I'll tell you this right now. I very rarely (if at all) give out rep. I don't even look at rep. It's all the way on the right side of the page, after all. I can glance through posts without looking at any green whatsoever. Besides, why should someone with 10 green dots be taken more seriously than someone with one green (or heck, even still on gray) when at face value, all their opinions are very valid. In which case I'm forced to think who deserves my rep. Does that person with 10 dots deserve it more simply because he has the 10 dots. Maybe I should give a leg-up to the person with 1. If it goes to the person with 10, it's a popularity thing. If I go to the 1, it's a pity thing. Maybe I give it to both, but that almost defeats the purpose of the system.
And then there's bad rep. I myself have gotten bad rep based on Jeopardy questions. How wrong is that? If someone only adds one line to a discussion, should I give him bad rep? I mean, he
is adding to the discussion after all. Should all posts under one line be judged as bad? There may be valid opinions in that one line. Maybe someone double posts (which is very often by accident). Should they be penalized for that? I don't agree with a post? Bad rep? (I'd never give out bad rep because someone disagrees with me, but I'm sure it happens). Someone has started flaming other users. Should he be given bad rep? Yes he should (sorry, just making sure you're still paying attention
). If someone pointlessly gives you bad rep, do you have the right to fire back at them (which is a dangerous thing considering a lot of people can fire a negative rep of 15 points)?
I speak my mind. It's just who I am. Which puts me between a rock and a hard place. I want to get my opinion out there (i.e., speak my mind). The problem is my opinion often differs from that of my peers (in this case, the users of CD). I'm not afraid of bad rep, but I'd kinda like that bad rep to be justified. Are you going to give me bad rep because I disagree with Operation Reelect- er, I mean Operation Iraqi Freedom? Are you going to give me good rep because you're good friends with me? Things like this have made me just disregard the entire rep system.
I'm not saying that rep is just a popularity contest, or a tool to keep political enimies (for lack of a better name) at bay. You have no clue how tempted I was to fire a -15 bomb in the direction of the people who gave me bad rep based on Jeopardy questions. I never did, but I wouldn't be suprised if that's another large source of bad rep. I'm pretty sure that a lot of rep givin out is deserved either way. But even if 90% of all rep givin out is justified (and IMO, it's probably less than that), that makes 10% of the system a popularity contest, and a way to oppress those that disagree with you. And 10% of all the points givin out (or heck, lets count 10% of the people) is a lot of points (or people). Again, I'm just speaking my mind. I'll take you seriously even if you're in red. And I won't let other people's opinions on you (in the form of rep), be them good or bad, influence how I feel about what you say. You agree with me? Cool. You don't? Maybe we can have a friendly debate on that topic. Don't be afraid to post what's on your mind. You'll never get bad rep from me if you do.
So, how 'bout them Red Sox?