Introducing: The Forum Reputation System

[ProfChaos]

The reputation system seems to be making a small difference in my opinion. It is hard to judge, but it does seem to be having a positive effect, at least to me. Whether it is enough of a benefit to be worth the extra time moderators have to put in to monitor it, I don't know. It does look like they are still struggling to make the votes anonymous as intended, though.

I am truly amazed how much people on the forums are worrying about these make believe reputation points. I had my concerns about this when they rolled it out, but to me it has done a wonderful job of cleaning up the forums.

Reminds me of SpongeBob SquarePants when Mrs puff took his good noodle stars away!

How can you know that forum rep is responsible for the current tone?

I think it's more likely currently quieter due to high mod activity, closing and moving threads, and the typical lulls that occurs once the previous update has been debated to death.

I think it's a huge rush to judgement to give any credence to the rep system this soon and without it being in place during a major update.

And seriously Soonge Bob is your metric here.

[2222]

How can you know that forum rep is responsible for the current tone?

I think it's more likely currently quieter due to high mod activity, closing and moving threads, and the typical lulls that occurs once the previous update has been debated to death.

I think it's a huge rush to judgement to give any credence to the rep system this soon and without it being in place during a major update.

And seriously Soonge Bob is your metric here.

I said it "seems" to be making a "small" difference to me, but that it is "hard to judge." That was just too far out there for you? Lol

[ProfChaos]

I said it "seems" to be making a "small" difference to me, but that it is "hard to judge." That was just too far out there for you? Lol

Yes

10char

[ThatSASGuy]

Judging from the recent reaction posts from downvotes, I can see more name and shame threads being posted.

Why do I got a disapprove. I kind of ignore it, but just wondering

[stevo]

Yea cool this is interesting!

I like

Kinda a pity I'm not as active as I used to be, but should be a good thing for the forum.

[COCFan2001]

As I suspected. The forums are full of posts where people are highlighting their negative rep they just got for xyz reasons. Also many folks just going around "balancing" out others rep cause they feel bad for them. An absolute joke imo and I feel bad for the mods who must be getting inundated with complaints about the negative rep they just received.

I really, REALLY hope this idea gets scrapped as it is so entirely pointless the way it is now imo. People may say the forums feel more polite since this idea started, but it is crystal clear it is just promoting passive aggressive angst and the whole concept is being abused anyways. How can rep have ANY meaning the way it is used now? People giving negative just because they disagree with an opinion, and better yet when people upvotes rep just to "balance it out" because they heard another sob story.

Scrap it.

I strongly disagree. It encourages good behavior and discourages toxicity.

I will downvote your post when I find a computer

[Vikingchief]

You should make it is the points can counteract the negative forum points we have. I got 2 warning and now I find myself never participating in discussions for fear of being banned. I haven't got a negative forum point in a year but they never expire so eventually everyone will be banned.

it is a pity you dont participated anymore, you brought some good info to the forums, cant you give it another go, just sugarcoat your words a little?

[MasterOfAllTimeAndMagic]

One question. Is downvoting because an idea has been ruled out justified? I haven't downvoted, but I see people are still(in the ideas section) doing a ton of ideas that are ruled out. If somebody were to downvote them, would it be justified?

[Luinil]

I agree with PigulusMaximus in his thread, members should only be able to upvote and I think mods should be the only ones able to downvotes. Because downvotes should be based on bad/toxic behaviour and not disagreement/mistake/revenge.

[Vikingchief]

I agree with PigulusMaximus in his thread, members should only be able to upvote and I think mods should be the only ones able to downvotes. Because downvotes should be based on bad/toxic behaviour and not disagreement/mistake/revenge.

The problem is that this isnt congruent with the principle of reputation, in the real world if you engage in behavior that upsets people your will lose reputation in their eyes. Reputation is about your standing over time with a target group of individuals, in real life your circle of friends, aquantances and work colleuges, and here fellow forumers.

mods hand out infractions for toxic behavior, downvotes dont need to meet the same standard of extent as infractions. Over time our reps will be built on the up and downvotes we receive over many months, just like reputations in the real world, and just line in the real world, some forumers will not trust reputation at all.

i think its important for forumers to have the downvote option, as i think it spares the forums certain flamewars. Next time I see someone calling engineers ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥s cheats, instead of getting into a back and forth, ill downvote them and move on. If they revenge downvote me without reason ill rapport them.

I think the threat of downvote discouraged toxicity far more than a system with only upvotes. In an upvote only system you can mix in some good value, argue on polarising issues and get a bunch of upvotes from your side, then engage in semi toxic and slightly rude behavior without any fear of action (assuming your not so toxic a mod interviens).