Reputation 101
 

One of the coolest and possibly the best feature is the reputation rating system. This system allows for people to see if someone is well respected in the community and also allows more direct feedback on posts. Reputation can go both ways, you can get 'good' reputation if you help people out, contribute to discussions, and are a generally overall good person. Now, if you are a butt, post things that don't pertain to the discussion, and flame away, you'll get negative reputation.

Now, the big problem is, what should I reward good/bad reputation for? While it's mostly up to you, here's what to look for...

Giving Good Reputation:
-Post helped somebody that asked a question
-Post added a new viewpoint or experience to the discussion
-Poster wrote a good reply to a statement
-Post applauded somebody for something done that's good
-Raises questions on a subject
-Anything else that would qualify as Gracious Professionalism

Give Bad Reputation to a post that seems to flame someone without and justification, is off topic with the discussion, and overall seems like a troll post.

Bad reputation SHOULD NOT BE GIVEN TO PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE WITH YOU. Remember, everyone has different experiences with things and views FIRST differently.

Remember, this isn't a constraint, but instead a guide path, and once you understand what supposed to happen, you can go out and help improve the community. Remember, reputation points are for people to recognize those who are outstanding people in the community, not friends or a popularity contest.

Re: Reputation 101
 

Heres what I go by, more or less.

positive rep.

1. on topic?
2. helpful/correct information?
3. advancing & contributing to the conversation

negative rep.

1. 'yes', 'what he said', 'no', etc
2. abusive, incorrect, rude, etc
3. breaking any forum rules

Re: Reputation 101
 

Hrm, is it just me or is this just a popularity competition? If a user rarely posts, or doesn't have many aquantances on the board how will they ever get reputation? It doesn't mean that their views are any less valid, just not as known. I personally think some of the more active users on the board are full of themselfs and have lost what this board should be. A community. They are too worried about being PC and less about just shooting the breeze with people and talking about the good things about FIRST. Is the reputation system really what this board needs or really wants to have? Do you see it making it any better?

I personally don't

Re: Reputation 101
 

Do some searches and you'll find that I really don't like the idea of who CD is now more of a press release center and not a true discussion forum. As for reputation, if someone only posts a littlebit, they will still get good reputation for their posts if the are good. But mabey we can have a variable added where the amount of posts contribute to how much reputation you have (as someone with 20 posts and 10 reputation would have more than 200 posts and 10 reputation).

Re: Reputation 101
 

The # of posts and also the length of time you've been registered influnce your reputation. (this isnt retroactive, though)

Re: Reputation 101
 

I'm not sure that I understand why someone who takes the time to frequently and meaningfully contribute to this website isn't deserving of a better reputation than someone who visits infrequently, yet still contributes useful information. While I am fearful of the creation of a caste system among CD users, I think that the reputation system offers enough checks and balances so as to be a better solution than other methods of recognizing someone for their dedication to improving this website and this organization.

Re: Reputation 101
 

Is there a way to make it retroactive? I'm not sure if this is a door we want to open, but is it technically possible to make it count posts and registration from the beginning, not just vb3?

Re: Reputation 101
 

I just noticed this --

If you click on the "Give Reputation" icon for one of your own posts, a box appears that shows you what comments have been made about that post. Additionally, it tells you whether or not you reputation for that post alone has been positive, negative, or even.

Re: Reputation 101
 

It is possible; I'd have to write something to do so, though.

Re: Reputation 101
 

Okay, so maybe I'm missing something somewhere, but is there a way I can see my reputation level in number of points, not just ranks or number of green boxes?

Re: Reputation 101
 

In your user cp, in the box entitled 'Latest Reputation Received', it has your points on the right.

Re: Reputation 101
 

Yeah, I just found that. I guess I was overlooking it or something.

Re: Reputation 101
 

Maybe we could call it the BCS reputation system. ;)

Re: Reputation 101
 

You read my mind... or possible this post?

I think the rep system will end up being just like the BCS. We don't need a uniform standard on how to grade posts; we just need people to participate. Things will balance out in the end.

Re: Reputation 101
 

I think it is best left in the hands of board moderators and admins to give negative rep points.

Everyone else should be only allowed to give positive points.

Re: Reputation 101
 

I disagree. I think that defeats the purpose of the reputation system. Moderators and admins should and do have more weight for points, but anyone can give negatives. That's the way it should be.

Re: Reputation 101
 

Yeah, I agree. Everybody should have the opportunity to give their input on any topic. There will would be no use for having a reputation system if not everybody can give both positive and negatives. A lot of the admins arent on as much as some other the others on this board.


Its going to take a while for the reps to start working really well in the way its designed for. :]

Re: Reputation 101
 

This would only be a good idea if getting a negative response penalized you more than just lowering your rep.

Personally I think it's a good idea. Before, the only way to gauge a member was to be familiar with their posts or look at the number of their posts. Now, their reputation represents the quality of their posts and ideas. I think that this will eventually be a good way to recognize the "upstanding citizens" of CD. Now CD can become a closer and more personal place where you get knocked down for a dumb idea and praised for a stroke of genius, almost like a true family.

Fun with "Reputation"
 

I just noticed a few things:

- I was going to five someone a few reputation points, but a message popped up that said I needed to spread some reputation around before I gave it to this person again. That made me wonder: I know you can see the list of people that have given reputation points to you in the "User CP," but is there a way to see a list of people to whom you have given points? Over time it would be interesting to see if some people show up on a regular basis or not.

- When looking at the list of members in the "Members" section, sorted by "Reputation" I noticed something. Some folks have very high reputations (and therefore presumably a high number of reputation points), and have made hundreds (or even thousands!) of posts. Others have very high reputations with only a few dozen posts. So is there a way to see a members "points per post" ratio?

It is interesting to see who has a very high ratio (e.g. Matt Adams may not post with high frequency, but his ratio sugggests that every single post has high value and is really worth reading), and who has a low one (if I had >1000 posts and only a few reputation points, I would think about whether many of my posts were just irritating drivel that did not contribute to the discussions - either that or I was making WAY TOO MANY really bad jokes :D ).

-dave

-------------------

8 days to go!!!!

Re: Fun with "Reputation"
 

I asked about this when vB3 was new and Brandon indicated that it's not possible out of the box, so to speak, but that he may be able to accomodate us.

Again, there's nothing built in to allow this. Remember, as well, that reputation has accrued only since vB3 was installed, though our post counts have been carried over from the previous version of the software. Because of that, it seems like you can't really learn much from the ratio you're asking about.

Re: Fun with "Reputation"
 

I'd love to see this feature as well.
I give out reputation in "spurts" and it'd be nice to see who I've given it to when, and when I'll be able to give it to them again.


It's true...
Dave has been cracking wise on this forum for ages, but Matt is a newcomer. Hence their rep-post ratio would be very different, despite the fact that they are both equally worthwhile to read.

John

Re: Fun with "Reputation"
 

Worthwhile they both are, but Dave shows his years with great wit.

I concour with Mads and John about a post-reputation ratio not working.
Also a reminder that Brandon is working on the CD specific hacks while hoping that someone else will share a hack for showing who I gave reputation to.


Wetzel
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks Brandon, relax and enjoy the holidays.

Re: Reputation 101
 

I noticed that it looks like I'm some sort of a "miracle poster" since I have so few posts and a fairly high reputation. I'd like to emphasize this is not the case. I joined these forums a day after we switched to vB3. If you took the ratio of posts after the switch to reputation... I'm sure that I'd be sitting somewhere around the middle of the pack.

I think people somewhat weigh of the reputation dots and the number of posts, but most importantly, it's the strength and justification of points when deciding about who's advice to take in a post. I know there's a lot of people who have been here a lot longer than me and know a whole lot more... fortunately, respect and reputation isn't dictated by green dots. :)

I have faith that those who know what's going on are well respected, with or without green dots. Are reputation points fun? Yes. Life or death? No.

Matt

Re: Reputation 101
 

I didnt feel like starting a new thread, but it applies to reputation.


Brandon, I'm sure this has been brought up, but I'd like to have the ability to see who we repped and our comments on them. And also, I'm not sure if its possible but if we could see how many rep points was given to us on each rep and the same for the reps we see, that would be awesome. I will be nice to see how much value one is to another in addition to their number of bars.

Re: Reputation 101
 

This has been talked about, and Brandon is working on the CD hacks (White Pages, portal, UFH, etc) and when that is done, looking to see if someone else has already made a hack for reputation stuff.

Wetzel

Re: Reputation 101
 

Am i the only one that doesn't see that box? Or is that just because no one's given me any reputation points? :( :tear: :(

Re: Reputation 101
 

User CP is located here. Even if you havn't received reputation, the box is still there. Its titled "Latest Reputation Received", and will be on the right below "New Subscribed Threads:"


Wetzel

Re: Fun with "Reputation"
 

You don't have to worry about that Mr. 400 + reputation points. :p j/k

I still think that Chit-Chat posts should be dropped from recognition in post count AND in the amount of points given in reputations.

Re: Fun with "Reputation"
 

i think that the chit-chat posts should be dropped from the post count that shows up on each post .. but i dont think that the reputation points coming from there should be as well ...

i noticed this today about the green boxes ... for users who have been given no reputation points, sometimes there is still a green box where you run your mouse over it and it says username is an unknown quantity at this point, however with some other users, it is a grey box and when you run your mouse over it it just says their username. i thought that with the green box appearing it meant that someone had given that person a positive reputation and someone else had given them a negative one .. but thats not the case because a new member had a green box next to his name and had the message saying that he is an unknown quantity

so i am confused .. is there a difference between each ?? and should there be (like have grey dots for those who had good reputations and now dont or viceversa and green dots for those who dont have any reputation points) ??

Re: Reputation 101
 

I think I read somewhere that plus/minus 10 is the grey zone. The deadband if you will.

As I can't find anything to verify that, I could be wrong.

Wetzel
~~~~~~~~~~
First hunch tend to be right.

Re: Fun with "Reputation"
 

Why do you think that?? I can't see any real value to allowing people to give reputation for posts in Chit-Chat. There's already enough abuse in the system without people giving reputation for giving a good response to word association or the like :rolleyes:. The only reason the reputation could possibly be useful in Chit-Chat would be in the case of inappropriate behavior, but that requires moderator intervention anyway.

Re: Fun with "Reputation"
 

With respect, what access do you have that allows you to see that people are abusing the reputation system?

I think that thoughtful contributions to these forums should be rewarded, no matter what their subject matter. I haven't ever given someone positive reputation for their response to the word association game, so if someone has, we cancel each other out and the universe remains in balance.

Re: Reputation 101
 

that cant be right because if you look in the members list .. the first two people both have 0 posts, but one of their boxes is green and the other is grey .. it might have something to do with who has visited since vb3 has been running ... (just my guess now that ive looked through some of the profiles there ... )

Re: Reputation 101
 

So, is it improper to give someone negative reputation if they give you negative reputation for moronic reasons? :)

Just wondering.

Re: Reputation 101
 

I hope so...

Besides, everyone has posts in their past that deserve negative reputation... it's just a matter of finding them. Reputation doesn't have to go to new posts ;)

Re: Reputation 101
 

Im sry people But i agree w/ what he said *point to above quote*

i see no point/need for the reputation system

does it serve a purpose that im not seeing?...

Re: Reputation 101
 

It doesn't even have to go to real people, it seems. I was looking at the "Members" section and had it organized by rep points. The Archiver has more rep than most other CD "users." How depressing...

;-]

Re: Reputation 101
 

I go to @Forumz and they use reputation. It can get pretty nasty at times how people use it. Hopefully that won't happen here.

Re: Reputation 101
 

Hahaha... I've given the archiver a few rep points ;)