Reputation System: Dramatics and Whining

[complich8]

I'll follow up with a detailed post, but the short version is ... I didn't like where the old system was going, so I changed how the calculations worked, fundamentally changed the code, updated all the given rep values, and rebuilt the whole world's reputations.

Don't panic. But it's permanent. Explanation to follow shortly.

[Kraco]

Wow... That was quite a crash. With the updated scores, it looks almost as if every hit just gives a few points at max, or something. I'll be looking forward to the detailed explanations, and the new calculator.

Heh heh. I suppose it's safe to say good bye to the dream of achieving a custom title...

[Yukimura]

It looks like the relative positions of everyones rep count haven't changed so i'm gonna guess comp just took a nice bite out of everyone's value, if it was a flat percentage from everyone then looking at the new values is kinda cool because you can really see who had hig rep and who had INSANE rep before this overhaul.

I'm gonna miss those little boxes though, they made the area under my avatar look so much better :(

EDIT: How is this a complaint?

[mage]

i had finally gotten up to 5 squares and now its back to one :(

i even got 4 positive reps in a row once!

[complich8]

There were two problems with the system as it was
First problem: rep power spiraled out of control, blasting nearly every active poster off the rep scale entirely. This rendered the entire system meaningless in the short term, and utterly pointless in the long term.

Second problem: setting rep factors to a level that doesn't cause things to spiral out of control shuts out new users, making them unable to have a meaningful role in the rep system

Basically, the population has endpoints that are simply too high. The top users have >6000 posts (terra's currently at 7850, bud's at 6299, assertn at 6896) and have been around as long as the forums have existed. Other users have been around since the forums came into being, but have spent large amounts of time inactive. Still others are newer, but extremely active. And then there's the complete newcomers, who just haven't had any history with us at all.

The reputation system is supposed to be a way to encourage users to participate and a mechanism to give each other feedback.

However, as we've seen the last two months (wow, pretty much exactly … I first turned on and explained the rep system on March 11, it's now May 12), there are big problems with the implementation. Many of you have pointed this out.

There's three variables to control rep power: membership time, post count, and rep score. I think they should all count. But, if any one variable is set to a value that allows new members any influence, old members, high-postcount members, or people who've accumulated large amounts of reputation already become too powerful.

In the previous system, things were controlled by a linear equation, :

Power = (post count/post factor) + (user age/age factor) + (reputation / rep factor).

Since these are all integer ops, they lock a user into having no influence until they've exceeded at least one of those factors..

But some quick math shows us that if we have a low value, then we get disproportionately powerful people in the mix. With all the thresholds at 30, a user like AssertnFailure would get 229 rep power from his post count, and 33 from his age. And that's not including the huge reputation that he would quickly be able to build with other people having that scale of power. Clearly, this is broken.

But setting this value so Assertn doesn't have 230 rep power just from his post count renders the post weight meaningless. The old value was 400 -- meaning users with 800 posts only got 2 points from it, while Assertn STILL got 18 from it.

There are a lot of users around who registered back in 2003, and maybe posted a couple times (enough that their accounts didn't get purged for being inactive and having <2 posts). If age alone a substantial rep factor, then those people will be at an advantage. A user who's been around for 3 years, but only made 3 posts in august 2003 and has never been back shouldn't have more power than a user who's made 300 posts in the last 3 months.

Lastly, there's reputation score. This is the most variable of the lot, because it jumps forward by the power of the person giving you rep. This quickly spirals after a certain threshold - while the equation is linear, the growth along it is quadratic, based on the average rep value of the participants.

You may be asking yourself at this point, "what's wrong with all of that?" The problem is, the rep display only scales up to 1000. While I can add higher values to the reputation categories, I can't easily change how the display boxes scale. Meaning after a certain point, the average growth rate of reputations becomes greater than the intervals between display categories.

Further, Tuning any value such that the top end users aren't excessively powerful means shutting new users out of that field as an influence mechanism. And there will inevitably be users who are extremes at any, or even every category.

When I applied the brakes, the highest rep power calculated out at 186. Not very far away, the next was 178. Now, that's just too damned fast … and as I said, this is a quadratic growth. A single rep hit from one of the highest end reppers increased a user's displayed reputation by nearly two full boxes. That's … at risk of being redundant, too damned much. It means that EVERYONE very quickly goes off the displayable scale of reputations, one way or the other, based on the whims of a small group of more powerful (ie: more popular) people.

Now, my whole goal in the reputation system experiment was to encourage users to participate - to try to raise both the participation volume, and the average quality of posts. And you know, the system succeeded at that, on the short term. But at the same time, it's pretty plain to me that on the long term, the growth spiral was going to continue indefinitely, powers were going to continue to grow quadratically, and a single hit would be able to completely fill or flatten any user's rep display.

Even worse, individual users would get the power to disenfranchise anyone they wanted to. Think about it … if user X has a rep power of 200, they can neg rep a newbie, and drop their rep to -100 singlehandedly. Because that's where I set the threshold where reps don't count any longer, that user can no longer participate in the system until someone else finds it in their heart to toss them a positive rep and drag them out of the depths. But I think it's a natural tendency to pre-judge someone with those angry little red boxes proclaiming "this user sucks" - and that's more likely to swing more people to neg rep them.

Now, this scenario aside, if a new user who's just crossed the threshold into having their rep hits count (at 20 posts, by the old value), gets positive repped by someone with 200 reputation, and the rep factor is 25, that 200-point hit hands them 8 more points of rep power. Still pales in comparison to the 200 points that the giver has, but it's more influence than someone with 20 posts and no prior reps should have. This is sort of a power proliferation problem - by giving you rep power and making the rep factor smaller than your power, inherently every hit you make will be giving the receiver more firepower. And again, with the quadratic expansion of power factors, before long it would get to the point that by simply giving a rep hit, you would give enough power to another person for them to immediately give someone else another point of power (ie: two tiers of power proliferation from a single hit -- this would happen at a rep power of 625 -- with 2000 posts and being a 1 year member of the forum, that would be a rep score of a bit over 15,000 -- not too far off, seeing how growth had already reached higher than 1000 points per week for the top repped people).

Again, this in itself isn't much of a problem, it's just an inherent quality of the system. By using your rep score to calculate your rep value, you get this sort of thing, and this is where that quadratic growth factor comes from.

And the thing is, I like that attribute of the system! Or rather, I like the core meaning of it. I want it to be the case that if you are more popular, you've got more influence. That just makes sense -- let the system be a democratic meritocracy. But at the same time, I don't want it to be the case that if you're more popular, you're practically a god, and if you're less popular you're insignificant - because new users are inherently less popular than older ones, regardless of what they try to do. Part of my goal is to attract and keep new users, to keep constantly revitalizing the forums with a stream of new people who stay around. A community like this has two paths: grow and thrive, or stagnate and die, and I'd be ignoring my role as an admin if I encouraged it to stagnate and die (although, admittedly, it would make my life a little easier ;)).

So … to summarize the problem, if the system is going to be meaningful and sustainable, then it needs to accommodate both new users and old, and give them fair influence. But fair isn't a linear equation, and linear equations in calculating power lead to quadratic growth and the implosion of the system as a whole.

So I changed the equation …

Here's the new general equation, roughly:

Power = 1 + sqrt(post count/post factor) + sqrt(age / age factor) + sqrt(rep score/rep factor).
(there's some added logic for negative rep scores to keep things rational)

You guys have put 2 months and about 4000 reputation hits into the old system. I didn't want to discard it, even though it was broken. So instead, I squarerooted all the values of all previous rep hits. Then I recalculated everyone's rep based on the new values for every hit.

The recalculation of total based on all of that has dramatically moved people, as you've seen. As for what your current rep power is, see RepCalcv2.xls . The top users are still the top users, but they're not so dramatically overpowered anymore.

I think all of this levels the playing field. Basically, as you get higher and higher values, you get diminishing returns. There's still value in doing more, but it's harder to attain that value. This lets me open all the doors. Every factor is at 30, but users at the extremes won't get incredibly disproportionate amounts of power.

Finally, a new guideline: quit signing your reps. It's ok if you sign a rep that's thanking someone for someone doing a favor for you (like ... making you a new sig, or solving a problem for you), or if you're asking a favor from them (like, "please pm me that link"). But if you're signing most of your hits, it will be interpreted as rep solicitation, and punished severely (like ... re-squarerooting your received hits, or simply disabling your ability to leave rep).

[masamuneehs]

lol comp you explained it to me last night but i can't quite recall all the specifics... something about a square root beingthrown into the equation?

All I know is I like the change. Yeah, sure, we all look like we've got no reputation now. That's the way it's supposed to we when the Rep system has only been in effect for 2 months! People maxing out boxes, getting the customs after that little time makes the entire system quite laughable. Imagine if you logged onto a forum and half the users had reputation to the moon.

This way it seems like the system will more accurately serve as a long term gage of users. Serious props to comp for going through all the trouble of figuring out a better system and implementing it. It certainly wasn't an easy task, as you can see:

[07:44] * Assassin gives complich8 his thinking cap
[07:44] <complich8> I'm waist-deep in php right now
[07:45] * Assassin takes the hat back

edit - totally agree with comp. Signing reps is from the devil! Cease and desist at once or be destroyed.

edit again - I totally love my new title, though the fact that switching between that and 'Shaved Butt Monkey' is a matter I have no say in and that comp can do with his pinky in 10 seconds is a bit disconcerting

[complich8]

actually, the code mod itself was pretty easy -- though it would have been easier if that bastard hadn't taken back his cap.

Just that I don't actually know php, and wasn't terribly familiar with vbulletin code =D. Maybe I'll actually teach myself how to write it (instead of just tweaking it) this summer.

And yeah, it's basically just "squareroot each component of rep". For the extremely curious, here's a diff! HAHA!

[woofcat]

Ok, So to be clear, signing reps is now illegal and punishable by law?

[Augury]

And yeah, it's basically just "squareroot each component of rep". For the extremely curious, here's a diff! HAHA!Ugh, code without nice line breaks are a pain to read :(

... Huh. I wrote a paragraph or two in response just now, deleted it, and wrote another and deleted it too when I realized that most of the points I was bringing up could fall under a "wait and see" action. Although I'd like to chime in here on the not-signing-your-reps guideline as good. People who are loose, easy, and / or retaliatory with their rep hits tend to develop more say as time progresses.

[masamuneehs]

Ok, So to be clear, signing reps is now illegal and punishable by law?

Yup. But as with most laws that can hold water this isn't purely cut-and-dry.



Finally, a new guideline: quit signing your reps. It's ok if you sign a rep that's thanking someone for someone doing a favor for you (like ... making you a new sig, or solving a problem for you), or if you're asking a favor from them (like, "please pm me that link"). But if you're signing most of your hits, it will be interpreted as rep solicitation, and punished severely

While it would be safest to stop signing reps alltogether there's obviously some cases that warrant it. From what I've seen I agree this new guideline is in order, as signing reps just for the sake of showing your identity to the person you're Pos Repping certainly reeks of soliciting.

[Kraco]

Heh. Well, that was quite a change. Powers sure fell down. This was an act of great equalization. When this whole rep system was established, and everybody started from the scratch (except for select admins), every single rep hit counted. But during the latest times when you had your eyes on the 2500 limit, and nothing else since you didn't anymore get more squares, hits from new users with low power became less meaningful, although they were still nice to get; who wouldn't want his efforts to be appreciated?

While it's useless to anymore even dream about ever getting up the 2500 score for the custom title (I'll probably be in a grave from old age before that happens), now it's at least possible to once again stare at the squares, and be equally glad about every hit you get.

And thank you very much for illegalizing the signing of the rep comments. That was a kingdom of fear. No matter what people say, but if they didn't get the favor back, I seriously doubt they were as eager to rep that same person again. And for me who only signed a few comments during the last days (as responses, though "valid" ones for the Event), it was thus a thing of great distress. As much as I wanted to have a custom title, I still didn't want to break the original idea of the reputation system. Now that it's practically impossible to gain the custom title, even slight solicitation of course is much less meaningful altogether.


Edit: Ciber has one red square and Wilik one green! No need to look any further for the ones who suffered the most...

[complich8]

Ok, So to be clear, signing reps is now illegal and punishable by law?

That's the idea. I've done a bunch of database work (amazing the data mining you can do in these databases, lemme tell ya), and there's a very strong correlation between reps signing and what very much looks like "rep cliques" developing. And if I get much stronger correlation there, then the four or five users involved may end up simply removed from the rep system as a whole.


Ugh, code without nice line breaks are a pain to read :(

linux-generated universal diff format. Line breaks are there, but they're just \n, not CRLF. Open it in wordpad if you're in windows. But it's a diff, if you don't know how to read it it probably doesn't mean much to you.


Well, that was quite a change. Powers sure fell down. This was an act of great equalization. When this whole rep system was established, and everybody started from the scratch (except for select admins), every single rep hit counted
That's precisely what I'm trying to get back, and then some. That's why the code modifications. I still want people's power to reflect their degree of participation in the community, but I don't want it to do so in such an incredibly stupid, broken way anymore, ya know?


While it's useless to anymore even dream about ever getting up the 2500 score for the custom title (I'll probably be in a grave from old age before that happens), now it's at least possible to once again stare at the squares, and be equally glad about every hit you get.

Some scanning through the user list seems to indicate that the average rep-giver is walking out of this with a power in the low teens. The highest powers are in the low twenties right now. My initial adjustment of the values of all previous rep hits has drastically impacted the value of all reps given. New reps, given under the new system, are generally worth more than the square root of the old reps -- though this is not always the case.

In many cases, the new rep hits you get will co
unt more than the old ones did, and since everyone's score dropped so dramatically, there will probably be a new period of power growth. Just that that growth should taper off, rather than skyrocketing.

My end goal is to have nobody have more than about 30-35 power per post. You can do some repcalc experiments using hypothetical numbers and verify that it's very, VERY hard to get much past that (10000 posts, 5000 accumulated rep points, and being here for the entire life of the forums so far would get you a power of 36).

What that means is this: if a no-name user is repping you, they still are going to have somewhere between 2 and 6 points to contribute. So the incredibly powerful hypothetical user, who's been with us since the start and is incredibly popular to boot, will be worth roughly six times more than someone who's at ~120 posts with no rep who's been here for a year.

What that means is that you'll have to get 125ish positive hits from the currently "powerful" people (who are in the low 20's), 70 hits from the hypothetical uber-user, or win the aproval of 415 or so faceless nobodies to get to the ever-so-desirable custom title level. That's ... a lot more, but still not a lot slower growth than bouncing forward 200+ points at a time, but it's still pretty bearable, I think. It means that an average positive hit is going to be worth .... somewhere between half and one percent of the way to a title -- rather than the nearly 10% that it was approaching. So, in short, don't despair! Someday, it may be yours! (or, there's other ways you might get one ...).


And thank you very much for illegalizing the signing of the rep comments. That was a kingdom of fear.
fear ... cheating ... however you want to put it ^_^.

[RyougaZell]

Wow. Talk about dropping a bomb, hehe.

I like the new system better. Its more fair.

Good job complich8

[Augury]

Ah, wordpad. I see. While delightfully readable now, all it is is the logic behind the rep power equation you mentioned... as you've mentioned. ;)

[Lucifus]

Ah, goddamn it........bye bye custom title....so close....

Anyway, very good work man, systems way more fair. If this wasn't done, I would have had a custom title and full rep within two weeks.:rolleyes:

Signing now illegal huh? Hmm, gonna take me awhile to get back to the top...A long while...........

Anyway, at Complich, excellent work, those calculations aren't bad.:cool:

Edit: I guess I was solicitating rep, I repped you, would a rep like that be considered solicitating? Making it obvious who did it?

[RedX1z]

this is for the better, it's understandable. for those who are good posters shouldn't have to worry about it, even though it's makes things slower, it's a more effective way to make things keep on going.

custom titles? exactly what are custom titles? do people care actually care about what your title is? stating the obvious, but it's not really all that great as one would make it out to be. will it really matter like 2 years from now when most of us will probably forget about these forums anyway? you all should just make the most of it by just posting and having fun like you've always had.


Ok, So to be clear, signing reps is now illegal and punishable by law?

of course, everything has a flaw. you just have to do it without breaking it.:p

[complich8]

Edit: I guess I was solicitating rep, I repped you, would a rep like that be considered solicitating? Making it obvious who did it?

In the case of me, I can see it anyway. Not that I'll ever react to it. Feel free to rep me, I don't care =D

[Kraco]

In the case of me, I can see it anyway. Not that I'll ever react to it. Feel free to rep me, I don't care =D

Yes you do. You are just saying you don't.

You are the person who most deeply cares about reputation. After all, you are the one who has spent hours into making it work better and being more equal. And you even made the calculators, and wrote long posts explaining how the system works. So, I think you care the most about reputation, no matter what you say.

[Knives122]

Well I have no problem with you starting the rep over Comp.

But there is one thing: I was literally one pos. rep from getting my own Title, and you've ruined it *insert dramatic sobbing and music*

I had such a great name too :p

[Splash!]

Wow, what a reform. I have to say all credit goes to Complich8 for giving this ALOT of thought.
The new system is amazingly well though out and fair. All though everyone, including myself, will miss their inflated reputation, at less now the rep system means something

[Carnage]

I like the new system. Its much fairer. And I guess signing reps is kinda soliciting. But what about signing neg reps? I think that should be allowed, not so you can get revenge, but so over time if you stop getting neg reps from that same person, you know your improving in their eyes.

[Splash!]

I like the new system. Its much fairer. And I guess signing reps is kinda soliciting. But what about signing neg reps? I think that should be allowed, not so you can get revenge, but so over time if you stop getting neg reps from that same person, you know your improving in their eyes.

well i guess you could do that but in all honesty, who would wanna do that??! telling someone you gave them a negative rep just increases the likelihood of you getting a neg rep in return without any particular reason.

[Kraco]

It shouldn't matter from whom you get the neg rep. As long as we are talking about valid neg reps and not commentless or stupid ones. Valid ones are kind of statistical: Some things irritate people, not the same people everytime, but a portion of people in a population. If you want to better yourself (or avoid neg rep), it doesn't matter if you know who those individuals are. It's enough to know the likes of them are there, and they don't like certain types of posts.

[dragonrage]

Cool. This is a much need change, with people with reps over 3000 already within a few months the system would have become somewhat useless. I welcome the new changes, I think that will keep things in check. Nice work complich8.

To those who were excited by the thought of a custom title within your hands, my heart goes out to you. Sorry, but that how things goes sometimes. It will be interesting to see how long it takes someone to reach the 2500 marker this time. But more importantly, i think that this make things more stable, maybe.

[Board of Command]

I've never cared about rep so this overhaul doesn't really affect me.

For those of you that do care, enjoy.

[Lefty]

I agree that this reform is definatly needed. I got about a few hundread points for my birthday, that alone sky rocketed my rep. Though I have to say I feel a little naked with out all those pretty squares.

[The Heretic Azazel]

On top of all this, I really found it pointless to rep good posts if the poster already had like 16 squares, now that it's starting over I feel better repping people who have a more realistic count instead of something ridiculous.

[ChaosK]

On top of all this, I really found it pointless to rep good posts if the poster already had like 16 squares, now that it's starting over I feel better repping people who have a more realistic count instead of something ridiculous.

Well now it's all realistic. The most squares anyone has is 5. This change is a lot better than the old system (not to say the old system sucked complich). Good work :)

[Lucifus]

Make that 6 squares. I totally miss my rep gained in two weeks, but if the old rep system went on for about another months time, if would have become pointless.Either everyone would be fully repped out, or totally new and rise to full rep within the week.:rolleyes:

So close.....To all those who were able to get their custom titles.....I envy you.....
Insert Salute here..............

[Assertn]

words

That was quite possibly the most roundabout way of saying "the rate of growth of influence is too high" I've ever seen.

[complich8]

Pointed observation.

Hah! pretty much. I just like people to know that there's a reason I think what I think.

[samsonlonghair]

I'd be a liar if I said I wasn't disappointed to see my rep go down so drastically. I know other people were having an easy time with reputation, but I had just gotten to "beyond reproach". Oh well.

I do love that you've outlawed signing reps. What I love more is that some of the people who were notorious for doing that are denouncing signing in this very thread. As memory serves I only signed one rep, and that was because I really liked that person's argument. I can't even remember to whom I gave that rep.

This new system is making me wish that I hadn't had so many periods of inactivity. If I had continued posting at my normal rate all the way since the time I started here I'd have a much higher post count than I currently do. I've never really cared about post count untill now.

Overall, I like the improvements. It's obvious that complich8 put a lot of time and thought into this.

[complich8]

oh, for kicks, I've also increased the negative rep power factor from 1/2 to 3/4. I like the idea of the system having a positive bias, but I think negative hits need to have a bit more impact than they do.

[Kraco]

Hmm... I wonder if that's good or not. There isn't such a thing as a flawed positive hit, but there certainly are flawed negative hits, if you know what I mean... ;)

[complich8]

Hmm... I wonder if that's good or not. There isn't such a thing as a flawed positive hit

That's a pretty baseless assertion right there...

I'd argue that there have, in fact, been a lot of "flawed" positive hits. That is, hits that people don't deserve, for no good reason.

If you're going to call things like vendetta neg reps, random commentless negatives, etc "flawed" ... then positive hits meet the same criteria for flawedness -- pos-rep your buddies, pos-rep without commenting or without good commenting, pos-rep things that don't deserve it.

The system is still biased positive, and the hit counts show that the given hits are substantially more than 2 to 1 positive to negative (the actual number stands at 2821 positive, 1252 negative right now).

[Kraco]

Sorry. I was just trying to make a joke, but I guess it was too lousy to really carry any message.

While I admit I didn't even consider "pos-repping your buddies" when I wrote the post, I just meant that no matter what kind of strange comment, a positive rep hit is always welcome. However, a negative rep without a comment or with a totally bizarre comment are rarely welcome.

[DDBen]

Honestly while I do approve of the change limiting the rediculous growth or decline or rep as a whole I think atleast one more change should be made to the system.

I've certainly seen 1 rep change mine from 77 to -9 or the like and on top of that the rep in pretty much every case of negative rep has been given out for pointless reasons. A lot of people seem to think the rep system is a way of avoiding posting your opinion. In certain cases as I can only go by my rep remarks I've been negative reped multiple times for discussing a topic with nothing more then "stop arguing" as these are forums and discussion should be promoted instead of punished I think things like that are still out of hand even with the changes.

As such I think that a amendment should be made to the code that reduces if not eliminates peoples ability to give rep if they are giving a disproportinate amount of negative rep for any reason. Overall the aim of this system seems to be to have a positive effect on the forums and until there is something done about trolling I don't really see that as possible.

[complich8]

looking at your history, you do indeed seem to be the consistent victim of rather stupid rep hits. I dunno, maybe it's just something about you?

Interestingly, nobody who's repped you has repped you more than once, in either direction.

And the drop in your score was probably a combination of all rep hits you've gotten becoming much, much smaller, and someone giving you a negative hit. You may have noticed that everyone else's reputation dropped at the same time you did. Also, the scores got recentered around zero, rather than +5, so you'd see additional loss there.

I don't see this problem as systematic -- the people who have given you negative rep have for the most part been generally positive, and your situation seems to be something of an exception. I would say, write it off as a fluke, ignore it, and get on with your life.

[samsonlonghair]

Ever since the overhaul I haven't gotten any new reps; before I got new ones at least every few days. Is this because of something wrong with my control panel, or is it just coincidental?

[Kraco]

Yeah. I have only received a few hits ever since. Generally speaking (personally I don't think I have made that many great posts worth repping after the overhaul) from my point of view I'm inclined to think it's because the hits don't matter so much anymore (as reaching the reward will take a long time indeed), and so there isn't as much initiative to rep. This would of course indicate as well that many people were truly aiming for the custom title as a reason to rep at all, or mostly.

However, that's probably a highly biased opinion. Maybe in truth it's just a coincidence, and partially due to the fact the forums seem to have been somewhat quiet of late.

[Kraco]

A comment that agrees with your post, yet the hit is negative... Now I have got more than one of these. Although there wasn't much of an impact with either, it still begs the question whether the "I approve" and "I disapprove" aren't quite clear to all people. Maybe somebody thinks it doesn't mean you judge the post, but it's used to either approve or disapprove the greater matter that was being addressed in the post? And so if your post was a negative answer to something, the "I disapprove" would be agreeing with you by also being negative..?

On the other hand, maybe they were just ironic comments that were lost on me (irony rarely works over the Internet, as everybody should know. With almost no exception it's taken as hostile sarcasm).

[Assassin]

i did that once, but that was cuz i was giving a negative comment, but in my haste i forgot to change it to 'disapprove'. So the guy got a +rep hit with a negative comment. But that was only once

[ChaosK]

i did that once, but that was cuz i was giving a negative comment, but in my haste i forgot to change it to 'disapprove'. So the guy got a +rep hit with a negative comment. But that was only once

His case however, is the opposite. The person took the precious time to click on "disapprove" and left him with a good comment. Now, a person accidently forgetting to click "disapprove" is more likely than a person intentionally clicking "disapprove" and not meaning it no?

[RyougaZell]

I find awesome someone thinks Im gay for a post I made in march :D

[Kraco]

There's a conspiracy againt people writing properly :(

"thanks for writing properly" and negative points.

Should I start to write improperly to retain my rep? :confused:

English is not my first language, so I always strive to write it as well as I can. I don't know why that would offend anybody; this is the first time I witnessed such a thing. Normally people writing poorly get bashing. Well, there is the first time for everything, I suppose.

[mage]

I did that. I meant to positive rep you, sorry :)

[Kraco]

Alright. It's cool, no worries. Your punch wasn't very heavy anyhow, as it is :p

It's good to know I can continue to write properly!

[mage]

lol I had given you that after reading one of bxgreatone's posts. His 2nd grader writing style pisses me off greatly.

[Jadugar]

Hmmm.

I haven’t posted in this thread for a while. Here are some new ones that made me laugh.

http://img93.imageshack.us/img93/3999/rep6lm.jpg

[Lucifus]

Rofl, that crap made me laugh so bad.

I've gotten about 10 pos reps since the changes. Still 3 bars. T-T

[Knives122]

I recently got a negative rep for saying that Muffins are gay, and that Cupcakes are better.

........they said I was gay.

[BlitzRonin]

Anonymous repping never truly works out.

On all the comic book, manga, scifi, etc.. boards I'm on the systems that work best are those that actually tell you who positively or negatively repped you.

For instance, I got a negative rep on my first post here for just pointing out a fact in the latest Naruto manga thread.

Not complaining, just saying is all.

[Deadfire]

Anonymous repping never truly works out.

On all the comic book, manga, scifi, etc.. boards I'm on the systems that work best are those that actually tell you who positively or negatively repped you.

For instance, I got a negative rep on my first post here for just pointing out a fact in the latest Naruto manga thread.

Not complaining, just saying is all.

Well take it this way then If I sign or my username comes up as a positive rep I give you. Most see that as a act of kindness that they return, and as such a circle may start which may be called the "circle jerk". When you get more people in it you get results that are conflict in the reasoning for such a system to exist in the first place. A rep system is to reward those demmed worth it by their peers based on what they have done in posting. A "circle jerk" abuses the system in such a way that it doesn't matter what type of poster you are, It only matters who you know.

As well a good poster may give a member of this "circle jerk" a negitive rep, resulting in anger from that member making him ask that the members of his "circle" help him take this poster "down" per say.

This is high school all over again in which everyone had their "group" they belonged too and they looked down on all others not with them. That is why this we asked that usernames not be given in the comments of a rep.

Now that doesn't mean that the current Anonymous reping system is prefect, but it is far better to stay true to the reason for the system in the first place. Yes we have all been Neg reped for what appears to be no reason at all, as well I'm sure that there are people out there that do it for fun. I have been neg reped for stupid reasons as well, just don't let it get to you. I know that they need the veil of the rep system to insult me and such as they can't do it in front of me for what ever reason.

http://www.comstarnewsnetwork.com/shitrep.JPG


So Yes thats exactly what I'm saying people that give Negitive reps for what appears to be a just spiteful nature are cowards in my eyes. However there are some of the neg reps I have deserved as well.

Take the system as it is, don't let it take you

[Zidarri the Exile]

I really like the system you guys have here. Best I've seen.

I love you guys, though, haha.

My first like 10 reps were all pos, then I got a neg, then more pos, now, I've had like 15 straight neg reps! You guys are the best! hahaha

[Zidarri the Exile]

Don't double post.

And you wonder why people have been critical of you lately...

masamuneehs

[Bonkers325]

where am i now :p

[DDBen]

I'm still convinced this system promotes trolling considering some of the rep I'm seen including a negative rep for a thread started July 14, 2005 and of course insiteful comments like ?_?.

Overall why I see benifits for the person giving positive rep and negatives for the guy giving a negative rep but I certainly think that atleast negative rep should force a signiture to prevent trolling. Also the person recieving the rep should be made unable to negative rep or positive rep anyone who has done so for them within the persons last 15 posts.

I'm also personally against someone with a negative rep losing the ability to effect someone else's rep. That idea just seems poorly executed as simply put if a group of friends decide they don't like someone its fairly easy to just have them all neg rep the guy. Sure all the rep are from differn't sources and if the guy hits negative to whatever degree it takes to make his rep useless. Also note as soon as someone gets a negative rep they are much more likely to get another negative rep then a positive one and unless that person is going out of there way to get negative reps it is much more likely to just discourage a new poster.

[fahoumh]

What I dislike about the anonymity of this system is the very fact people can give you a negative reputation on a post for any unsubstantiated reason. Recently I was accused of starting a new Naruto release thread to "win a thread". I don't even know what that means. I think it a bit silly to be forced to think about every post and worry about being punished for trying to contribute. I'll probably get a negative rep for this post too.

[complich8]

The problem with any public system is that there's going to be a lot of noise.

Further, by complaining about it in public, you validate that noise, which encourages it. People know it gets a rise out of you, so they'll keep it up.

Did you miss the "don't take it too seriously" part? <_< I think you're all taking it too seriously. A reputation hit, positive or negative, shouldn't be reviewed as "reward" or "punishment" but as "positive feedback" or "negative feedback". It's like someone yelling "WOOO!!!!" or "YOU SUCK!!!" out of a moving vehicle. You don't know who they are. You don't know why they approve or disapprove of what you're doing, unless they make it clear. You shouldn't let it get to you either way.

[ChaosK]

What I dislike about the anonymity of this system is the very fact people can give you a negative reputation on a post for any unsubstantiated reason. Recently I was accused of starting a new Naruto release thread to "win a thread". I don't even know what that means. I think it a bit silly to be forced to think about every post and worry about being punished for trying to contribute. I'll probably get a negative rep for this post too.

Nobody reps/neg reps for no reason unless they are randomly going around. You may have done something bad in the past, which has gotten them to view you as an idiot, which caused them to notice every mistake you make and neg rep it. The things that are questionable, is like being neg repped on a post from a year ago.

[fahoumh]

Nobody reps/neg reps for no reason unless they are randomly going around. You may have done something bad in the past, which has gotten them to view you as an idiot, which caused them to notice every mistake you make and neg rep it. The things that are questionable, is like being neg repped on a post from a year ago.
Maybe you're correct...and I was correct in my prediction: 2 negative reps for my previous post in this thread:

Reputation System:... 07-21-2006 01:47 AM You're a girl

Reputation System:... 07-22-2006 04:10 AM Nobody should bully girls Have a cookie!

Well, it would seem the racist comment was removed and I found this comment in its stead. Its a postive comment, albeit a bit strange since I'm not a girl...but I'll take it! LOL :-&#222;

[dragonrage]

Maybe you're correct...and I was correct in my prediction: 2 negative reps for my previous post in this thread:

Reputation System:... 07-21-2006 01:47 AM You're a girl

Reputation System:... 07-22-2006 04:10 AM Nobody should bully girls Have a cookie!

Well, it would seem the racist comment was removed and I found this comment in its stead. Its a postive comment, albeit a bit strange since I'm not a girl...but I'll take it! LOL :-&#222;


i sense a greater power at work in this matter. ::)


anyway you all put too much emphasis on reps, chill out. the only person you are fustrating is yourself and the person who implemented it. The world is full of assholes and well we all can be one at times. This is nothing new, move one.

edit: actually most of the emphasis on reps has died down. Which is really really awsome.

[fahoumh]

i sense a greater power at work in this matter. ::)


anyway you all put too much emphasis on reps, chill out. the only person you are fustrating is yourself and the person who implemented it. The world is full of assholes and well we all can be one at times. This is nothing new, move one.

edit: actually most of the emphasis on reps has died down. Which is really really awsome.
I sense one too. Many thanks to whoever is responsible :D

And you are correct, I do need to chill out....I will move on.

[mage]

Awesome. A custom title!! I'm special!

[complich8]

in the "short bus" sense.

[mage]

What, you guys can't handle the truth of my negative reps? I tell it like I see it.

[complich8]

if "you're a little nigger shit" and "faggots like yourself should get a drill stuck in their urethra and turned on" is how you actually see it, then I'm glad to say that you are a horrible person who doesn't deserve the courtesy we show you by letting you stay here at all.

You've gone far too long leaving shit like that for me to clean up. You don't get to play anymore.

[mage]

Too bad :(

[The Heretic Azazel]

Stick it to the man Mage.

You're the only reason I come here!

[mage]

Atleast one person recognizes my genius.


"faggots like yourself should get a drill stuck in their urethra and turned on"
I thought that one is pretty good, but you forgot my favorite: the one where I said I was adopted because my real parents stuck jalapenos in my ass and sent me to school, but my teacher found out and reported them to the police and I was put up for adoption. That one is a masterpiece.

[Paulyboy]

Ahaah are you serious about that or just being plain dumb and sarcastic, also Azazel is right :).

[The Heretic Azazel]

Oh he's serious. He has to be. It makes too much sense :rolleyes:

[Paulyboy]

Reputation System:... 07-29-2006 07:30 PM faggots like yourself should get a drill stuck in their urethra and turned on

LMFAO, I wish I was a woman, because if I was I would make sure I would use a dildo instead of a drill ;)

[mage]

Reputation System:... 07-29-2006 07:30 PM faggots like yourself should get a drill stuck in their urethra and turned on

LMFAO, I wish I was a woman, because if I was I would make sure I would use a dildo instead of a drill ;)
what woman would stick a dildo in their urethra?

[Jadugar]

My secret admirer….

http://img114.imageshack.us/img114/5850/repal6.jpg

Rofl

I love you too.:D

[ChaosK]

Why was it necessary to cover up the thread? Also, you're the worst poster on gotwoot? When did you strip Carnage of his title?

[Jadugar]

Why was it necessary to cover up the thread? Also, you're the worst poster on gotwoot? When did you strip Carnage of his title?

It was just another random thread. It was not necessary to cover it up but the important thing is that Terra loves me. ;)

[Terracosmo]

I received this neg rep for my post in the Myspace topic;

"Just what we need, admin's necro posting."

Apparently this somewhat well-known poster, who shall remain anonymous because I'm really too kind for my own good, seems to prefer an admin who posts repeat topics (i.e one who ignores the rules) instead of an admin who bumps an already existing one.

Good move, you silly dumbass with your even sillier lifeless vendetta endeavors.

[masamuneehs]

*sighs and rolls eyes*

internet drama = teh dumb

[Knives122]

Are you kidding Masa? This is "Days of our Reps", the best internet drama on the internet. Let's watch.

[dragonrage]

so days of our rep are getting back on air, huh.

*DrAgE pulls up a chair.....*

[Deadfire]

I just love that every good post I make that I try to help members out is sniped by neg reps from some asshat that has to hide their name from me because they are weak bastards

If you don't like the fact i try to help people, Then you are a sad, sad, bunch of elitest bastards

Why don't you try it sometime, I know that you asshats don't :p

[xDarkMaster]

I totally agree. I have gotten plenty of neg reps because when I post a scanlation or something people don't like sendspace or rapidshare or w/e host is used.

However, it is kinda the rules to not sign reps and, no offense, but I doubt you sign all your neg reps. You mods and admins need to stop taking reps and the whole deal so seriously and personally.

[Terracosmo]

I have a problem. I don't need to sign my reps, people somehow understand it's me anyway :O

[Knives122]

Maybe you should stop acting like you do on the forums in your reps me thinks :p

[Terracosmo]

Godamnit, that's not possible! It would be out of character, it would... *brain melts*

[dragonrage]

the terra attack. Why would anyone want to change that. I mean really, it is all part of the Gotwoot experience. :rolleyes:

[Kraco]

They say sarcasm isn't conveyd well over the net... The sarcastic humour in my pic edit didn't please somebody (although the idea for the pic was from another poster), but likewise I fail to see the intended sarcasm in this neg rep.

http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/5125/notsogreatpostyb4.jpg

(Just included the other two hits into the pic to show 2/3 still think it was a decent post.)

Edit: In compliance to Bud Bauer's request: The post (http://forums.gotwoot.net/showthread.php?p=308628#post308628)

[xDarkMaster]

Lol, looks like you and I got hit by the same person.

http://img306.imageshack.us/img306/6889/untitledxb9.png

-_-

[fahoumh]

They say sarcasm isn't conveyd well over the net... The sarcastic humour in my pic edit didn't please somebody (although the idea for the pic was from another poster), but likewise I fail to see the intended sarcasm in this neg rep.

http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/5125/notsogreatpostyb4.jpg

(Just included the other two hits into the pic to show 2/3 still think it was a decent post.)

I thought yours was a pretty funny post, personally :confused:

[Munsu]

Come on', if you guys are going to whinne about reps, at least quote the post you got neg repped on.

[Honoko]

My personal favorites are the ones where you receive a neg rep with no comment nearly a week after you actually post.

[ChaosK]

I've gotten ones from posts in 2005.

[masamuneehs]

They say sarcasm isn't conveyd well over the net... The sarcastic humour in my pic edit didn't please somebody (although the idea for the pic was from another poster), but likewise I fail to see the intended sarcasm in this neg rep.

http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/5125/notsogreatpostyb4.jpg



Lol, looks like you and I got hit by the same person.

http://img306.imageshack.us/img306/6889/untitledxb9.png

-_-

oh man, this cracks me up!

*shuts the door to the lounge so the laughter isn't heard*

edit- and no, it wasn't me.

on a seriouser note, i think this just goes to prove: Sometimes it doesn't matter how good of a post you make. If someone doesn't like you and wants to kick you in the e-rep nuts, they will use anything. It's just best to ignore them, cuz it's handing them their victory when you get mad about it like they wanted you to.

[ChaosK]

It's probably an excuse for a neg rep, if they're gun-pointed they'll say "I meant to put it as a pos rep, my bad" then go laugh manically behind the door...

[Kraco]

ATTENTION: This may contain a slight One Piece spoiler, although I'm not sure of that since I don't watch the future episodes.

I shouldn't post so much in this thread, but I got a neg rep that's too funny not to report here. And it was probably the first inappropriate neg rep that didn't piss me off because it's so goofy.

http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/7855/nousetoreadthepostkj8.jpg

And the post in question looked like this:


Robin's mom? I thought she looked somewhat (that is, a lot) similar to Robin, and was thinking it must be her sister or a cousin, or something. I guess she's introduced in one of those future episodes subbed by other groups. I've only watched K-F subs, so I had no idea.

Quite nice pics, nonetheless.

Now, as you can see, in my own opinion I DID notice the "resemblence". Which of course leads me to think this neg repper person actually went through all the trouble of possibly reading the first two words of my post, and then went berserk and neg repped me...

On a serious note, this finally explain to me some neg repping people are getting. I never thought there were people around who didn't even read the post they were neg repping, but this undeniably proves that to be the case.

[dragonrage]

kraco : quit bitching. It is unbecoming. And if you need to vent there is the bitching thread. Besides, you got a comment, so you can decide for yourself if the opinion of the person giving the rep. is actually worth a damn.

[Kraco]

I thought this thread was meant for that, of late :(

The rep system has been stabile for a long time now, so certainly this thread isn't anymore meant for discussing the details of the system itself.

Nevertheless, you are right about one thing (not the neg repper but Drage): I've posted in this thread too many times.

[mage]

The main problem with the rep system is that the entire forum jumps all over someone's bad post, but when the same person makes a good post, or even several, they only get a few positive reps. This seems to be a decent way to keep retarded newbs out of the forum though. Spam them with neg reps on their first post and they'll never want to come back.

[ChaosK]

http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/9602/lolpl5.th.jpg (http://img135.imageshack.us/my.php?image=lolpl5.jpg)

That recently became my personal favorite.

[Munsu]

Come on', if you guys are going to whinne about reps, at least quote the post you got neg repped on.

Quoting my previous post, your post is meaningless if we don't know on what post you're getting the rep.

[ChaosK]

Quoting my previous post, your post is meaningless if we don't know on what post you're getting the rep.

What do you think? I said "happy birthday"

[gr3atfull]

http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/9602/lolpl5.th.jpg (http://img135.imageshack.us/my.php?image=lolpl5.jpg)

That recently became my personal favorite.

I also got that. >.<

[mage]

As good a place as any to post this I guess. I thought it was pretty funny.

http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/1448/warninglogas1.jpg

[Assassin]

wth does this have to do with reputation mage?

[mage]

Well, it's kind of like reputation from the mods.

[ChaosK]

As good a place as any to post this I guess. I thought it was pretty funny.
*screenshot*

:D Lol I bet you got one for that post too. Also, you get excessive amounts of warnings at a time...

Hey I wanted to know, do you still see reputation people give you either though you're disabled from reputation?

[mage]

:D Lol I bet you got one for that post too.

Nah


Hey I wanted to know, do you still see reputation people give you either though you're disabled from reputation?
People can't give me rep, I think. If they can, I'm not able to see it.

[samsonlonghair]

I just repped you. So, apparently we can give you reputation, but it has no meaning whatsoever.

[mage]

It was positive, right?

[ChaosK]

I just repped you. So, apparently we can give you reputation, but it has no meaning whatsoever.
we can give it to him, yet he can't even see the comment or whether or not it's positive or negative? :confused:

[mage]

so it seems.

[Terracosmo]

I got a "ur dumb" neg rep for my post in the "fastest typer" thread. Indeed, posting my results is the pinnacle of stupidity.

[KoKo37]

I got a negative reputation for posting my typing results in there as well, except there wasn't a comment on mine.

[XanBcoo]

Good thing I opted out of posting in that thread. Seems there's a serial repper going around.

[Assassin]

The nature of the system encourages pointless repping and that usually tends to be negative. People need to rep lik 20 different users before they can rep the same person again, so stuff like this is bound to happen. Unfortunately its hard to come up with a balance repping power/repping time/other sutff as comp explained some time ago, so i guess we just have to deal with it.

[mage]

Can a mod change my 'fails at reputation' to something else? I don't want to be grouped with Mizuchi.

[Yukimura]

So does 'Fails at reputation' lie at the end of the line for everyone that gets enough red bars, or are mage and Mizuchi just two special cases?

[complich8]

Mage "fails at reputation" because he did a lot of pointless, stupid, irrelevant and spiteful repping.

Mizuchi because he asked to have rep turned off for him. From what I've seen, he's getting a lot of not-entirely-deserved negative rep just because everyone knows it's fine to neg rep him for whatever reason -- it's a snowball effect. The more negative he gets, the more people think it's ok to join the bandwagon and drive him even more negative.

So really, the reasons they're there are polar opposites (ie: abusing versus being abused), but where they are is the same -- the rep system just didn't work out for them.

[Munsu]

The more negative he gets, the more people think it's ok to join the bandwagon and drive him even more negative.

Joining the bandwagon? The forum is littered with his shitty dumb posts.

[complich8]

He's not alone in that respect.

In other news, visible reputation is now optional, on a provisional basis. Maybe that can help cut down the drama. Maybe not.

[mage]

So uh, can a mod change my title? I'm serious. I don't want the same title as Mizuchi.

[complich8]

nope, sorry. you both fail at reputation, you both get the title :p.

[samsonlonghair]

I hate to say it, but it seemed like he was getting a little bit better. Despite a lot of criticism he was trying to improve. At least he wasn't annoying the piss out of me anymore. Now he's gone right back to shitposting.

I don't know, maybe the two have nothing to do with eachother, and it's just coincidental. It seems a bit far-fetched that reputation would have such a great effect on someone.

[Stoopider]

Yay. The reputation counter is off.

Now I don't have to suckup to people and I can be an arse! :D

I kid.. I kid.

[Munsu]

In other news, visible reputation is now optional, on a provisional basis. Maybe that can help cut down the drama. Maybe not.

You're no fun.

[Yukimura]

How pray tell do we control whether our rep is visible or not? Just curious.

[KoKo37]

Go to your control panel and click on 'Edit Options' and where it says -

Show My Reputation Level

Your current reputation level is displayed to other users whenever you post a message. If you would like to hide your reputation, disable this option.
you can check or uncheck that to hide or show your reputation to other people.

[ChaosK]

nope, sorry. you both fail at reputation, you both get the title :p.

So if it's turned off, can it be turned back on?

[Augury]

The option just seems to be a show / don't show switch in your control panel. I've turned it off and on and the level remains the same. Now, can your reputation still rise and fall if it's switched off (or not show)? My guess is probably yes, but you're less likely to be repped if it's disabled.

[ChaosK]

Lol, Mizuchi, switch your reputation back on just to see where you are now.

[mage]

I'm quite surprised to see that I have a positive rep :)

Seems I'm still not allowed to give rep, though.

[ChaosK]

I'm quite surprised to see that I have a positive rep :)

Seems I'm still not allowed to give rep, though.

I thought you were forced to disable it...by the way all the weird random yellings in your reputation were probably me...though i think most of them were positive :p

[mage]

I was, but I can enable it myself now.

[complich8]

hmm, what an interesting way of doing things ...

Turns out that the way the rep system is built, there's no way for me (or any admin) to completely shut a user out of it short of banning them or turning off the system.

There's 4 options that can be set: "can see who left comments" "can use" "can hide level" and "can leave negative" ... the "can use" option enables or disables a user's ability to give rep, but doesn't affect the other options (except for the ability to give negative rep).

Interestingly, for the "can hide" option, if it's set "yes" the user can opt in/out of the system, but if it's set to "no" the user is forced in regardless of other settings. That's ... really sort of lame, from an admin perspective... what can ya do though?

I guess ... just not really care :p.

[fahoumh]

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m231/fahoumh/Clipboard01-1.jpg

Looks like I have a fan....hahahahaha. I think you should have to leave a comment before you can add or subtract from someone's reputation. I mean, at least tell me what I've done wrong so I can make the appropriate corrections. Unless these are just attacks, which is a little childish and pretty lame.

EDIT: many thanks to whoever left this comment:

Reputation System:... 10-30-2006 11:13 PM Listening is a magnetic and strange thing, a creative force. The friends who listen to us are the ones we move toward. When we are listened to, it creates us, makes us unfold and expand

[SK]

Is it against the rules to sign your reps?

[complich8]

it is indeed against the rules to sign your reps.

[SK]

it is indeed against the rules to sign your reps.

Can I ask why that is?

[complich8]

it leads to retaliatory/payback reps, encourages cliques to form to artificially inflate rep scores. It's just a bad practice.

When I first set up the rep system, it caused that sort of problem, which is why the rule is there. There's more explanation of the current system and rationale in the first couple posts in this thread.

[ChaosK]

Can I ask why that is?

And within weeks we had an abundance of people reaching 9 bars of reputation.

[Super5]

I still don't like the rep system since it seriously discourages new members from posting anything. Plus, you make one screwup, your rep goes negative, and then people jump on the bandwagon...

[Danad_corps]

Hey so i've been a member of these forums for a little bit and i've just found out what those little green boxes were (i was wondering why mine was black). Anyway I think i can help you to figure out a function that would make this better (but a lot more involved).

Since people are complaining about how it could be potentially unfair since someone can get neg-reped repeatedly by a group of people for a single post, why don't you limit the neg-reping to a constant (i.e 1, 2, 3...) per post (that way someone can't be neg-reped like crazy for posting 1 bad comment.
This is kinda an off-shoot of the previous idea. You have said that you want to encourage people to post so have the constant a little higher for pos-reping.

I think that the age of a person posting here should be weighted less than the amount of posts someone has. (if you disagree please just disregard this paragraph and move onward). I think that an active forum is based on active users (people who actually post). Someone who has been here for years but has only posted a handful should not be more powerful than someone who has been here for a few weeks but already has a boatload of quality posts.

As for being able to successfully provide an upper limit to these posts, it would be easier to do so using a logarithmic or natural logarithmic function. That way you can newer members achieve power much quicker than with a square-root function (i graphed a ln(3.5x) function and compared it to a sqrt(x/40) function. They ended up in near the same place after x=3000, but the ln(3.5x) achieved a much higher value at the start and stayed above the square-root function.
I used ln(3.5x) rather than ln(x) because ln(x) = 10 when x = >22000 whilst ln(3.5x) = 10 when x = 6300 (around). This would be useful especially for forum posts. Although both of these functions have no upper limit, it is much harder getting to a value of 11 with the logarithmic function (at 17106) than with the square-root function (at 4840).

I can't really put anything else i wanted to put because i just remembered my physics homework is due at 10 pm today. Please feel free to comment on what i've just said. If you like the idea's I could help you figure out possible equations for each function.

[complich8]

Fun facts: 88 posters (2% of everyone who's ever posted) are responsible for roughly 53% of the posts currently in the database.
663 users (15% of posters) are responsible for 90% of the posts. To be in the bottom of that 663, you'd need 50 posts.
224 people have given reputation. 9445 rep hits have been given. the top 10% of reppers have generated 68% of the hits. The top 20% have generated 84%.

That's just to make this a little more interesting. It's pretty irrelevant, I just thought I'd share.

Now on to business.


Since people are complaining about how it could be potentially unfair since someone can get neg-reped repeatedly by a group of people for a single post, why don't you limit the neg-reping to a constant (i.e 1, 2, 3...) per post (that way someone can't be neg-reped like crazy for posting 1 bad comment.

Would require significant code mods. I am trying to keep the code as close to stock as I can. Patching 6 lines in a well-defined function is easy. Patching 40 or 50 lines across 5 or so functions in 4 or so files is substantially messier to carry around with me.

Also, I don't like it. People rep-swarming a poster isn't really a huge problem. Annoying, but not huge.


This is kinda an off-shoot of the previous idea. You have said that you want to encourage people to post so have the constant a little higher for pos-reping.

This would be even more annoying to implement, and implementing it in a sane way would make every forum page view dramatically (roughly an order of magnitude) more expensive on the database side. And if I've gotta implement something halfassed, I'd prefer to leave it unimplemented if possible. I'm sort of a perfectionist like that.

Implementing it halfassedly would be fairly easy to do, given that the first code mod was already done. But it's not, and it won't be. No dice.


I think that the age of a person posting here should be weighted less than the amount of posts someone has. (if you disagree please just disregard this paragraph and move onward). I think that an active forum is based on active users (people who actually post). Someone who has been here for years but has only posted a handful should not be more powerful than someone who has been here for a few weeks but already has a boatload of quality posts.

I disagree. Someone who's coming back regularly enough to remember the place in a year deserves their power for coming back. Consider it a retention initiative.


As for being able to successfully provide an upper limit to these posts, it would be easier to do so using a logarithmic or natural logarithmic function. That way you can newer members achieve power much quicker than with a square-root function (i graphed a ln(3.5x) function and compared it to a sqrt(x/40) function. They ended up in near the same place after x=3000, but the ln(3.5x) achieved a much higher value at the start and stayed above the square-root function.

I considered using a logarithmic function, but decided against it for exactly the reasons you're advocating it: (a) I'd rather have newer or lighter posters NOT have significant power compared to older heavier posters, and (b) I still want the posts that old users make to count for something. Using a logarithmic function means that a person has to ^(base) their post count before they get another point. Square rooting means they've just got to get to the next square, which is probably going to be quite a bit closer than x^base.

For the people who are new, I want them to have a voice. But I don't want them to have much of one, until they earn it. Using a logarithmic function gives you precisely that ... an immediate jump, then tapering off to complete irrelevance.


I can't really put anything else i wanted to put because i just remembered my physics homework is due at 10 pm today. Please feel free to comment on what i've just said. If you like the idea's I could help you figure out possible equations for each function.

Physics homework ... those were the days. I miss doing hard science... those heady bygone deterministic-universe days of my youth. Concrete values, not subject to big-o or big-theta (just to uncertainty), that's what it was all about. Now every time I write a number it's either the result of a select statement, or it's an element of the set {a,b,c,i,j,k,m,n,w,x,y,z}.

[masamuneehs]

a whole lot of crazy shit

this man deserves a delightfully cold beverage, or some kind of delicious baked good! well said man, well said.

[Munsu]

Introduce Yourself! 02-07-2007 07:56 PM you make me smile

I hope this wasn't Terra, else I'm going to snap his neck.

[Danad_corps]

@ complich8: Sorry if i misinterpreted your 2nd post but it seemed like you wanted to reward the newer members and give them a decent amount of power. Upon retrospect and upon review of your statistical evidence (they weren't just put there for fun facts...i'm on to you!) it seems unfair to let the huge amount newcomers achieve a decent rep whilst there are so few who actually are the heart and soul of these forums.

It seems like you are striving for more of a retention attribute to these rep scales than one of allure, which is by all means understandable when you view it alongside the data.

as for your implementation - i am the same way. If it can't be done right, don't do it unless its absolutely necessary. There is no point in doing something half-assed especially if you are going to hate its very existence. However, i do think that a lot of people are worried about people swarming them with neg-reps. I've read through this entire thread and i've seen that issue stated quite a bit which is why i feel that it should be addressed.

Would it be more reasonable to limit the neg-reping per set period? Keep in mind that i've only coded in C++ during HS for 2 years so i'm not familiar with what would have to be implemented to do this. I'm just trying to shoot out ideas that might assuage the fears of the members of this online community. I'm tired right now so I'll definitely inform you of any other ideas i might come up with.

I'm getting neg-reped for expressing my views of an anime (w/o any cursing, lewdness, or flaming)...i thought expressing one's viewpoint of an anime was the exact point of these forums.
I just got an idea. How about an appeals process. METHOD 1: If you think you've been unfairly neg-reped, you can post you're exact post in the Appeals thread. There you have two days since the inception of your appeals post to convince people (by a gen. pub vote or by an appeals committee) to discard your neg-rep. METHOD 2: you can have a reply to comment (for the neg-reps) which will send a comment to the anonymous user who neg-reped you to ask/explain your behavior. If he/she is convinced, he/she will be able to rescind their neg-rep. If he/she is completely sure of your guiltiness, he/she could have a END DISCUSSION button to stop the replies.

Once again plz tell me if these are feasible or not or if they display some attribute that you do not want to have at all due to some ill-fated precedent or just due to your beliefs.

[KitKat]

As much as we wish that the reputation system were perfect, and people were only repped 'legitimately', it won't ever work that way in practice. Here are the main reasons people give out rep:

1. They like/don't like you or your opinion.
2. They thought you wrote something intelligent/poor.
3. They're feeling generous/cruel that day.
4. They have to rep a number of random people in order to be able to rep the person they wanted to originally.

It's impossible to place restrictions on reasons for giving rep. So, say you got negative repped for reason 4, then an appeal won't change anything because there was no logic there in the first place. There have been cases of people abusing the rep system. If you are repeatedly getting negative reps that seem like personal attacks, and you think they are all coming from the same person, you're encouraged to talk to complich8 and we can do something about that.

Otherwise, rep is somewhat of a popularity contest, and shouldn't be taken too seriously. The system was implemented as a fun idea to try, and isn't the be all and end all of the forum experience.

[Danad_corps]

kk i think i've gotten the idea behind this whole rep thing then. I had thought it was only to be used if you think someone has broken the rules and/or did/said something you thought to be valuable to the conversation at hand.

Just wondering...is # 4 true?? Why can't you just rep the person you wanted to in the first place?

[Kraco]

Just wondering...is # 4 true?? Why can't you just rep the person you wanted to in the first place?

You have to rep 20 other people before you can rep the same person again.

[complich8]

It's a tool to try to spread out the pool a little bit. Otherwise you get someone re-repping the same person over and over and over again.

As it stands, there's both that spread factor, and a time interval factor. The spread's a bit lower, it's 16 people, but you can only give 15 rep hits per day. Thus, at most, you can only give one rep hit to any given person in a day.

This is largely to avoid cliques and curtail abuse.

[Honoko]

I say it's GENIUS ;)

[itadakimasu]

i dont like that persons name... or their avatar or their lack of avatar... i think i will give them negative rep points ^^ WOOOT!!!

neg rep should be reserved for only select douche bags and haters.. and if you find yourself neg repping every day... you probably fall into one of those two categories.

[masamuneehs]

you do need to be more careful with the forum rules... and it's probably not a good idea to complain too much about Negative Reps if you, like you say, don't care about them... I used to Neg Rep anyone who seemd to make such a complaint...

just learn to let things slide. Rather, maybe these comments aren't helpful, but you could still look at some of those posts and manage to figure out how to improve your arguing and writing. Some neg reps are done out of sheer spite and assholeness, but others have a legit rationale behind them, even if it's not evident from the rep comment.

[JaySee]

I don't understand the whole anonymity thing... Why not attach names to reps?

[Munsu]

Mainly to prevent the phenomenon known as the "Circle Jerk".

[JaySee]

Well, it helps what I call the neg rep stalkers. They like to stalk people's posts to neg rep.

[Munsu]

To us, that's the lesser of the two evils... there's also some other reasons why it's done this way. If you feel you're constantly getting neg repped unnecessarily and it bothers you, simply disable the function.

[?igma]

I also get neg repped sometimes it seems, maybe I should get an Avatar :P Seems as the people with teh pictures! get positive rep. I also feel that if people disagree with eachother, one of them is bound to neg rep someone just out of Spite.

This whole things is bullshit to me anyways :P

[Board of Command]

There are several members with ridiculously low reputation. The current leader is Animeniax.

I'm going to try to overtake him. Everyone neg rep me as much as possible and see if I can discover the depths of the rep system. Is it doable in one month? We'll find out.

I will keep a daily record of how many +/- reps I get. There will always be Animeniax fans +repping me. Bastards.

Merged this thread with the one in Announcements, since they essentially cover the same kind of stuff. Renamed the thread to more accurately reflect the contents...

Sorry BoC, but I did keep the poll up.
masa

[gr3atfull]

This should be interesting. Good luck!

[Board of Command]

Day 1 results:

1 positive
9 negative
Net change: -61 points

Keep it up guys!

[Lucifus]

Done and done. Become the baddest on gotwoot.:rolleyes:

[Board of Command]

Decent progress so far today. Keep it up. Don't just neg rep this post...whenever I post anything, neg rep it immediately.

Day 2 results:

1 positive
8 negative
Net change: -62 points

[gr3atfull]

Not every one reads this thread. You should put a message in your signature to inform every one about your challenge.

[Board of Command]

Good thinking. I sure will.

[Assertn]

Doesn't stand out enough...make it bold

[Board of Command]

I think it's good to go now.

[SK]

I assumed I had the lowest? :confused:

[Board of Command]

Animeniax has the lowest ever.

[JaySee]

I doubt you'll even catch up to me. I've already gotten 2 idiotic neg reps from this thread.

[Shadow Skill]

I don't understand it. :/

[kAi]

I had the lowest rep some time ago.

How many points do you have BoC?
and with 2 day results having ~ -60 each day.
Should be possible.

[Board of Command]

Day 3 results:

3 negs
1 neutral (no rep power)
Net change: -17 points

Really really slow day there... Kai, I'm currently at 572.

[gr3atfull]

How much did you start with?

[Board of Command]

Starting point was 712.

[dragonrage]

Putting aside the fact that this idea basically ridicules the reason that the system was first put in place for. It do make fun of those that constantly whine about every single rep that they thought was unfair and stupid blah blah blah....... Here is a person with a pretty respectable rep trying to make his way to the very bottom, it ridicules both the system and the people whole make the system unbearable at times. But since all the drama has basically went away I am kinda torn, "is this a good idea or just another mistake...."

Well whatever if the forces to be can let it go why the hell can't I....

Anyways if you want to achieve your goal. Go and piss assertnfailure and BUD as well as jad and XDM; if you can find them. Since they basically have the highest repping power those are they guys that are key to your goal.Assertnfailure and Bud are pretty easy to piss off, and I am guessing that he is already helping out. For Bud well make a mistake or two in the threads that his is intensely involved in and you should get your result. All of this is only possible of course, if the mods repping power haven't been limited. I know that the admins has been capped at +/- 25 but i don't recall if the mods were.

Anyways good luck I guess.


p.s. I am interested to know complich8's thoughts on this matter.....

[Board of Command]

I'm pretty sure all the top brass are okay with it. No complaints so far.

And I'm not going to go out of my way to get neg reps (other than my sig). This is purely a voluntary "support the movement" thing. I'm not going to go out and shit on threads to speed it up.

[Mr. Roboto]

the other part that makes it hard to help him achieve his goal is the rule about spreading the reps around. it's more difficult than i thought to find other people to rep that i wouldn't have repped in the first place. i guess that is going to throw the system off too. although, i don't think that i have much power when it comes to repping members. however, i did go back to some older threads and found members that i should have repped before i figured out how the system worked.

[complich8]

On principle, I disapprove of the whole affair. I don't like this thread having been hijacked as it has been, but I should have locked it about 6 pages ago when it started going south to begin with.

On the other hand, making fun of that also diminishes the drama, and as Roboto points out, for people to participate they've got to go around repping people, which drives overall rep participation and theoretically actual forum participation, all of which is positive.

I think the positives of the exercise outweigh the negatives, so I'm mildly in support of this, inasmuch as I'll allow it to go on. So long as BoC doesn't adopt the asinine posting style of the people he's trying to compete with, that is.

[Board of Command]

Hey I didn't hijack this thread. I started my own thread in General and Masa merged it with this.

If you wanted me to, I could go through and pick out all these posts and remake it into a separate one, then lock and delete it on grounds of being trolling/contentless. And then I'd have to warn you and go on a massive repping spree to Pos Rep you as many times as possible to stop your little plan.

And stop posting so much on this thread, like comp asked. Have your fun, but keep it relativey slop-free.

masa

[Assertn]

Anyways if you want to achieve your goal. Go and piss assertnfailure and BUD as well as jad and XDM; if you can find them.
Only problem with that is that it usually takes me a while to rep 12 different people (or however many the min limit is) before I can rep a person again.

[Shadow Skill]

I still don't understand this... :(

[Yukimura]

Lol, good work BoC, I think it's cool that you might manage to fully destroy the utility of the rep system. I've already gotten one rep with the text "You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Board of Command again." and I doubt i'm the only one or that it'll be the last.

If enough people get in on this and keep handing out random reps just to get another shot at BoC the numbers for most people should completely stop having meaning within a month or two. A semi-viable solution would be to collectively choose 12 other people and designate them as rep recovery resevoirs, repping one post by each of these people then returning to BoC. If these 12 people would be the only ones with completely bogus reputations BoC could have his fun while the rest of the system would still have what meaning it did before.

[Board of Command]

Day 4 results:

5 negs
Net change: -42 points

You bring up a good point, Yuki. My progress would probably slow down to a grind in a few days due to the way the rep system is set up. The problem with the bogus system is that you can only rep one post once, so these bogus accounts must keep making new posts to receive more reps. Oh well...we'll see how far the current system will take me.

[RyougaZell]

I just love being neg repped whenever I post that I bought new naruto figures on the Naruto forums.:rolleyes:

[Yukimura]

I never said anything about bogus accounts, I meant pick 12 people with lots of posts (say the 12 people with the most posts for example) the goeal of my thought experiment was to get you your neg rep and contain the rep destruction to only 12 people, but as you said, they'd have to be people with lots of posts to fresh posts would exist to fuel the cycle until it was complete. Now this does bring up the dilemma of do the people with the most posts deserve to have their reps ruined so that BoC can have fun, but there are a lot of people with large post counts that haven't been back for a while so maybe they woulnd't mind.

[Assassin]

Yuki, the rep system was ruined about 2 weeks after it began, back when the original circle jerk started.

[RyougaZell]

LOL... I wasn't trying to get pos repped for bitching about a neg rep, and suddenly the previous post here got 3 pos and 1 neg.

The neg one was funny as hell btw. "Get a life nerdy" hahaha... hmmm... Lets see... I have a full time job, with a good sallary, I watch anime as hobby, I play videogames as hobby, I have friends, I ofter go to reunions.

Yes. I have no life. Im a Computer Systems Engineer after all :D

[dragonrage]

talk about a sucky existence. Man you need to get out more often DL. :p

[Board of Command]

Ok 3 people pos repped me in the last little while. They're obviously Animeniax fans. As you can see my rep is now back up to 6 bars.

Thanks a lot, assholes.

[ChaosK]

http://img409.imageshack.us/img409/71/repscr1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Ok, so I haven't made a post since 2-11-07 before this one, but in the 2+ months I was gone, it's nice to know I was still loved.

BoC I have a rep power of 21...whatever the hell that means and I'll be glad to help you decrease that rep..you..uhh deserve it?

[Super5]

This is interesting, I would like to help but I have no repping power...

I'm not an Animeniax fan, but you'll never catch up to him. Maybe if you started with neutral rep you'd have a chance, but he's too far ahead. And he doesn't compare to the neg-rep legend that was Mizuchi. Aww, what the hell, I'll cheer for you anyway!

Go BoC!!!!

[Mizuchi]

And he doesn't compare to the neg-rep legend that was Mizuchi. Aww, what the hell, I'll cheer for you anyway!

Go BoC!!!!

This literally made me LMAO!!!!
hahah lol wow. I took like 3 months off from posting regularly, and i havent had a rep in like half a year. Its nice to know that my name still lives on.

[Board of Command]

<3 Mizuchi

[RyougaZell]

I don't care if I get neg repped for a bad post, or because someone simply thinks totally different from me.

But I totally hate getting neg rep on serious threads. Got a neg rep on the thread about the asian guy (forgot his name already) that killed his classmates and on WD's thread about the insecurity we live on Mexico.

[Animeniax]

BoC, one of those pos reps was from me because I didn't know about your quest. Sorry about that. It probably didn't hurt your score much though, considering my rep power.

It's kind of an unfair contest, since I've been banned twice in the past few months, once for 1 month and just now for 10 days. Plus, a lot of people fell for my "please neg rep me" sig, and gave me pos rep out of spite to slow my progression. A few people did give me neg rep to help me, but that actually went against my plan. I thank them for their support anyway.

Personally I think the rep system works well, except it makes people fear being themselves or speaking their minds (therefore it produces the same fear as raising your hand in class and asking a question, for fear of being called dumb). For the most part all of us here are social miscreants who have won few popularity contests in our lives to be sure. What makes the mods think we can successfully participate in a popularity contest on these forums?

[Deadfire]

What makes the mods think we can successfully participate in a popularity contest on these forums?

Now if I can remember right here the mods did not have a hand in making the rep system. That would be your admin. We just sat back and watched the creation become what it is today.

In fact I myself have said any multiple occasions that the rep system doesn't work, and it's nothing more then a tool people use for what ever reason they wish.

It's funny how every mod is different on how they deal with things yet we are all branded the same....

[Animeniax]

Now if I can remember right here the mods did not have a hand in making the rep system. That would be your admin. We just sat back and watched the creation become what it is today.

In fact I myself have said any multiple occasions that the rep system doesn't work, and it's nothing more then a tool people use for what ever reason they wish.

It's funny how every mod is different on how they deal with things yet we are all branded the same....
D'oh, my bad then. Admins and mods are higher level beings (on a forum), so it's users vs mods\admins, so they are usually grouped together. It's also easy to mass mods into one group, especially on this forum, since their primary way of dealing with things is to click the "BAN" button.

I think the current rep system, while flawed, adds another layer of participation to a forum, so I'm all for it.

[JaySee]

It's because they're the man, and everyone hates the man.

[Board of Command]

I don't hate the man.

[gr3atfull]

I don't care if I get neg repped for a bad post, or because someone simply thinks totally different from me.

But I totally hate getting neg rep on serious threads. Got a neg rep on the thread about the asian guy (forgot his name already) that killed his classmates and on WD's thread about the insecurity we live on Mexico.

Did they at least leave a comment of why they neg rep you?

[Animeniax]

I doubt it matters the reason they neg rep, some people are just overly concerned with the final score.

[Mr. Roboto]

stop neg repping people for no reason. i got one today that said "I don't like you". if you don't like me then put me on your ignore list. chances are i don't like you either and, judging by the fact that your neg rep didn't have any effect on me, it would seem that a bunch of other people around here don't like you either. i'm pretty sure that this person is the same person that's left me other unwarranted neg reps before.

[JaySee]

I don't see why you should care. Take a look at the people's posts that actually have rep. Most post a bunch of nonsense and fanboy chatter. They suck each others cocks and pos rep each other, and that's how it's built up. Say anything against the grain or thought provoking and you'll get neg repped. It's how humanity works. Anyone who sticks out gets hated. I really don't give a shit about who's neg repping me. I'm more interested in who's Pos repping me. Sometimes I get commentless pos reps! Whomever's pos repping me, send me a PM with it as well. Maybe you're someone I can have an intelligent conversation with. Maybe it's just BoC messing with me. :D

[Animeniax]

I've read some of your posts roboto, so I doubt they did it "for no reason".

If it didn't affect your rep, why worry about it? Does the one red box in the field of green really matter that much to you?

[Board of Command]

I don't see why you should care. Take a look at the people's posts that actually have rep. Most post a bunch of nonsense and fanboy chatter. They suck each others cocks and pos rep each other, and that's how it's built up. Say anything against the grain or thought provoking and you'll get neg repped. It's how humanity works. Anyone who sticks out gets hated. I really don't give a shit about who's neg repping me. I'm more interested in who's Pos repping me. Sometimes I get commentless pos reps! Whomever's pos repping me, send me a PM with it as well. Maybe you're someone I can have an intelligent conversation with. Maybe it's just BoC messing with me. :D
I don't mess with people.

[Animeniax]

I agree with everything JaySee is saying, and some of the pos reps you got were from me, except I usually leave comments, if not a signature. I am somewhat intelligent and think the same of you. However, I am antisocial so I have no interest in talking to you further :p.

[Board of Command]

I agree with everything JaySee is saying, and some of the pos reps you got were from me, except I usually leave comments, if not a signature. I am somewhat intelligent and think the same of you. However, I am antisocial so I have no interest in talking to you further :p.
Will you be my e-friend?

[JaySee]

HAHA! Look at this moronic neg-rep someone gave me for the above post.

seriously stop whining. Also what u just stated still counts as rep soliciting
Solicit - to make a petition or request, as for something desired.
Thus, Rep Soliciting = requesting rep. Something I most certainly did NOT do. :rolleyes: Thus is the intelligence of the people who neg-rep me... I wonder if he neg-reps BoC for every single post he makes because his sig is most definitely a rep solicitation.

By the way... Speaking of the guidlines; does anyone actually FOLLOW THEM?


Try to give out more positive reputation hits than negative ones.
No soliciting rep hits.
Don't take it too seriously.
Leave comments with your rep hits.

I highly doubt the first is followed. Most people by nature are haters. Especially on this board.
The second one is broken by every post of BoC.
Most of these neg-reppers and the people complaining about them definitely don't follow the third.
The fourth is what I just commented on previously.

[Animeniax]

Sorry no, BoC, for the same reason I won't with Jaysee.

Dang, I never read the rules about rep soliciting. I don't know if my sig violates this rule, though I haven't received any warning or reps citing my rep soliciting.

[JaySee]

I just got another stupid neg-rep :D

this post bores me, as does the rest of the thread.
I'm just a few neg-reps from catching up to you Animeniax. ;)

Here's a few more genius tid-bits.

carnage was out way before T1000
A simple google search proves this so very wrong.


you should be banned asshole. get the hell out of this forums, your kind only makes this planet sick
Some classic fanboy rage. :p

[Animeniax]

I think the rep system would work better if it wasn't anonymous. Then people would be accountable for their meanness and/or fanboyism.

I'm at -475 JaySee. Have you read my posts in Off Topic lately? Those will ensure I'm in the -600s in a couple days.

[JaySee]

I'm only at -322. I'm not posting much anymore. I'm bored of fighting the fanboys and their unintelligent responses. By the way, you and I have no repping power, so your reps don't actually do anything. I'm not sure what's the positive for making the repping anonymous myself either. On some other boards I'm on, the repping has names attached. This leads to interesting PM conversations and debates.

[Board of Command]

I envy you guys. Spread the love.

[Assertn]

This literally made me LMAO!!!!
hahah lol wow. I took like 3 months off from posting regularly, and i havent had a rep in like half a year. Its nice to know that my name still lives on.
Your name has been immortalized in my sig.

[JaySee]

The flood of "smart" neg-reps continue.


We all know you are but a whiner, no matter how much you pretend to enjoy your neg rep.
Oooh! Now they're trying to be shakespearean!


pfft Idiot.. Asking for pos reppers to PM you leads to soliciting because it does not remain anynonymous and was outlawed by complich8 a while back
Uhh.... yeah... that makes sense... So no longer anonymous = soliciting? :confused:
Funny how this "outlawing" is not stickied anywhere.

Found where it's outlawed. Nice broken logic on how signing a rep = soliciting.


watch as I give you a neg rep for no reason
The beautiful maturity of these forums.

I'm at -351 now Animeniax. Someone's really going out of their way for me. :cool:

[Animeniax]

The flood of "smart" neg-reps continue.

Oooh! Now they're trying to be shakespearean!

I'm at -351 now Animeniax. Someone's really going out of their way for me. :cool:
Hahahah! Shakespeare sux.

I'm stuck at -480. I think all the fanboys have to spread more reputation before getting back to neg repping me, so you might get dangerously close to my score before I make the leap to the -500s.

Once again though, it's plain to see that this system doesn't work, but it is a lot of fun to mess with.

[XanBcoo]

I bet whoever's leaving those hilarious reps cry while they masturbate.

Seriously, I'm all for leaving neg reps if you don't like someone, but if you wanna have an argument, do it in the forums, not through the rep system. It defeats the whole purpose of the forums in the first place. Fanboy rage indeed.

I remember getting a neg rep a while back telling me that "Simpsons rule" when I mentioned how the more recent seasons sucked. I would have loved to discuss this properly in the thread, but I never got the chance :(. The Simpsons recent suckage is something I'm quite passionate about.

[masamuneehs]

i find it funny that you two actively seek out negative reputation, then complain about the comments when you get it... Well, I for one will no longer feed into it.

I've always been in favor of a certain level of negative reputation resulting in a ban (say 200 or so), since, to me, that low of a rep would indicate that the collective forum disproves of that user and would, overall, be happier if that person was banned. However, some feared that one or two spam-reppers would ostracize new, subpar posters without the "public mandate" that I envisioned low rep signifying.

However, in light of current events, I'd like to seek to institute a rule that would do just that. The rep system was made partly to reward good posters and punish bad ones, but now we have people delighting in getting on people's nerves. Personally, I consider "seeking neg reps" through intentionally poor and/or controversial posting habits to be trolling, and I'd like it to end.

So, I'd like to propose the following rule and hear what people have to say about it:

If a user reachs -200 reputation, has more than 10 posts, and has been an active forum member for more than two months, that user recieves a month long ban. At the end of that month, that user's rep is adjusted to return to -100, and he/she is allowed to return to the forums. However, a second time reaching -200 (barring extraordinary circumstances) will result in a permanent ban.

To me this is more than fair. -200 is an incredibly low reputation to reach, almost always requiring a high number of forum members to neg rep that person. Brand new members who might not yet be acclimated to forum posting would not be hurt, since they'd have two whole months after joining to improve.

The offender would even get a second chance, and the extraordinary circumstances would be people neg-repping that person for no good reason after they've returned, or a very small number of persistent neg-reppers to cause that person to slip down -100 points. The staff has the ability to see what posts were repped and by whom.

I'd like to see what people have to say about this.

[Animeniax]

If we are "seeking neg reps", it's for no other reason besides to ridicule the system and the fanboys that populate it. I personally am not seeking neg reps, but have a tendency to receive them anyway, so why not celebrate it. It's kind of like why gays becoming flaming, though I don't like the comparison, neither do I dislike gays.

Some of my statements and conclusions go against the grain, which is easy when dealing with a homogeneous throng of nerds. Does that make my viewpoint less appropriate on a public forum? Don't the moderators already patrol these waters? Do you really need another system in place to keep the masses in line?

I think the -200 rule is ridiculous. Look at our main argument here: fanboys suck and make the system useless. You're going to let a bunch of fanboys decide what's appropriate for this forum? You revel in being the "immoderate moderator", so your judgment is questionable as well, but let's see what others think.

Some other justification for why a -200 rule wouldn't work.
I received neg rep for saying Orochimaru was my favorite badguy from Naruto.
I received neg rep for saying Lord of the Rings wasn't the be-all-end-all fantasy series everyone claims it is.
I received neg rep for asking if anyone has tasted Bomba energy drink.

People aren't encouraged to speak their minds or have differences of opinion on this forum as it is, so an automatic ban would be like the Salem witch trials.

[JaySee]

I assume you're referring to BoC and Animeniax and not me. I don't actively pursue any rep.

Your rules are useless with the current rep system. Everyone would have to be reset to 0 and the anonymity gone. There are far too many idiots on this board and gaining rep power is pretty easy. Just be a fanboy and post useless crap a few times that will spark no response and you get repping power. Then they go on their rampage continually posting useless nonsense and neg repping the slightest different view.

I don't know if you can, but if you can, look at my account and the posts for which I get neg repped. They are most definitely not trolls. They're either:
A.) Critical (FANBOYS CHARGE!!!) This and this were bad about an episode/chapter.
B.) Speculative (Fanboy says "That would never happen!" and it happens (http://forums.gotwoot.net/showpost.php?p=319939&postcount=30))
C.) Corrective (Fanboy said something stupid and I corrected him so he retaliates.)
D.) Suggestive: It would be cool if... (Fanboy: FUCK NO IT WOULDN'T!!!)

XanBcoo, the Simpsons do suck ass. The movie coming out looks like crap. After about season 4 it was downhill. They should've cancelled it long ago. (awaits neg rep)

Anyways, I guess it is OUR FAULTS. We make an attempt at showing different views and invoking thought. This place is obviously created by, run by, and for mostly stupid fanboys. So maybe Mas is right. Maybe we should be banned? Time to find another board to talk about manga/anime where the demographic isn't 13-21 year old retarded fanboys. Not to mention douchebag mods who give out stupid warnings and bans for DBZ references and "baiting other users (http://forums.gotwoot.net/showpost.php?p=334694&postcount=19)" out of personal vendetta because they can't find a good legitimate reason. Let's not forget the mod who posts a bunch of drivel (http://forums.gotwoot.net/search.php?searchid=53715) and lame attempts at sarcasm, stupidly censors posts (http://forums.gotwoot.net/showpost.php?p=334406&postcount=51), threatens everyone in a thread (http://forums.gotwoot.net/showpost.php?p=330355&postcount=1337), and "prophesizes" in anime threads for which he reads the manga. :rolleyes:

[Board of Command]

JaySee, I'm no longer seeking neg reps anymore because I realized I will never catch up to you guys. I've simply come to far in the positive direction to go down to the red.

However, you can still neg reg me all you want.

[complich8]

I never thought I'd see the day I'd agree with animeniax...

Look, the rep system is a toy. It's a popularity contest. It's stupid. It's trivial. It's easily subverted. It's easily exploited. Yadda yadda yadda.

It's not meant to be a user banning system. If people are breaking rules, ban them. If people are doing things that aren't necessarily against the rules but are ban-worthy, warn and/or ban them. If people are just being stupid ... well ... people are stupid, deal with it.

I would purge the entire rep table, reset the scores and then disable the system entirely before I let it be used as a referendum on banning.

I think it was Jefferson who said something about democracy being two wolves and a sheep discussing what to have for lunch... just some food for thought.

I've said before, if you don't like the rep system -- if you think it's pointless, if you think it's exploitable, if you think it colors people's opinion of you in ways you'd rather not have their opinions colored, or if you just don't like the idea, just disable showing it. People will still rep you, but not as much, and you can totally ignore it.

I'm getting really sick of the petty bickering and stupidity that this thread has degenerated into though. So I'm putting a stop to it. Locked. If you have issues with persistent harassment or other problems with the system, send me a PM, don't air your dirty laundry in public.