Quote:
Originally Posted by Ledgem
I don't doubt that this may have occurred, but how is this any different than standard discussions? If you have one person saying something and then a group of other people are speaking against them, they're less likely to keep participating. Similarly, if someone says something and then a bunch of people express agreement - whether by outright saying it, by quoting them approvingly, or by echoing similar lines of thought - they're going to feel emboldened by perceived support. That's just human group dynamics. The reputation system may have put some of the support and detraction behind the scenes, but the dynamics themselves won't change.
|
Sure. But we didn't need an invisible system where an artificial notion of power gives certain individuals that much more sway in these dynamics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KholdStare
@relentlessflame: My bad, I meant to post more but something went wrong. I edited it quickly. I think you confused me with someone else though, because you never needed to tell me to not post one-liners. In fact, this was what I had to say. |
I meant that I already explained to you the nature of the problem we saw with rep, but your "support" for the other post basically ignores the conversation we had less than a few hours ago. I realize that you aren't convinced, but to frame the whole thing as "I think it's being blown out of proportion" when you don't have the facts needed to make that assertion, just because it supports your personal desire... it's just frustrating. It's like why even bother trying to provide information? People will believe whatever they want.