Reputation System Change:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LachNessMeownster

There has definitely been a decline in the amount of clicks, but not as much as you would think.
The first 4 weeks there were 11,000 reputation points given/taken.
In the past 2 weeks there have been 3,500 points given. Keeping in mind that is just 2 weeks, and that is only positive votes.. Its seems there is a similar amount of upvotes going around.

We will take a proper look at all the data and feedback when the trial ends.

---

any chance of running a final 1 week trial of the downvote as a control, since we have been all monitoring the forum vibe, if there is a sudden drop in toxicity it would show that it was the new system but the downvote that caused it. That wont be decisive in any way, we all know there are downsides to the downvote but it will make the inputs into the decision more clear. If the clicks per week move up from 1750 to 2750 that would be a 60% activity increase, which is pretty significant. It would also show that the drop off was due to the system change, and not simply people getton bored of the system.

if the upvotes are stating steady at 1750 per week, that means it was 1000 downvotes per week, a 64% to 36% split or only 1.75 upvotes per 1 downvote.

I would have guessed looking at the forums the radio was more like 25 to 1, but that could be on account of where I tend to spend my time, more in clan wars sub and less in general.

like i said who knows if you will even keep the system, and if you do it will be a though call on the downvote, let me say we really appreciate the efforts the mods made to try out this system, it was a risk you took on the forums before and we are all grateful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by forever10

Oh then in that case forum rule about downvoting shouldn't exist because if someone is getting a downvote, there will be upvotes to compensate that. Positive and negative don't give you positive outcome. They don't cancel each other out.

---

I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you are saying here. I don't know what forum rule you are referring to or why you think it shouldn't exist. I also don't know what you mean by positive and negative votes not canceling each other out. They do of course cancel each other out. One negative and one positive equals zero change in the user's reputation points because they cancel each other out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by prosper12

This proves to us that the down-vote can be abused by people who simply do not like your point of view or like what happened here a revenge down-vote. I still strong feel if we keep it positive than the people that deserve the votes will get them and those that make comments that break forum rules will be reported. There is no benefit
to the down vote as it is very subjective to the down voter. The downvote can lead to problems in the future and honestly I think the moderators already have a busy job to do and add looking at downvotes in addition to that, its a lot of work. I agree that once a person reaches enough up votes they should have a tag besides their name to show they are reputable and most people would focus more on comments with a special tag. Lets keep it positive folks.

---

Yes, the downvote can be abused. No, in the 30 day test run it didn't prove to be a problem. People definitely can downvote or upvote simply for disagreeing or agreeing with the opinion, neither of which is the correct use of the vote. Because the downvote is not anonymous, it seemed to me in the test month that there were way more incorrect upvotes than downvotes. I do agree looking at downvotes could be too much work for moderators and frankly think you should only be able to report it to a moderator in an extreme situtation, not every little downvote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeadPoool

Hi ,
So , i have seen this thread has risen and I got a small idea for this rep. system.
Like , when you down-vote someone , it must be first seen by moderator , And mod will check his post and see if the down-vote really means or not , then the mod will decide whether to forward that down-vote or dumb it.

Reason:
Some People do down-vote without any particular reason or just do spam votes.
and due to this , people start hating each other or try to revenge him and hence , result in a ban or rise in fights.

---

Moderators have beter things to due with their time than "approve" down votes. If I got 10 down votes for a post, I still wold not bother a moderator about it. When down votes were active, there was no widespread down voting of a post that I ever heard of.

I get some forum members seem to be sensitive about down votes, gotta say , I don't get it.

I still don't get the value of up votes if there are not also down votes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnyxDS

I think it's 15 not 50. I've run into it a small number of times (it certainly cost Tiler a few upvotes). But on the whole it seems to work as a way of stopping someone bumping up their friend, because...



there is also a daily maximum number of votes (10?). So in practice you can't upvote the same person very quickly.

---

Haha, thanks Onyx. I can say the same for a few others in .Y experience. Right now, it's Tom missing out on a point from me. I like Aspex's idea of adding in a time element

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aspex

Whilst you cannot give rep that counts until your post count is 50+,, it's actually 15 different users that you have to give rep to before you can re-rep a person.

I think the problem ATM is that as not so much rep seems to be being given since the removal of negative rep (or it could be that the novelty wore off), people aren't passing the 15 other reps given so quickly so are noticing that they cannot re-rep someone.

There was always a time element to re-repping as, in addition to the 15 rep limitation, we only have 10 reps a day to give. I feel that a week would be way too long if such a limit were to be introduced as some people make a consistently positive contribution to the forums day in, day out, and I would want to be able to acknowledge individual instances of that contribution more frequently.

Edit: Ninja'd by Onyx

---

And I think 24 hours would be a good limit. Either fifteen other rep points or 24 hours. Neither allow for rep spamming one person. But I haven't been around much lately, much less given rep, and the fact that I can't give Tom a point, despite not having given him one in several days, is a bit weird to me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RAppel

I just hovered my mouse over my forum rep, so what does it mean that 'RAppel is showing promise'? Promise of what?

---

Haha, promise of nothing. Showing promise to be a great forum member? I dunno. Just a fun little thing. My goal is to find out what they all are and what their rep boundaries are

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

ok, I know at first thought 99% of you are going to think this is a ridiculas idea, but just let me make the case, i'm not even sure if this is a good idea.

How about we allow revenge downvotes, you can straight up downvote the person who downvotes you and write revenge on the vote.

Heres the logic

1 It means the downvote will only be used when you feel really strongly
2 The person who received the downvote, could very easily, bide his time, and give you a hidden revenge vote later anyway even if revenge downvotes are not allowed
3 It wont be such a big deal to have a few downvotes on your profile, making single downvotes less upsetting
4 the person who does the revenge downvote has a chance to let some anger out, making this less likely to spill into the forum, and i'll bet many revenge downvotes will feel a bit guilty afterwards

I think you may be suprised how few people use the revenge downvote, many of us have out own personal integrery, and would rather feel good about ourselves than give a spiteful/Petty revenge downvote.

it also allows us to use the revenge downvote when we feel we have been given a ridiculas downvote, at the moment someone can downvote you for a pretty tenuous reason, and i'm sure some have been ridiculas, and if you revenge downvote now you end up with moderator disipline.

I would feel quite noble, taking one for forum candor, and downvote someone quasi toxic or spamming nonsense, knowing I will likely get a revenge downvotes for my efforts. I think many would feel the same, and I think you will be pleasantly suprised by the charader of our follow forumers how few revenge downvotes actually get used.

OK, please consider this for at least 7 seconds before laughing, I honestly think this would save the mods a lot of work, and at least revenge downvotes will be noted for what they are.

For your comment to your rep you would just write 'REVENGE! HOW YOU LIKE THEM APPLES?'

---

Yeah, I see what you're saying...But the people who would use this already do it. If revenge downvotes were a thing, I still wouldn't use them because I don't think that's what they should be for. Even a garbage reason like, "vccxvxcv" (which I HAVE gotten) is not worthy of a "revenge" downvote. In my opinion. I don't think they would help anything.

PS, I love this thread, haha. Keep bumping it!

Makes very little difference to me, but one thing I do know is that not everybody considers every downvote to be little in nature as has been suggested.

i was inactive for i while ....so could someone tell me what this is showing promise , on a disti guished road ??
the original post ...
thx

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TERRORH

i was inactive for i while ....so could someone tell me what this is showing promise , on a disti guished road ??
the original post ...
thx

---

Those descriptions are based on reputation points. If you go to someone's profile and click the reputation tab you'll see their actual score.

Rep is added by clicking the little star to the left of the report button. Downvotes were also allowed for the first month of the trial, but not at the moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

This is off track in a three ways. First, one of the key decision makers has just told you that the decision hasn't been made and at least 5 options are under consideration. Are you suggesting you know better than he does or that he is misleading us? I rather doubt both. Second, downvotes are not connected to spam in any way - spam is a matter for reporting, not voting up or down or replying to. It's usually a bot, so it doesn't care, and we were specifically told at the outset that downvoting didn't replace reporting. Thirdly, you have a bee in your bonnet about something in particular that happened a long time ago and are carrying a grudge and keep bringing it up, despite it having been explained by all relevant participants... yet you persist in insisting that you must be right in your interpretation and they are rationalising or deceiving. If that particular downvote situation is still pushing your buttons after weeks have passed then PM a mod and explain it and see what they say... or wait, let me guess, whatever they say you will know better?

---

I don't know about what you are talking about but I think you are obsessed with yourself that you think that I'm always pointing at you. I never took your name and yet you always manage to point my post to yourself and keeps on explaining my quotes. Let me tell you what I was talking about:
By writing spam I was talking about how many people start creating repeated threads about the update rather than replying to existing ones.
I actually visited some forumers profile and saw some down votes with irrelevant reasons as if they are trying to hide their downvote based on disagreement.
Now tell me where did I point at you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

First, one of the key decision makers has just told you that the decision hasn't been made and at least 5 options are under consideration. Are you suggesting you know better than he does or that he is misleading us? I rather doubt both.

---

You should stop being skeptic about my post. I don't suggest what they should do. I'm just saying that many people have already said. Reputation system looks incomplete without downvoting. There are high chances that it will be back after the trial.

One thing that needs to be changed asap. We currently can't add/subtract to reputation if we are below 10 rep points, but we only start at 10. So 1 downvote and you're out of the game, and it's less likely to get an up vote if you can't up vote anyone else. I propose that people start at 20 rep points, and if they go below 10 then they can't vote.