Use of Reputation When People Disagree

[Joe Matt]

I've recently been finding out that some people have been giving me a bad reputation because they don't agree with what I'm saying, not that I'm misbehaving or doing anything wrong. I think we might need a clearer explanation behind the Reputation system and how it should be used.

[Brandon Martus]

Reputation should be used to rate people based on a few things. A) Following forum rules. B) Keeping threads on topic. C) Advancing the level of conversation, etc.

It shouldn't be used to give people bad reputation because you don't like them, or what they say, etc. People disagree -- thats life.

The system is just to keep things running smoothly, and hopefully encourage people to improve the quality of discussion.

[Ken Leung]

I've recently been finding out that some people have been giving me a bad reputation because they don't agree with what I'm saying, not that I'm misbehaving or doing anything wrong. I think we might need a clearer explanation behind the Reputation system and how it should be used.


There is always some advantages and disadvantages with any system we use. I see them in the new reputation system as well. On the plus side, people can really recognize who contribute to the forum in a positive way or a negative way. People can potentially follow these reputation to enlightening messages. On the negative side, people can abuse the system to give reputation to friends they like, or people they don't like.

It is up to us to set an example to the rest of the community on what's appropiate and what's not. I always think teaching by example is one of the more effective way of teaching. So look at what Brandon saids in his post in here. When you come across messages, try to stay objective, as you always should, and look at what the people are trying to say and where they are coming from. Stand your ground when it comes to a difference on opinion, but be profoundly understanding of the other person. And don't react base on your emotional responds.

Once you do that, than it's not too difficult to give an objective rating on other people's message. And it's nice to tell people you appeciate their effort in posting a message. It's nice to let them know you learn from them. Those are easy to do. Then remember only to give bad reputation points if you think the person is messing around, or intentionally causing headache to other people, or totally irresponsible of what they post, or wasting people's time. Anything beyond those reasons should be evaulated carefully before your urge to judge someone take control of your behavior too quickly.

In the end, I guess it doesn't really matter if you have a good or bad reputation. What really counts is if you have confidence in yourself, and if you think you are doing the right thing. Be open to other people's criticism and see if you can learn to be better, otherwise there is no need to care too much about reputation.

[George1902]

Ken, I don't see the negative side to the reputation system at all.

Reputation: (n) overall quality or character as seen or judged by the people

The reputaion system will end up working like College Football's BCS. No one's system for giving out rep points will be perfect, but in the end, all of the inadequacies will cancel out.

For example, Let's say Angela, Billy, Chris, and Donna are all CD users who actively participate in the reputaion system. Their criteria are as follows:

Angela hates reading long posts, so she gives people a positive if they say their piece quickly and a negative if they take up too much space.

Billy doesn't like it when threads get off topic. His rating system gives positives to people whose posts are clear an on topic and negative to people whose posts are off topic or convoluted.

Chris thinks both Angela and Billy have great ideas and uses a hybrid of those two systems. Short, to the point posts get positives. Long, off-topic posts get negatives.

Finally, Donna doesn't really feel like thinking to hard about the whole reputation thing. She gives positives to the people she likes and negatives to the people she doesn't like.

None of these systems are wrong. All of them take into account the meaning of "reputation" in some form. There will be dozens of people like Angela, Billy, Chris, and Donna on CD. There will also be plenty of crazy ways people use to give rep points. All of these methods will average together to form a really great system.

Personally, I'll give a post a positive if my left eyebrow twitches while reading it and a negative if my right eyebrow twitches.

[Brandon Martus]

all good points.

And -- if all else fails, I can restrict it so much that it will be impossible to abuse it.

I can make it so you have to rate 45 people before you rate a person a second time.
I can make it so you can only rate 5 times a day.
etc..

And, as a last resort, I can go and undo any abuse.
If you think you are getting bad reputation for good posts, talk to the person via PM. If nothing is resolved, send me a PM and I'll look into it.

[Madison]

so...people have some really bizarre ideas about what deserves disapproval regarding posts, I think.

Can we start a discussion about what qualities we look for when evaluating a post?

[Joe Matt]

so...people have some really bizarre ideas about what deserves disapproval regarding posts, I think.

Can we start a discussion about what qualities we look for when evaluating a post?
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22964

[Tytus Gerrish]

it is kinda bad

ppl are giving me bad rep points for spelling and being mean about it too and gave the coment... "Learn how to spell" :(

Andy Baker was nice and sent me a PM saying how i would look better and would get more respect if i would just check my spelling. Like a nice Good person :)

prehaps if there was a reason checkbox in the rep popup it would probaly discourge such things

Overall i thinnk its a nice system gives us addicted ones somthing else to do and make this a better place in the process

[Adam Y.]

Never mind. I am guessing it is that little bar in the upper right hand corner of my profile.

[Ken Leung]

it is kinda bad

ppl are giving me bad rep points for spelling and being mean about it too and gave the coment... "Learn how to spell" :(

Andy Baker was nice and sent me a PM saying how i would look better and would get more respect if i would just check my spelling. Like a nice Good person :)

prehaps if there was a reason checkbox in the rep popup it would probaly discourge such things

Overall i thinnk its a nice system gives us addicted ones somthing else to do and make this a better place in the process

I have been giving this reputation system a lot of thoughts, that's why I haven't said anything for a while.

Let's organize our discussion a little bit, shall we?

Pro's for the reputation system:

I personally like the fact that you can give little comments to the posters when you give them points. It's like using PM, except much more conivenent. You can easily give comments like "very well said", "I agree with you 100% on the issue", or "hey, I understand you feel really strongly about the topic, but maybe you shouldn't have said that about someone" or "it will help a lot if you pay attention to your spelling a little more". That feature alone will help a lot of posters out there to become better posters by hearing comments from veteran posters.

It helps recognize people in the forum, although I am not quite sure what we recognize them for... They could be people who say something a lot of people like, or someone who spend a lot of time in this forum, or someone who are really dedicated to FIRST. As of right now, I see a lot of great posters with good reputation points who are all of that.

Con's

If people don't like the way you say something, it is possible that they will give you negative points just because you have a bad attitude. So, if you happens to not be the crowd's favorite and a lot of people disagree with you, you may get a lot of negative points. But having said that, it's not 100% harmful to listen to some of those constructive criticism and learn what you can from others.

It could become a popularity contest, and people are too consumed in trying to please people to get a better reputation. I remember for as long as the Chief Delphi Forum existed, we didn't need a reputation system. People take the time to read messages and figure out if that person is a good poster or not. We learn to respect people because of what they said, and not what their titles are or what others said about them. And you get to really know those people instead of reading titles on a long list of reputation rating.



So what now?

I have mixed feelings about this. On one hand I really like the ability to give comments to other posters using the point system, and recognize a good job when I see good messages... On the other hand I personally will not use the reputation system to judge how good a poster someone is. It's nice to see the list of who is on top or bottom, but nothing more than that. I would rather get to know the people personally rather then looking at a list of statistics.