Reputation points
 

Is there any way to see how many points each reputation given is worth? Is there also a way of knowing how many reputation points that I can give?

Re: Reputation points
 

well, i assume that each box represents a set number of reputation points. i have 15 points, but only one box, so they are worth at least that. for some research, next time you up somebody's rep ask them how many points it goes up by

Re: Reputation points
 

I think he's asking if he can see how much is given in any given situation. You can't really, unless you keep track starting right now and checking the difference between your total points after you get rep, vs, before you get rep.

Each person does not give the same amount. For example, I give around 20 or so (I think) while DJ gives 38, and the top people give something over 50 I think. It all depends on your own level of reputation. The higher it is, the more points you give.

Re: Reputation points
 

does your # of posts have any influence on anything with reputation? or anything at all for that matter?

Re: Reputation points
 

Yes, I believe those with under 50 posts don't contribute to reputation, thus the gray squares..

Re: Reputation points
 

each dark green box is worth 100 points,
from 1-99 rep points you will have a single dark green box (or grey if your new).
from 100-199 its 2 dark green boxes
200-299 is 3 dark green boxes
300-399 is 4 dark green boxes
400-499 is 5 dark green boxes
500-699 is 5 dark green boxes and 1 bright green box
700-899 is 5 dark green boxes and 2 bright green boxes
900-1099 is 5 dark green boxes and 3 bright green boxes
1100-1299 is 5 dark green boxes and 4 bright green boxes
1300-1499 is is 5 dark green boxes and 5 bright green boxes
1500+ is 5 dark green boxes and 6 bright green boxes

Currently you cant go over a total of 11 boxes. Also when you place your curser over the boxes it will give you a phrase which represents the users point value. Also like Cory said, each person will give or remove a certain value with a positive or negitive rep comment. people who currently have 1 grey box will not give or remove any rep points when they send a positive or negative request. I dont know if there is a way to see how much each request is worth with out brandon doing some work on a new feature...

Re: Reputation points
 

There isn't a way (that I know of) where your reputation score is shown.

There are alot of factors that contribute to how many points you give. It is based on your reputation score (which you can see on your main user cp page, in the upper right corner of the recent reputation box. It is also based on the # of days you've been registered, the # of posts you have, etc.

There are a few other quirks spelled out in the FAQ, too, if this doesn't answer all your questions.

Re: Reputation points
 

From a previous post about reputation:

Hope this helps

Re: Reputation points
 

Thank you for posting how the math works! I am still amazed at how one person who has been around the forums for a while and who has at least 8+ boxes gave me a negative rep point. It turned my 1 green box into 1 gray box. I think they were just having a bad day since my post was just an insight into the thread.

However, it shows us how much power a veteran member can have negatively. But this also shows, how forum members can build rep points back up.

But not to leave this post on a negative, thank you to all of you who have helped make ChiefDelphi so wonderful and a great resource for all of us.

Re: Reputation points
 

Do red bars limit ones posting? Say there are members on CD that have a very negative reputation, does the system limit their posting because they have such a negative reputation?


If it doesnt, I think it should.

Re: Reputation points
 

I agree. Then we could keep that SilenceNoMore fool from posting.

Think of what a better place Chiefdelphi would be.

Cory

Re: Reputation points
 

Here Here!

The problem is that one can then come back on as a guest.

To steer this back on topic: <humor> So, if someone with 2 red boxes gives you neg feedback, do you really get positive feedback? </>

Re: Reputation points
 

Remember kids, censorship is bad.

"'Tis better to be silent and thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt."

This is a wise sentiment that many have not yet taken time to understand. They should be given every opportunity to do so.

Re: Reputation points
 

I agree. If you censor one thing, it sets a dangerous precident to enable censoring in the future. That's the theory behind Slashdot- No posts can be deleted or edited. It's been a very contraversial stance for them, and they've been threatened with legal action a few times because of it. But the idea is if one post can be deleted, it opens the doors for other posts to be deleted. If that happens, there's no stopping how many posts can be deleted, or under what criteria a post would be eligable for deletion. Some would argue political or moral censorship, and the site would loose lots of credibility as people complained. Of course, this means there are plenty of trolls who take advantage of the system, but I think it's a small price to pay for the freedom of knowing your thoughts can be expressed without fear of censorship. It's easy enough to browse around trolls, but far more difficult to get your ideas heard in a public place without fear of ridicule or censoring.

Re: Reputation points
 

It doesnt really matter what anyone thinks about the forum moderators ability to delete posts or edit them, or if censorship is bad.

Read the TOS. Im sure it says something along the lines of it is up to the discretion of the chiefdelphi.com moderators to delete what they consider inappropriate content.

Now if people went around deleting threads just because they didnt like the person, that'd be another story entirely.

[edit] here we go. "The owners of the ChiefDelphi Forums have the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason."


Cory

Re: Reputation points
 

I think that for people with an extreamly low reputation, maybe their posts should be evaluated by a moderator before it is posted. This way it is not compleate censorship, but does give people an opertunity to review possibly inappropriate posts from a user infamous for bad posts. I also feel that only the administrators, modorators, or the person who posted should have the right to deleate already existing posts.

Re: Reputation points
 

I have to disagree with having posts from those with low reputations moderated. First, the moderators would have a lot more work to do than they already have. Second, who is to say what type of postings the reputations have come from?

I haven't posted very often simply because I don't feel that there is much more for me to add to a current discussion, esp. if M. Krass has responded before me. Therefore, the number of my posts is still under 100, as is my reputation, even though I've been around these forums since 2001. In addition, one of those posts that would be waiting for the moderators to approve may be the critical answer to your problem that must be solved in the next 10 min.

One of the interesting issues that is posed by having people post any time they want is that the reader must determine what information is valid. The same goes for any site on the internet.

indieFan

Re: Reputation points
 

I don't think the suggestion was for low but positive reputations, but for the (very) few people that have extremely negative reputations.

I haven't finished working through my mind as to what I think about that, though.

Re: Reputation points
 

Cory, I understand that the fine folks in Michigan and the moderators scattered across the country are free to close, move, modify or delete any posts or threads that they'd like. I'm also happy to say that, with some exceptions, I feel that they use those privileges wisely and sparingly. Censorship isn't a problem on these forums so far.

Everyone, there are also only two people with an overwhelmingly negative reputation among the thousands of members. For that reason alone, discussion about censoring their ability to speak seems fruitless and wasted. One of those members hasn't posted in over a year, before the reputation system even existed, suggesting to me that their extremely negative reputation probably isn't deserved.

Remember also that the forums have an "Ignore" function that automatically removes the text from posts by certain individuals. You can choose to view individual posts if you'd like, but on the whole, you can spare yourself from their inane stupidity, ramblings, or trite commentary.

Numerous methods of censorship exist already on these forums, so suggesting a site-wide policy of censorship that lay in the grasp of the majority is overwhelmingly dangerous and completely unnecessary. Around here, we don't get to vote people off the island, but we can pretty easily pretend they don't exist.

Re: Reputation points
 

I don't particularly like some of the moderation that happens here on CD. For instance, I think threads get closed more often than they should when discussion gets intense. However, I also feel that moderation on CD is a good thing. All in all, the moderators do a great job.

The difference between CD and Slashdot is Slashdot geared for nerds and was started by a group of friends and now financed by the Open Source Devlopers Network. The open source comminuity tends to be extremely liberal and would frown upon censorship of any kind. There is also no specific age group with Slashdot.

CD I would assume is financed by Delphi, or at the very least something with reasonle enough ties to Delphi that it would damage their reputation if you could post whatever you wanted here. There's also a specific age group on CD; high school students, most of whom are under 18. Granted, some of us are older, but we go to robotics everyday knowing that we have to keep it PG13.

Re: Reputation points
 

whoa, you can ignore someone?

How did I miss this...

Cory

Re: Reputation points
 

That can't possible be a difference.

Re: Reputation points
 

I really don't think it's in our best interest to moderate low or negative rep point members. My problem is that this is an online forum, and I get really antsy when contributing or reading to a moderated thread when hours goes by and posts havn't been aproved. This is an online forum and I really like the instantaneous nature of online discussion. If there's wasn't CD on the internet, we might be using carrier pigeons to hande PMs :D

Anyways, what I think should happen is there should be a method to as M. Krass put it "vote people of the island." Right now I can only think of 1 person who has never added to a thread in a positive manner. I could use the ignore option, but I really have trouble justifying to myself why I should be authorised to ignore someone. If CD officially banished someone, it wouldn't feel so personal and I would be happier about seeing them go.

Perhaps after more than 3 posts of immense negative reputation you should be banished from CD?

Re: Reputation points
 

Under the User CP screen, way down at the bottom under the Miscellaneous category, there's an option for Buddy/Ignore Lists. Adding people to the ignore list will make the text, "This person is on your ignore list," or similar appear in place of the text of their posts.

Edit:

With respect, you should feel personally responsible for the actions you take when you ignore someone and you should be mindful of why you're ignoring them. It is not and should never be ChiefDelphi's burden to make you feel less guilty about dismissing the effort (however minimal) someone takes to participate here. Passing that burden on to someone else is little more than sloth and irresponsibility. Make your own decisions and deal with the varied consequences of those actions; don't pretend you're being humble by leaving those decisions to someone else.

Re: Reputation points
 

There is more of an issue here than just plain censorship. Many of you are not seeing the forest through the trees. I have seen that most of SilenceNoMore's posts are stirring things up. He/she is challenging the normal paradigms we have and many people are rising up and defending their positions with conviction. Is this a bad thing? No. People need to defend their beliefs and it is good to have someone question what you believe in once in a while.

While sometimes, certain posts by certain people may be deemed inappropriate, their opinions still need to be heard. I actually like the fact that some people (even SilenceNoMore) come in here and have the guts to say what they feel, even if their opinion is in the minority. While I don't agree with what they say, I respect their opinions.

Also... there is another point here that needs to be heard. Many people who start posting on here initially say some silly things. Over time, they learn, mature, and grow up. They gain experience and realize that some of their previous posts were regretted. I'll give you 2 examples: JosephM and Tytus. When each of these two guys started posting, they grated on many people's nerves. If we had rep points back then, they would have red dots out the wazoo. However, we have all seen these two guys grow into fine young men and they are very positive contributors to this community. I look forward to seeing what these two guys have to say. They both have matured into credible young adults. If their comments were banned and not heard at all, they would not be where they are today.

As for the people who "stir the pot", I say let 'em speak. The moderators can handle the job of keeping things appropriate if things get too turbulent. We need differing opinions in here, and it would not be good to ban certain people because they have unpopular views.

Andy B.

Re: Reputation points
 

I agree with the freedom of speech etc. We need differing viewpoints and thats what this forum is meant for. At the same time the moderators do a good job moderating this place..

I mean I know people like SilenceNoMore get on peoples nerves, but its not too bad. Sometimes its good humor too. At the same time this is no political forum, therefore we dont need cencorship etc. The mods do their job, so let them do it.

Re: Reputation points
 

In my prior post, when I stated low rep points, I should have specified that I ment negative rep points, like -250 or somthing like that. I compleately understand how some people have a low rep score because they do not post as often as other people, and that should not make them suseptable to censorship. I was trying to state that it would only affect people who have a great deal of negative rep points.

Re: Reputation points
 

Sorry for posting again, but I think this is needed. I like what Andy said about new members. When I came in new to this forum, the first 5 reputation points I got were negative. So 1 red dot. About a month after that the "Collaboration" thread started. I observed people, and the forum etique and learnt a lot. I did not participate in the discussion because I did not want more negative reputations :(. Wel anyways, Andy is soo right, it does take time to develop and learn to post right.

Re: Reputation points
 

I have no problems with free speech and the expression of personal opinion. Granted, I do not have tolerance for rudeness and attacks upon other people and their personal morals and decisions. I believe that, upon multiple occassions, SilenceNoMore specifically has transcended this. Some of the posts he makes are not what would fall under "constructive criticism" or a personal opinion about a topic. These fall more to the criticizing of a member of team 25 apologizing for some things that happened at PARC, as this member felt the personal responsibility to apologize on behalf of his team.

Just to sum it up, I have absolutely NO problems with free speech, it facilitates the spreading of ideas, but there are some instances where people cross the boundaries.

Now to get back on topic, I think that reputations given by members with strongly negative reps, khssoccer16 and SilenceNoMore are the only ones I've seen, should be monitored. So that at least the reps given out by them be checked to make sure that the reps they give out are just. Because truly, I expect to an extent that those with higher reputations are more respectable and trustworthy, as I would trust Andy Baker, JVN, DJ Fluck, et al to to be fair and responsible.

Re: Reputation points
 

According to the Memberlist, there are currently only two ChiefDelphi members with red dots next to their names.

Re: Reputation points
 

That's unnecessary. If anyone is spreading excess negative rep OR positive rep for no warranted reason, you can talk to Brandon. Refer to this section in the FAQ:

Re: Reputation points
 

You don't even need to do this. Anyone with less than 50 posts doesnt give any rep at all, even if their name shows up as having given rep to you. I believe the users with extremely negative rep count also can't give any rep.

I just got some negative rep from a certain someone with two red bars, and it didn't do a thing :D

Cory

Re: Reputation points
 

So ... maybe a new thread should be started since most of this stuff is off-topic.

???

Re: Reputation points
 

I realize this is still off subject...but has anyone ever looked at the posts of khssoccer16 ? It seems someone had it in for him...considering nothing was really bad.

Re: Reputation points
 

I believe that is what M Krass was refering to in a previous post.

Re: Reputation points
 

Sorry, I had forgotten that this rule applies.

Re: Reputation points
 

The situation has been dealt with..

Re: Reputation points
 

When you decide to ignore a member of the Chief Delphi community you are ignoring a problem. I don't think that ignoring problems are part of a responsible solution. Silencenomore and others are people with generally valid problems with the current state of FIRST. Granted, they may not present the problems in the best way, and they hide behind anonymity, they bring valid problems.
It is un-American to see problems and ignore them. For example, we don't ignore the religious battles in Israel, we don't ignore oppressive dictators, and we don't ignore the minority. By ignoring the minority who have a problem with the current state of FIRST you are acting with prejudice. If we ignored the minority, FIRST would not exist. From my experience, FIRST gives students who are the unpopular minority in their school something to be proud of. That's something that is American, and definitely a responsible solution.

Re: Reputation points
 

I'm unsure how this is relevant to, nor concordant with your previous posts here. Are you only suggesting that you're more comfortable when the entire community ignores a problem by banning someone than you are by ignoring that problem alone? Does that make you feel less guilty?

Really, I wish I had the time, patience, and stamina to take every misguided student under my wing and nurture them and teach them about the things I believe in. Sadly, I don't have that sort of energy available to me and I make decisions based upon the resources I have at my disposal. If that means that I ignore someone after they repeatedly demonstrate they're incompatible with my ideas, unwilling to work within a framework I believe in, or determined to be a nuisance while providing few meaningful contributions to things I find important, I'm unashamed of that.

My goal is to inspire people who have found no inspiration by my actions and my ideas. If their existing ideas run counter to my beliefs, my goal is not to change them, but to better focus my energy and my effort on those people to which it is of the greatest benefit.

I don't ignore very many people, either. I am willing to accept the consequences of ignoring the few that I do, however, and if that means that people think I'm ignoring some problem or being close-minded or some other nonsense, I'm not keen on debating that or letting it color my behavior or actions.

I have read nothing posted by that individual worthy of any merit. They have rehashed existing discussions, made mindless comments about individuals I hold in high regard, and otherwise proven themselves to be an antagonist and nuisance. Anonymity is, in this instance, synonymous with cowardice -- and I'm afraid that many people are confusing that cowardice with courage.

Oh my. For what it's worth, I'm not interested in being the particularly popular definition of "american," thanks.

We don't? That's another discussion for another time, really, but I'd be happy to expound upon exactly how incorrect these assertions are.

I have for years been and continue to be one of the most vocal critics of FIRST and the people who participate in it. I don't understand the basis by which you can argue I am acting with any prejudice against those who challenge canonical FIRST paradigms. I feel like I'm running for President or something, but, uh -- well, check my voting record before making silly assumptions.

Was this post inspired by a need to alienate every nationality participating in FIRST or FIRST Lego League? My feeling is that the many fine Canadians, Mexicans, Brits and Brazilians who participate in this program have very little desire for their actions to be considered more "American."

I am dumbfounded by your choice to correlate shirking personal responsibility with being a red-blooded American. Really.

Re: Reputation points
 

I think it's important to remember our history and the mission of FIRST. FIRST was initally called the "US FIRST Robotics Competition." The name is still used in the domain name usfirst.org. The mission was to increase the number of students intererested in technology, to benifit the United States. This message is still clear when Dean Kamen takes the podioum and gives a speech on keeping technology related jobs in the United States.

Introducing FIRST to other countries is a great idea, but it is inconsistent with the entire original mission of FIRST. One of our growing pains is how to incorporate the original mission while allowing global participation. Dean Kamen continues to ignore other countries in his speeches, and keeps us focused on the United States' problems with the technology sector. In my opion Dean Kamen has yet to waiver in his original American mission.

Re: Reputation points
 

Sorry, but that's not true either. FIRST may have originally been started to promote science and technology in the US, but that's not the mission statement anymore.

Here is a quote from Dean Kamen himself in the FIRST info brochure available from http://www.usfirst.org/4vol/resource...ldBrochure.pdf

“…to create a world where science and technology
are celebrated….where young people dream of
becoming science and technology heroes…”

Note the use of world, and not United States.

I don't even feel like looking around anymore, but Im sure there's plenty more references to international teams.

Heck, the first thing always said about FIRST is "And there's over 900 teams from the US, Canada, Brazil, and England"

P.S. Check out www.first.org Even if FIRST had wanted to change their site, they couldn't.

Cory

Re: Reputation points
 

wow, this thread has really gotten off topic...

as far as the mission of FIRST i believe that it is much more than just getting kids interested in science and technology. it is also about promoting hard work, creativity, and dedication. personally, since i became involved in FIRST i have very much shifted my career goals AWAY from science and technology. i originally wanted to program video games. after joining FIRST, my dreams shifted to engineering. after being involved in FIRST for a while, i realized that while robotics and programming would probably always be hobbies of mine, my career was meant for elsewhere. it was the creativity of FIRST that inspired me the most, but creativity can be expressed in many forms. at the beginning of last school year, i became involved in journalism, writing video game reviews for a county paper. i found that i loved writing, especially the creativity of it. even when you write a review, you use creativity in how you word and structure the article. would i have pursued this if i didn;t have my extra self-confidence from FIRST? maybe, maybe not. i'm now looking at other forms of writing, like comedy (ask anyone on my team, i'm very silly). another important thing when writing is to think outside of the box. nobody wants to read an article/book/cartoon/whatever that sounds like any other article/book/cartoon/whatever. you need to think of innovative ways to structure your writing. FIRST has helped me with that a ton.

with Dean Kamen's speeches, yes, he does stress science and technology. but i remember somebody (i think either dean or woodie) who said that FIRST was about more than that. the quote "...compose a song, write a book..." sticks out in my mind the most. FIRST encourages anything where people express creativity and innovation.

The mission of FIRST is not just to promote science and technology, but to help every student involved to reach their full potential and achieve their dreams.

now, before i can achieve any of my other goals, i better achieve the goal of getting this thread back on topic...

does anybody know exactly how many points each square represents?

Re: Reputation points
 

I was thinking about the SilenceNoMore issue. I agree he is abnoxious, rude etc, but it also got me thinking, what caused him to behave like this? Is it something that has affected him in his past, or is he just doing it for fun, or does he just want to be the center of attraction? I am a pretty understanding guy, and therefore it got me thinking about WHY..

The other thing I was thinking about is, if I were in his boots, what would I do? (Assuming I come from a history like his, because I just cannot be really rude to anyone).

Little offtopic.. I must admit that kids in FIRST are talented, more than others in the world, as a community. I browse many other forums, and people come up with the dumbest arguements ever, rather than clever ones like you guys.. FIRST does not only inspire, but also gets your brains working cleverly...:p

Re: Reputation points
 

I think you guys are forgetting the history aspect, and the original mission statement. Sure the new press material talks about other countries, that may be the revised mission.

If Dean Kamen wanted FIRST to be about international technology, would he talk in a FIRST venue about why sending tech jobs out of America is a problem?

Re: Reputation points
 

Look at this post

Re: Reputation points
 

I think we need to start a new thread. We've strayed off the reputation points topic and into the individual meanings of FIRST...

Re: Reputation points
 

How do you know if the reputation points are negative or positive?

Re: Reputation points
 

Green = positive
Red = Negative
Grey = User who gave you reputation either does not have 50 posts or does not have positive reputation (ie grey bar or red bar next to name)

Re: Reputation points
 

The reputation FAQ page may also be of interest http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/fa...reputation_faq

Re: Reputation points
 

YA instead of Getting Banned For 3 Months I could just have had a bunch of red dots out the wazoo.

Rep points are good except when you get bad ones for spelling and gramer Otherwise its like somthing to work for and acheve and encourage people to be productive . I love those seememgly insignificant patches of pixels at the top of posts :Salutes them:

Re: Reputation points
 

Re: Reputation points
 

I have started a new thread to discuss FIRST's mission. Please move all non rep point discussion to new thread.

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...threadid=28609

Re: Reputation points
 

This might be slightly off topic, but I would like to say that the majority of people on these boards actually have a negative rep. In fact, only the last 4 screens of members have more than one green dot. Don't judge people by their rep. :)

Re: Reputation points
 

Errr... I'd hate to tell you but people with no posts actually have green dots. I have no idea how but I saw two people with one green block that had zero posts. How does that happen?

Re: Reputation points
 

If you place your cursor over the green dot, it with say "This user has an unknown quantity at this point" They are neutral

Re: Reputation points
 

I believe there is someway that negative RP is given if a user dosen't post for a long time, or something like that. I know my sister was once on these forums, and had a grey dot before I gave her rp...but I was the only person who had every given her rp, positive or negative.

That would explain why so many people have negative rp.

Re: Reputation points
 

We did give out reputation to WFA and UFH winners, who may not have posted. There are quite a few hidden forums, too, so just because you see 0 posts, doesn't mean they are inactive.

Re: Reputation points
 

I disagree. If I was in his shoes, that would only encourage me to start an new account. What's preventing him from making a new name? Doing this, in my opinion, does not help the situation at all... This is just my opinion, of course...

Re: Reputation points
 

No that ios not only your opinion that i would say would be one reason why it is against forum TOS to have more then one account.

Re: Reputation points
 

This is already his second account anyways

Re: Reputation points
 

Nothing really stops someone from opening multiple accounts but I believe Brandon has measures in place to avoid this. For instance if someone is banned from CD Brandon can log the IP address of that person and possibly have a "red flag" go up if another name shows up from that particular IP or he can cross reference that IP to other users. If they do open another account he can simply delete it.

Re: Reputation points
 

Ok, this is kinda a weird question and I don't know why anyone would do this but can you give rep points to yourself? Don't know why I thought of that.

Re: Reputation points
 

If the individual really wanted to get around it, couldn't they just assign themselvel a new IP? In my apartment we are wireless, and we reassign IP's to each other to play jokes all the time. Is there any possible to way to truely ban someone? Does their MAC address show at all?

Re: Reputation points
 

You're not able to do that.

Re: Reputation points
 

No, you can't. If you hit the rep button on your posts, It will onyl show your rep from that post, it wont allow to to add/sub any.

Re: Reputation points
 

I don't know. Only Brandon could answer that and I'm also sure he has other "tricks of the trade" in place that he may not divulge. As for HHSJosh's post about a certain someone (we all know who) having two accounts I heard that too. If it's true or not or why it hasn't been deleted isn't my business to get into. I just ignore that certain someone and don't let them bother me.

Re: Reputation points
 

It is possible to get a persons MAC id, it all depends on the forums config... and I dont think Brandon wants to answer this question in public for obvious reasons...

Reg. changing IP addresses: most probably when you change IP addresses its in the same range, i.e. 233.25.192.198, basically if they do ban your IP, they ban 233.25.192.* , so it bans the whole range, rather than the single IP. It is not likely that two members will be in the same range...

Also, about that "certain someone", who has two accounts, I can bet that "certain some people" know who that "certain someone" really is...

I can just suggest that we stop worrying and let the mods do their jobs.. it all works out well :)

Re: Reputation points
 

Re: Reputation points
 

Technically yes, but I'd imagine it wouldn't change the external IP. If you can change your IP at will, chances are you're behind a router using NAT (network address translation). If that's the case, no matter what your internal IP is, it will always register on CD and other sites as your external IP (if you're on broadband... dial-up typically results in a different IP every time you connect... come to think of it, even cable and DSL change randomly, but are generally not under the user's control)

As a random note, to find out your external IP, or the IP that sites like CD will see, go to http://www.whatismyip.com.

Re: Reputation points
 

For some reason, I highly doubt that that "someone ;) " has two acounts. My reasons are that he actively uses that account, and not using it just every time he wants to stir up some controversy. But who knows, for all you know, it could be any one of us.....and before andyone starts thinking :yikes: it's him..no, I'm not.

Re: Reputation points
 

personally i do not think that this is right that you are talking about other people like this. i know who you are talking about and even if they have said some bad things here and there, but they shouldnt be chastized for what they think. i mean take a look from their side for once maybe what they are saying is true (im not aggreeing or disagreeing here i just want to make a point) but please leave them alone. Also if you are now going to give me neg rep for standing up for them, then maybe you should take a step back away from your monitor, look in a mirror and ask how what you are doing there is any different then what they are doing in these threads...

PLEASE get this back on topic!

Re: Reputation points
 

To try to get this back on topic- I don't think reputation should provoke a limiting factor on posting... I'm reminded of a quote which I think fits nicely here-

Re: Reputation points
 

Agreed. There are obviously issues that are worth considering, even if they are presented by someone with an unpopular point of view.

But the way the opinions are presented could certainly use some critiquing.

Re: Reputation points
 

I don't like to bring back old topics, but I didn't want to start a new thread if there is one that this can fit in, so:

IMHO, Some people seem to give out Rep points for the sole purpose of recieving them back. I have recieved Rep points from different people either A) multiple times from the same person in a very short span, or B) For no reason.
I have recieved points for little/no reason. Most Rep points i have gotten have come from the Chit-Chat forum, which (again, IMHO) shouldn't deserve as much weighting as other forums.

Basiclly, It seems that some people give Rep points to get REp points.


But that doesn't mean I'm a bad guy. :D