My opinion, my direct opinion, is that reputation should not be based off of one's opinion. A forum is a place to come into discussion on a topic. Share your thoughts on an idea, comment, or opinion. The world is a free place to express someone's opinion, and to negatively rep someone because they don't agree isn't fair in my eyes. The reason why is because everyone is different, everyone has their own thoughts, and why should someone be negatively repped because they had a different opinion. In a thread, if someone has an opinion, instead of giving one bad reputation, why not continue the discussion of the thread and create a formal plain out of it. By this I mean, for example, one may like Aggron better than Tyrantitar, well then, instead of giving someone bad reputation for saying that post again following the discussion of the thread [without spamming] and back up your idea on why you may or may not agree.
I mean honestly, why should someone be based off of their opinion? That isn't fair for anyone, because then it is best for one to stay quiet and not say anything. That is how people are being treated here. I don't like your opinion, so here is some bad rep. Why? To me, reputation doesn't need to be based on opinion, because then no one will be able to speak freely in a discussion without the fear of someone disagreeing and bad repping them.
Now, what should someone be possibly neg repped for? Well, that depends, as stated if someone used bad grammar, then sure I wouldn't consider that abuse. It is actually a helpful cause as it may promote that one target to learn to focus on their grammar when posting. Also, when someone may be spamming a thread, then I wouldn't consider that abuse either. Again, it only helps promote those to not spam in a thread and actually provide the thread with an ongoing discussion. Another example that may not be called as abuse is possible because the person was possibly causing a feud within the thread. This is something that happens a lot and really shouldn't. So to stop the argument, neg repping them isn't terrible. As again, it'll promote one not to continue to start a feud but just ignore it.
Also, if reputation is such a problem for staff and members, then honestly why continue it with a warning when you can simply remove it? People complain everyday about their abuse, and yes it is annoying, but why hear this complaint and be bothered by it when you can easily dispose of it? In my opinion, if one matter can cause such a problem end it. With this, you'll first hear a person saying, "Aw, why remove it, that isn't fair." However, that uproar will eventually die out and people will forget about the whole thing. However, if you keep it you'll just always get continuous complaints.
For me, honestly, I say remove it. The reason why is because it'll be less of a hassle for staff and less of a deal for members. No one will be able to abuse anything and no one will always be able to come up with threads and the CQ&A always starting a known complaint. Also, as for Spey, some posts he has done were uncalled for, but others are his opinion or curiosity. Can you blame someone for being curious about something, especially if they are semi-new or were gone for a long period of time. Spey, I do agree has at times spammed threads or posted unrelated topics, however not everything he does needs to be de-repped.
As for derepping someone just because you hate them or dislike them is only immaturity for one. You don't like someone, then ignore them. Don't continue a problem when you aren't looking for a fight. It isn't the best thing to do for someone just because you don't like them. Also, picking on the noobs with bad reputation is only causing more of a trouble for the community. You'll only scare them away because they'll feel unwanted or you'll only cause them to create unecessary questions. So, you dislike someone, don't neg rep them for that, but simply ignore them and evade the problem and just move on with yourself.
