already sealed your own fate.