Printable View
Yes it was ... lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Tiler
But personally I am ok if someone downvotes me if I said something they disagreed with and I would chalk it up to different perceptions, but if a hundred people disagreed with me it would make me rethink my opinion.... but that's just me. And I realize not everyone would take it the same way as I would.
The way I see it is this:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jwp721
If one person downvotes me one time for one disagreement, then I shrug it off
If one person downvotes me a hundred times for a hundred disagreements, that person can't handle disagreement
If a hundred people each downvote me once for one disagreement, then I very likely need to reconsider all of the information I have and reevaluate what I said
If a hundred people each downvote me a hundred times for a hundred disagreements, my rep would be garbage. Also, that tells me that I should no longer spend my time here, because the forum would be actively suppressing discussion. Thankfully, I know that won't happen
I don't think a rep system should be used for agreeing with or disagreeing with someone. We need an individual post like/dislike for that. The rep should only reflect the manner in which a post was delivered. Spell checking someone only, calling people fools or worse, foul language, spamming a thread with worthless content would all be down votes. A solid, well reasoned response to someone, and deep thought provoking question would be upvote.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeputyDonkey
That person I would call a stalker and it is the one instance that I would agree with notifying a Moderator... and we will have those unfortunately.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiler
No it will not happen to you, but it will happen to some.... and maybe, just maybe justifiably so...Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiler
Really, one needs to ask the question, "what is it's use and expected outcome?" I cannot intelligently answer the first part because I just don't know. But from what I have saw during the trial period, it seems to create more child like fighting. So I can do with out it. if you down or up vote me I do not really care, but some people do. This was a bad idea from the beginning.
I don't like the system at all, just because someone says something about engineering or not maxing your base, you get a down vote because you are part of the "problem" to the community, which to me is immature.
I frankly do not care, as I do not use the system, but I wish it didn't exist, and I voted for that option
I think the reason the reputation system was brought in to the forums was because the mods were tired of the constant bickering and child like behavior that we see here on a daily bases. In my opinion it helped when we had the downvote option. There are also others on here who dont like it and they give some good reasons why.
I don't think it would be needed if people had a little more empathy for their fellow forumers and posted in a polite and civil manner. This is the internet and I know that will never happen. Just my 2 cents but I think the positives outweighed the negatives when the downvote was included.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheedy17
I have had quite a few arguments/discussions with people and didn't receive a down vote throughout the down voting period. But in all honesty if someone thinks that a post is a problem to the community then it is worth a down vote! If you don't care why vote and potentially spoil something for those that do care?
Your whole argument is flawed, as you say an opinion which is fair enough but then say you don't care? If you don't care it shouldn't matter to you whether the system comes in or not!
My personal opinion is that the system on the whole was effective, and I like the fact that I can give out rep points for well thought out and sensible/constructive posts. I didn't give out one down vote through the period. In my opinion there was a significant reduction in the amount of toxic posts while the down vote option was there. I don't care if people down vote me for disagreeing with my opinion, that's their own prerogative. But if they do I certainly am not just going to down vote them back because they did me. Overall I hope it comes in. But if it doesn't I ain't going to cry about it XD
I was one of those that didn't use the downvote at all, and wasn't sure it was a needed feature. But after the downvote was taken away at the end of the trial period, I've come to believe that it's an essential element if we are to have a rep system at all. A primary benefit of the rep system is to get people thinking before they post, if they wish to maintain a good rep. But with no downvoting ability then this benefit goes out the window, a poster has no fear of getting a negative response and only a bonus when there's a positive response.
The whole rep system needs to be taken for what it is though. Having a great rep does not necessarily mean that you are more qualified to answer than another poster. It can just as easily mean that you just have a lot more time on your hands to frequent the forum boards. Or that you are more willing to share your opinion than someone who reads a lot but doesn't post often. Or that you may be more interested in saying things that you know people will approve of, in order to grow your rep. None of these reasons makes what you post carry any more weight than someone with less rep points. In fact, I think those that may get too wrapped up with their reputation will be less likely to give their true opinions, so that may be a negative result of the system.
All in all, I'm in favor of it, but the downvote is needed. And people still need to judge for themselves when they read something, and not be influenced in their opinions by rep points alone.
I've witness similar system of up/down voting in other forums. Long story shortened, the down voting aspect led to a form of online bullying in which many would "team up" and go to extreme measures to down vote others(multiple accts., many against the few, online friends, etc) to "bully" other forumers they didn't care for.