Question: Detailed Rep View

[Malkuth]

Where can one see for which posts he received reputation? I recall a couple of times viewing a page like that, but I can not find it anymore.

And while on the subject, why can't we see WHO gives reputation?

[NightWish]

The answers you are looking for can be found in the Reputation FAQ, which is linked from the Important Threads sticky at the top of this forum. One day we'll move the information to the proper FAQ, but that could be a while off yet...

For speed, I'll also answer here in brief:

• You'll find the list in your User CP.
  Note: This is a recent list, there is no complete list that is both user accessible and shows all awards.
• Because we configured it that way

[TinyRedLeaf]

Originally Posted by Malkuth

And while on the subject, why can't we see WHO gives reputation?

Because reputation can cut both ways, negative as well as positive. Not surprisingly, people who give out razzies instead of cookies aren't keen on identifying themselves, lest their victims seek revenge.

[SeijiSensei]

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

Because reputation can cut both ways, negative as well as positive. Not surprisingly, people who give out razzies instead of cookies aren't keen on identifying themselves, lest their victims seek revenge.

A policy which, in my mind, just encourages bad behavior hidden behind anonymity.

As my mother would often say, "If you don't have something good to say about someone, don't say anything at all."

I'd abolish negative rep entirely if I were czar. If you object to something in a posting, then reply in the forum and hash it out in public. If you're not willing to sign your name to it, then shut up. If a post is truly unacceptable (racist, etc.), then hit the report button and let the mods do their job.

I only ever get negative rep for the stupidest of reasons, and it's never signed.

[The Small One]

Originally Posted by SeijiSensei

A policy which, in my mind, just encourages bad behavior hidden behind anonymity.

I think if neg-rep were not anonymous, then the people who would get it would definately misuse the rep to take "revenge", which isn't what the system is meant for.

As my mother would often say, "If you don't have something good to say about someone, don't say anything at all."

I'd abolish negative rep entirely if I were czar.

If there were no neg-rep, then there is no point in giving rep at all, since all it can do is grow anyways.

If you object to something in a posting, then reply in the forum and hash it out in public.

And pull a whole thread into off-topic-ness? No thanks. Some things are better not to be told in public.

[Aoie_Emesai]

Sigh... if no one has noticed. Rep have always been an anonymous of critiquing others personal behavior on the internet forums. While some forums show the users of their rep, some don't. Either way, it has never bothered me.

It has been anonymous, and I think it should stay that way.

ps: I can go about giving you a negative rep if you wish to test it out ^^

[felix]

Originally Posted by SeijiSensei

I'd abolish negative rep entirely if I were czar. If you object to something in a posting, then reply in the forum and hash it out in public. If you're not willing to sign your name to it, then shut up. If a post is truly unacceptable (racist, etc.), then hit the report button and let the mods do their job.

I have to agree with TSO, your logic is just in favor of the individual. In favor of the community rep is best kept by default anonymous. Tacking it in the thread is unnaceptable and does nothing but, given a iffy situation place you as the flaim-bait'er and the other person as the basher, in which scenario whos more/less wrong then? This goes with outh saying this is a discussion forum not a competion.

Also, you are free like the rest of us to opt out if you wish, remember most of the people who give you rep (one kind or the other) are likely in the age group 10 to 16. Hence rep equals: "good/bad kindergarden teacher"

[mit7059]

I also feel like negative rep should either be signed or be abolished, I got negative rep the other day for double posting in a suggestion thread, I'm so sorry I remembered another series that I thought the OP might like. If you're going to have negative rep then you need to disable the ability to disable rep, because I'm assuming that anyone who only gets negative rep would just disable it.

[Sinfully Naomi]

Originally Posted by The Small One

I think if neg-rep were not anonymous, then the people who would get it would definately misuse the rep to take "revenge", which isn't what the system is meant for.

I have to disagree. If the negative rep system weren't anonymous, there would be less negative rep going around. People would mind their tongue when they give someone a negative rep as well.

If there were no neg-rep, then there is no point in giving rep at all, since all it can do is grow anyways.

Grow, or stay nuetral.

[NightWish]

Originally Posted by Sinfully Naomi

If the negative rep system weren't anonymous, there would be less negative rep going around.

That would make the system even more skewed towards the positive end than it already is. I'm not sure I see this a good thing?

Originally Posted by Sinfully Naomi

People would mind their tongue when they give someone a negative rep as well.

To a limited degree perhaps. Making the lack of anonymity more obvious might deter a few. However, the fact that people minded to flame are willing to do so in the open forum already, makes me unconvinced that it would eradicate it completely. I believe the resulting fallout (the escalation of problems) from the few badly phrased negative comments that remained signed (and even the well phrased ones that were vehemently disagreed with) would be worse.

As it is, the staff can see all reputation awards so if the comment is insulting, flammable, or offensive, it can be reported and it will be seen. There is no real anonymity in the system. This staff filter allows for actual problems to be dealt with and mere disagreements to be diffused.

Originally Posted by Sinfully Naomi

Grow, or stay nuetral.

The system already has issues with how it grows, causing quick saturation in the high reputation range. Removing the only balance to this would make things worse.

As the rules say, if someone doesn't like the purpose or the way the reputation system works they are able to disable it.

[Sinfully Naomi]

Well that was certainly a waste of time.

I completely understand it now, had I known that before then it would've made sense.

I don't see a reason to remove "anonymity" any longer. I figured the staff could see, I just thought they woudn't care about something so trivial.

And while I'm at it *reports -rep* Even though I'm 100% certain I knew who it was anyway. =/

[TinyRedLeaf]

Originally Posted by NightWish

The system already has issues with how it grows, causing quick saturation in the high reputation range. Removing the only balance to this would make things worse.

That's something I've noticed too.

Barely a year ago, only a few members had a top rating of three to five pips, but that number has ballooned rapidly since then — which makes me wonder if you guys have considered normalising reputation points in the future.

[felix]

The problem with the system growing is caused by the simple fact you allow people to multi-rep the same person. If the system were to not allow rep from the same individual ever again¹ then there would not be any more unbalance. The values of the dots can be averaged to the current number of active users and the names given numerical meaning, problem solved. Well, the required post count etc before rep becomes green will have to be tweaked to avoid newbies being abused but otherwise should work just fine.

__________________
¹ this can be achieved by making it so we need to rep 9999999999 amount of people before giving it to the same person again.

[The Small One]

I'm not sure if prohibiting multi-repping of the same person would solve this problem. Well, maybe it would, but it would ultimately lead to another one: It's not possible for a person to rehabilitate. Once a direction is set (in either way) it's set. So if you give someone a +rep, and afterwards this person doesn't behave good, you can't change it, or the other way around.

Maybe there should be some sort of limiter, basing on the already recieved reputation.
For example: Let's assume person A has a reputation power of 100 (I think the value is too high, to be realistic, but just think of it as percent). In the current system (if I understand it correct) it means, that every reputation given by this person accounts for either -100 or +100 on the total value of the one recieving it.
A good solution could be, that person B, who recieves the reputation, only gains the full +100 points, if he doesn't have a very high value yet (maybe in the range of -10 to 10). If he has more points, he automatically gets lesser, until only one additional point remains (using 0 as minimum only makes sense, if you plan to have a fixed maximum value of rep). Negative points should work exactly the other way around.
This could be realized by some sort of mathematical equation, which should be easy to implement.

[Cosmic Eagle]

I find negative reps should be disabled as well. It sucks to find insulting comments on your CP (knowing that even if you disable rep, it's still there) for stupid reasons like fanboys and girls hating on you instead of constructive stuff (yes. That rule about using rep for constructive purposes is so badly crapped upon it resembles a sewer) and you can't delete it permanently from your CP.

Even if negative reps stay, at least allow people to clean out nonsense from their own CPs.

Originally Posted by The Small One

I think if neg-rep were not anonymous, then the people who would get it would definately misuse the rep to take "revenge", which isn't what the system is meant for.



If there were no neg-rep, then there is no point in giving rep at all, since all it can do is grow anyways.


And pull a whole thread into off-topic-ness? No thanks. Some things are better not to be told in public.

PM. If someone wants to be lame or insulting then at least have the balls to identify themselves instead of spamming like a troll.

[NightWish]

Originally Posted by The Small One

...
This could be realized by some sort of mathematical equation, which should be easy to implement.

I've thought about and tested a number of different models and options, such as allowing the user to give less than their rep power with each award, but nothing seriously enough to warrant installing it on the forum live. It is very difficult to know how a change would play out in the wild and so far the reward hasn't justified the effort, given it is a small part of the forum that is not meant to be taken too seriously...

Originally Posted by Cosmic Eagle

It sucks to find insulting comments on your CP ... at least allow people to clean out nonsense from their own CPs.

Personally I do not mind "clean[ing] out nonsense" on request. Within reason, I'm happy to do this even if it is simply because someone doesn't want to see the comment, maybe because they find it intolerable. The forum software, however, does not provide this option to users directly, which is something that is unlikely to change (though you are of course welcome to suggest it to the developers).

In such situations, all else being equal, I'll normally leave the reputation point alone. As I've said to many people who've asked, simply disagreeing with why someone gave a point is not a reason to have it removed. If everyone could remove the points they didn't agree with or like, I am confident everyone would be on high-positive rep by now, which would make the system completely pointless.

That said, where an award's comment is actually insulting, or otherwise violates our rules, it and the point would commonly be removed. Persistent use of the system to leave insults like this would result, at least, in the person in question being barred from participating.

[Daniel E.]

Originally Posted by Cosmic Eagle

I find negative reps should be disabled as well. It sucks to find insulting comments on your CP (knowing that even if you disable rep, it's still there)

Strange, I was under the impression that this was already a solved issue.

http://forums.animesuki.com/showthread.php?t=74794

Originally Posted by Cosmic Eagle

PM. If someone wants to be lame or insulting then at least have the balls to identify themselves instead of spamming like a troll.

And what are you gonna do if you have a name? Neg-rep them back?

I have left my name in some neg-reps before and I have tried to be as "adult" as possible while doing it. Regardless, people didn't care about explanations or reasons; Once they see the red dot, they can only think of getting even and little else.

As NW just said, if someone leaves an insulting remark on your CP just report it to the mods and move on to something else.

[Cosmic Eagle]

Originally Posted by NightWish

I've thought about and tested a number of different models and options, such as allowing the user to give less than their rep power with each award, but nothing seriously enough to warrant installing it on the forum live. It is very difficult to know how a change would play out in the wild and so far the reward hasn't justified the effort, given it is a small part of the forum that is not meant to be taken too seriously...Personally I do not mind "clean[ing] out nonsense" on request. Within reason, I'm happy to do this even if it is simply because someone doesn't want to see the comment, maybe because they find it intolerable. The forum software, however, does not provide this option to users directly, which is something that is unlikely to change (though you are of course welcome to suggest it to the developers).

In such situations, all else being equal, I'll normally leave the reputation point alone. As I've said to many people who've asked, simply disagreeing with why someone gave a point is not a reason to have it removed. If everyone could remove the points they didn't agree with or like, I am confident everyone would be on high-positive rep by now, which would make the system completely pointless.

That said, where an award's comment is actually insulting, or otherwise violates our rules, it and the point would commonly be removed. Persistent use of the system to leave insults like this would result, at least, in the person in question being barred from participating.

So I can PM a mod about this?

I don't really care if my rep gets reduced into the negative range (if it's even possible) I just hate finding spam and vandalism that cannot be erased.

And what are you gonna do if you have a name? Neg-rep them back?

Block them? More effective. It's only for trolls of course.

[NightWish]

Originally Posted by Cosmic Eagle

So I can PM a mod about this?

If you have a problem, of course you can.

[Xellos-_^]

good or bad, whenever i rep someone i sign it.

i don't mind people people neg repping me if they disagree with what i post but i absolutely detest the short msg they leave or no msg at all.