Reputation Change

I have an idea to possibly cut down on the number of bullshit reps given. Perhaps when a post is repped, have it show as "marked for positive or negative reputation" and for it to go through make it where 2 people other than the rep giver have to "approve" the rep.

Something like that, anyway.

Seems a bit too in depth, but it's a good idea. Would it show up right by the checkmark and x?

Sure. Maybe have a green + sign for positive or a red - sign for negative. Who knows. This is just the basis for the idea.

Eh, I say leave it be. It seems pretty fair the way it is now with having to wait 24 hours to give out more rep. If you're that hell-bent on giving somebody negative rep over and over, you've got problems.

I think having it where it has to be approved by others would give more of a "this is how everyone feels about you" feel to reputation than if it's single people, though. A single person can keep targeting someone that the majority of people like and there's nothing that can be done about it. I think it would make reputation actually reflect what it should.

I got negative repped by someone who hasn't posted in two years. Fun stuff, I suppose. Maybe we should make it for active or semi active members, and not lurkers?

I honestly don't care about the repping too much, but I found it odd to get negative repped for posting about yoshi coins by some guy who hasn't shown his opinions in a post since 9-23-05.

Was it Afroman? I got negatively repped by him on just a random post of mine.

So basically you would want to create a poll somewhat for each individual post? Idk if WW would be able to do anything like that because I don't believe anything like that really exists yet, I do like the thought of it though.

I think rather than that, it might be worth going back to an idea that was originally mentioned - reporting reps.

Obviously, some people will report reps simply because they're bad, but the staff will have the final say on whether the rep deserves to be 'cancelled'. It might mean a bit more work for us, and may even lead to a couple more staff members, but I see it as being far eaiser that having to set up a mini-poll system for repped posts. As I see it, also, reps aren't supposed to be public - if I rep you, I don't want to have two other members agreee with me before the rep is added. Adding the rep is my opinion, not someone elses, and we all hve different opinions. I can also imagine it may get to the point where people are purposely disagreeing to the rep, simply because they dislike the reper or repee.

Staff approval/denial sounds fine to me, though it would have to be where you can't approve/deny your own given or recieved rep. For instance, if I rep d3v negatively, and he reports it, I shouldn't be allowed to approve it anyway. Also, if D3v reps me negatively, and I report it, I shouldn't be allowed to deny it as well.

Correct, sounds like a good system, passing it upstairs probably wouldn't work.

I think having it where it has to be approved by others would give more of a "this is how everyone feels about you" feel to reputation than if it's single people, though. A single person can keep targeting someone that the majority of people like and there's nothing that can be done about it. I think it would make reputation actually reflect what it should.

... That's stupid.

I agree with Lenny. Everybody's opinions differ, we're not all going to agree "Hey, this was a good post."

Keep it the way it is. Why fix something that isn't broken?

Because it is broken.

How? You can't +/- the same person until you've done it to 6 other people and you have to wait 24 hours if you've done it too much. I think that's a pretty fair system.

That only affects how often you can do it. People can still rep for whatever the hell they want, whether or not they have a good reason or not. There at least needs to be SOME sort of approval system, be it by staff or by members.

I'd say just allow people to report it, and assign somebody fair enough to be a Reputation manager and moderator, something. And if THEY feel it IS unjust, they can use their own good judgement and/or pass it along to the other staff.

That sounds a bit too complicated. Just make it where staff handle any reports about rep, but cannot alter anything that is in relation to them(that they either gave or recieved, basically.)

Would be just like approving new members. We weed out the pointless ones.

So basicly re-write it from scratch, then...
Even if you do something fancy like that, three people could gang up to pick on someone.

I can make it so only positive rep can be left, but even that can be abused.

That actually might not be a bad idea. I kinda like that.

I actually think it's fine the way it is. I would just like the comments to be anonymous.