Reputation

[Guy]

Reputation should not be based on age, because if you really take a look around, there are some older and supposedly mature ones who abuse the reputation system. So, strictly cuffing down the system by age might still create those who abuse it run loose. So, basing it on age in my opinion isn't the best idea. I mean, yes, kids at a young age can be reckless or tend not to pay attention, however there are a few who actually take things into consideration and there are a lot around the site who can handle it younger than ten. For the record, I was a tame young lad at a young age as well, because it all depends on how you are raised really to determine your personality at a young age.

Anyway, besides age I agree that if the rules on reputation are given more explicitely and with more detail then at least more members will begin to understand the correct concept of it. I mean, some think it is based on opinion others think not and some think it unfair. So, if we can easily manage a healthy working system and give it a run, then what harm can be done besides seeing if it is an epic win or epic fail. Honestly, if left to lag the problem will only carry on and grow larger later on, while if at least fixed now maybe memebers will understand how it works and gain better knowledge of it.

 

[ruby]

Actually this thread had nothing to do with rep abuse, it was actually saying that I liked the reputation system.

You realise creating threads like this dosen't help with keeping the rep system?

All it does it create more fuss and opportunities for people to whine about it. :|

As I said before, creating threads like this aren't going to help your cause at all.

 

[True Reign]

Jpp8 is right.

I can be a hundred right now, then tomorrow be a year old.

 

[Spinor]

So what do you have against just taking action against those rule breakers and leaving the people doing nothing wrong alone?

If the people that do nothing wrong start abusing the rep system, from before the point they start abusing they are not people that haven't done anything wrong.

 

[레트로]

AdvancedK9, you're saying that because I have an infraction I shouldn't be able to give out negative reputation? That's a pretty crappy generalization. I think I've given out... one, maybe two negative reputations throughout my whole time at PC.

 

[Spinor]

Maybe that's exactly what I'm saying once you get your fifth one. I never said one infraction is grounds for disabling.

 

[PiroMunkie]

If the people that do nothing wrong start abusing the rep system, from before the point they start abusing they are not people that haven't done anything wrong.

I don't quite understand what are you attempting to convey. Are you talking about people who aren't doing anything wrong now, but may abuse in the future? I'm sorry if I'm misunderstanding.

 

[Spinor]

I don't quite understand what are you attempting to convey. Are you talking about people who aren't doing anything wrong now, but may abuse in the future? I'm sorry if I'm misunderstanding.

The criminal mind is automatically criminal from the point they think about it if they actually do it. So if someone who is Infracto-Free thinks of starting to abuse the rep system, they technically are not that Infracto-Free from that point if they actually do start abusing it.

 

[레트로]

Maybe that's exactly what I'm saying once you get your fifth one. I never said one infraction is grounds for disabling.

So once I get a few more infractions I'll be compelled to abuse reputation?

 

[Nick]

Maybe that's exactly what I'm saying once you get your fifth one. I never said one infraction is grounds for disabling.

But... people get infractions all the time. Just because they do one thing wrong, it doesn't mean they should get something taken away due to it. Plus, only Admins can do that and people get infractions ALL the time. That'd be so annoying for the Admins to keep track with those people who get rep disabled just because they get an infraction. :|

 

[Spinor]

But... people get infractions all the time. Just because they do one thing wrong, it doesn't mean they should get something taken away due to it. Plus, only Admins can do that and people get infractions ALL the time. That'd be so annoying for the Admins to keep track with those people who get rep disabled just because they get an infraction. :|

Isn't there why there are scripts that can be generated to do that automatically? Or are we all still in the age of DOS?

 

[레트로]

AdvancedK9, why'd you ignore my post....?

 

[Nick]

Isn't there why there are scripts that can be generated to do that automatically? Or are we all still in the age of DOS?

Even if a script were to be made to automatically disable reputation for a user due to the fact that they accumulate X amount of reputation, it'll be difficult to manage those users who had their reputation disabled. :|

Seems kind of extreme to disable someone's reputation for them accumulating infractions for something that reputation has nothing to do with.

 

[PiroMunkie]

The criminal mind is automatically criminal from the point they think about it if they actually do it. So if someone who is Infracto-Free thinks of starting to abuse the rep system, they technically are not that Infracto-Free from that point if they actually do start abusing it.

Then they shall suffer the consequences of their actions after those actions occur, but one cannot punish an individual for something that hasn't taken place based on possibilities.

 

[parallelzero]

I get the oddest feeling that if I read all five pages of this thread I'm going to find myself wasting time reading unnecessary arguments / reiteration of the same points over and over again, so does someone want to summarize what the hell is going on in here?

 

[Taemin]

I get the oddest feeling that if I read all five pages of this thread I'm going to find myself wasting time reading unnecessary arguments / reiteration of the same points over and over again, so does someone want to summarize what the hell is going on in here?

People are arguing over little green squares on a Pokemon forum. :D

-shot-

Nothing's really been achieved.

 

[Nick]

The criminal mind is automatically criminal from the point they think about it if they actually do it. So if someone who is Infracto-Free thinks of starting to abuse the rep system, they technically are not that Infracto-Free from that point if they actually do start abusing it.

I think I just lost some brain cells after reading this post. :(

Yes, because one infraction for an off topic reply to a thread is just so criminal.

I really think that you're overthinking this and taking this just a bit too seriously. :|

 

[jasonresno]

I hate how childish negative reputation can get but I love the system. I've been in very mature and intelligent debates with people on the forums and somebody out of nowhere will hit me with a negative rep just because they disagree. It's stupid and really not what the system is for. I think there should be a few people who has the sole responsibility of "approving" reputation addition/subtractions. It'd be a hassle but it'd even it all out.

 

[레트로]

Put em' up, I'm gonna beat you! (b._.)b

 

[Mika]

o.O didn't we have this discussion last week and didn't it turn into a bloodbath?

Seriously people, enough is enough. ;o;

Something tells me that every time someone creates one of these threads a pichu somewhere dies. ;;

On a more serious note, as some of you apparently didn't learn this lesson back in primary, whining/throwing a tantrum gets you nothing. ~3~ Nothing. Nada. Zilch. All it does is aggravates people and starts these little childish spats that don't go anywhere and just make the people in charge mad. :<