Re: Reputations. Do they deserve more careful thought?
 

Alright, let me stir the kettle.

I see a general trend here, those who are fully supportive of the system all have rep points higher than 3 dots. Many even say they aren't all that big of a deal, they don't really look into them. However, some say that the people are the dots are the ones they respect.

If Bill Gates said, he doesn't really care about money. Would you believe him?

Re: Reputations. Do they deserve more careful thought?
 

I am perfectly content with my two dots. (Though if anyone will give me more, I won't complain.)

Re: Reputations. Do they deserve more careful thought?
 

For me, the reputation system is more of a way to show someone u agree, or disagree with out having to clutter the forums, then they can carry out the discussion through ...PMs if needed. Some do take the system a little too seriously. I left my account signed on by accident, and i guess my sister gave someone bad rep through my account, they got angered, PMed me asking why i gave them bad rep then gave me bad rep and in the comments wrote "see the first ammendment", before giving me a chance to explain.

Maybe people do see this as a popularity contest, that is their choice, u wanna worry about people giving you bad rep, go for it.

I dont think it is that big of a deal, I never really worried about what others thought of me, just said what i thought needed to be said, and i hope everyone else on this forum does the same. If you have something that you feel needs to be said, say it, dont worry about Bad reps, u will always have people that dont agree with you.

If i got good rep pts, w00t (<---that one is for tom), if bad, well, that sux, i read the comment and move on. It isnt that big of a deal, i think its meant to be a check and balance kind of system.

Re: Reputations. Do they deserve more careful thought?
 

From my experience, (which is limited :)) and what has been posted in these rep threads, most rep points, good and bad, are given out to posts that have a strong opinion, or at least some sort of opinion on a hot topics. The people who recieve the most positive points are the ones that are able to post and make a point, while being sensitive about what they say.

And, I got distracted and forgot how I was going to finish that. Oh well, half my point is there. :)

Re: Reputations. Do they deserve more careful thought?
 

Mike,
I think money and respect are a little different.

Bill obviously cares about the money, he worked hard to get it.

I obviously care about being respected, I work hard to be a positive role model, and a positive voice in this communitty.. Do I care about the green dots that come with it.... not really, but it's always nice to see I'm appreciated.


I think your analogy is slightly flawed.

Though I guess, you don't have to believe me...
John

Re: Reputations. Do they deserve more careful thought?
 

Bad analogy here's another one...
It would be like asking John Kerry what he thinks of the democratic nomination process.

Slightly better analogy.

I didn't mean to call anyone a liar. It's just I don't think anyone could say that they are neutral feeling about the rep system, especially if they say they enjoy receive positive points.

Re: Reputations. Do they deserve more careful thought?
 

To answer the question of this thread, I believe that more thought does need to be put into clicking that little button in the top right... I agree with the Kens - make sure you're deciding whether you approve/disapprove and NOT whether you agree/disagree. Most ridiculous negative rep I got was for "What's in your CD player right now?" - I don't care whether you like my CD or whether you don't.

... and in the case that you are trying to give rep, don't be a fool like me and accidently take it away from someone ;)

Re: Reputations. Do they deserve more careful thought?
 

Oh, I think of them as saying "Good job!" when someone writes something eloquently and conveyingly. On the flip side, you can also use them to tell some one that they stepped out of line. The PMs are for, I think, to tell someone something that doesn't need to be said in a forum. (Agree/disagree, minor point, etc.)
Yikes. I do NOT agree with someone giving someone else rep based on rep. So much for "Gracious Profetionalism."

Ditto. See my signature.
(but I am a little surprised. I'm a rookie and already have 8 rep comments. Of course, I'm averaging 4.96 posts a day! That's 392 posts. Do the math.)

Re: Reputations. Do they deserve more careful thought?
 

As usual, Ken gives a great idea. Wouldn't be too hard to put a 'Neutral' just so you can give points. It would count towards your 'X per day' and 'X per person' and such, but I don't think thats too much of a problem, is it?

Re: Reputations. Do they deserve more careful thought?
 

I accidently did that once. I just gave them 2 pluses. (one to cancel it, one to add rep)

Re: Reputations. Do they deserve more careful thought?
 

that would be great.. theres been alot of times i just want to make a quick, stupid comment without posting or having to deal with PM's

Re: Reputations. Do they deserve more careful thought?
 

I personally like the rep points. I am one with few but I also don't post as much as others. When I do post I like to think that what I say is worthwhile and informative. Yes I look at my rep points. What I really like is not those who give me points but those who take time to tell me why. This is a good indicator to me that I am not just talking but how what I say affects others. If I deserve neg points then let them fly but please let me know why.

As for points that I give, they are given sparingly. I have not yet given any neg reps even though I have thought about it. My feelings are that if I give only for great posts or ones that really hit home then I don't have to give neg points. One thing that I like about FIRST is the way people encourage, help and assist one another. Should we be any different here? As for those who chase and neg points everything that someone says, they need to look at themselves and their reason for being on CD. This is a great tool that is a priveledge to belong to. Please don't abuse this and look for the good in people and this forum.

Brandon, continue your great work here and thanks for the opportunty to be a part of the Chief Delphi Forums.

Re: Reputations. Do they deserve more careful thought?
 

Counter-Point: There is no easy way to know when you crossed a line, if someone gives you a neg rep, you better have crossed a line. I have given 1 rep point, and don't really care. But I would like to be able to revoke any rep that was given inapropriately or accidentely. (With apropriate safties of course; requiring your password?)

Re: Reputations. Do they deserve more careful thought?
 

Would it be possible to instead of just positive, negative, and neutral, to allow us to chose how many points to give (within the range already used).

That way, I can give some points to someone being helpful, and a lot of points to someone who went completely out of their way to help. And the same things with the negatives, I can give out a few negative points for minor abuses, and big points for large personal attacks, etc.




One thing to remember is that reputation averages out over the long run. If you annoy a few people, but make many more people happy, your reputation will increase (although maybe not as fast as someone who makes everyone happy ;)). Remember, JVN stated that he's gotten many negatives, but many more positives.

Another thing to know is that the same person gives out less negative points then positive points. So, even if a person gives out 50/50 positive/negative, the overall reputation increases. I think I give out about 2/3 positive, 1/3 negative, and from what I gather, I give out more negatives then the average person. Also, I've only had one person give me negative reputation as a result of me giving them a negative (and a few nasty IMs). But, much more often, the people thank me for bringing them back to earth.

At times I am frustrated by the reputation system, because I'll put a lot of effort into a post and not receive anything for it. But then, I'll get positives for some post that I consider inane.

Currently, I think that the reputation system measures a combination of effort and popularity. It isn't perfect, but overall, I like it (and yes, I'm one of those people with more then 3 dots).

Re: Reputations. Do they deserve more careful thought?
 

I think much more highly of people who take the time write thoughtful, coherent posts on these forums than I do of people who use shorthand slang like "ur" or who aren't considerate enough to edit or proofread their posts. As Kris has said, the ability to communicate is probably the most significant thing we can have. Don't compromise it from sloth. Were I to meet you, among the first thoughts in my mind would surely be, "You're the poster who doesn't bother to use proper english." I promise. Be a bit less presumptuous about telling me what is or isn't personally important.

Also, I think it makes complete sense that those who think the reputation system is working fine are the people with the highest reputation. These people have proven repeatedly that they are capable of examining a situation with as little influence from personal bias as possible. I don't believe for a second that any one of the people who're supporting the system are doing so because they're treated well by it.