Reputations. Do they deserve more careful thought?

[Brandon Martus]

Excellent points, Matt.

Originally Posted by Matt Adams

I feel really humbled that people take the time via leaving some reputation points to let me know that I posted something worthwhile. I'm not in some exclusive circle of five people who exchange reputation points on a nightly basis. As a matter of fact, of the last 24 reputation comments I've received, they've come from 21 different members.

And to add to this .. the system is designed in such a way that it forces you to give reputation to X other people before giving reputation to the same person again. This forces your reputation points to be spread out among more than just 1 or 2 people.

[Madison]

I'm curious as to how anyone knows anything about why and from whom people beside themselves receive reputation -- and can thus ascribe reasons for such high reputation with any accuracy at all. You all just don't know why others distribute reputation points and I find it ridiculous that you can pretend to understand something completely outside the realm of your knowledge.

The people with the highest reputation are the people with the most power to affect reputation. A popularity contest amongst people with one or two green dots isn't going to significantly affect the overall reputation ratings people receive, as those at the top of the list are, seemingly, consistently receiving positive reputation at an equal rate. Thus, everything remains relative. You're not all genuinely suggesting that people like John, Matt, Amanda, or Andy are engaged in some sort of clique where they each distribute reputation only to one another? That's laughable; and I know that, not because they all have many green dots up there on top of their posts, but because I've been lucky enough to have the opportunity to meet or speak privately with many of the best people in FIRST.

Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil

What I'm saying is, there's some people out there who get reputation or even spotlighted, when they clearly should not have been.

I'd like to see some examples of people that are undeserving, in your opinion, of the reputation they've received and further examples defining why such reputation is inappropriate.

Also, who do you feel deserves to have higher reputation that has not already received such?

[Matt Leese]

Originally Posted by gwross

Originally Posted by ChrisH
I am concerned that standards of good english be upheld and that those who practice them be recognized in a positive way.

Props for using the subjunctive mood properly, Chris. It's one of my favorites. You get a Grammar Curmudgeon gold star.

Shouldn't that be proper english and not good english?

Matt

[MikeDubreuil]

Originally Posted by M. Krass

I'd like to see some examples of people that are undeserving, in your opinion, of the reputation they've received and further examples defining why such reputation is inappropriate.

I'm not about to make this into a witch hunt.

EDIT: I think some excellent suggestions have made made for the reputation system. I look forward to seeing them put into place.

[LauraN]

Let me just talk about myself a little bit before I start this post. But I assure you, it's to make a point.

I know for a fact that there is going to be at least one person who is not going to be happy with what I have to say. I can make similar statements about a lot of things. But given the potentially controversial nature of this thread, this is even more true than usual.

I am fully expecting to receive negative rep for this post. But I'm writing it anyway, because I have something to say. And you should take the same attitude. </egotism>

Originally Posted by GregT

A person with lots of green dots next to their name is more likely to receive additional green dots.

I disagree. I honestly think the exact opposite is true- people with higher reputations are less likely to receive more reputation. Someone once said (I believe it was in an older post about reputation) that they'd be less likely to give rep to those with a long line of pretty green dots. Why not give it to the new guy with only one dot? And, if that person already has so much rep, then they need to really go above and beyond to get more, because you expect more from them. I'm also sure some people are intimidated by it. I might feel kind of silly giving rep to someone so much more "elite" than me. Do they really care what I think about their posts? (I'm sure they do, I'm just saying it's possible for that thought to cross your mind.) I'm not saying these ways of giving rep are the "right" way to do things (I don't think there is a "right" way to give rep), but they are things that cross people's minds. Also, as M. Krass said, I find it highly unlikely that there's some conspiracy run by John, Andy, Ken and Co to keep themselves at the top of the list.

Let's look at some examples. =)

Originally Posted by JVN

I have a negative rep-stalker... someone who I know has a personal grudge against me. It's actually kind of humorous to get -3 from them for a post, and then +20 from another person for the same post. Makes me smile.

Originally Posted by Matt Adams

I feel really humbled that people take the time via leaving some reputation points to let me know that I posted something worthwhile. I'm not in some exclusive circle of five people who exchange reputation points on a nightly basis. As a matter of fact, of the last 24 reputation comments I've received, they've come from 21 different members.

To further the point that this system isn't some sort of exclusive club, I only came on these boards 4 months ago and have met no more than 6 or 7 people outside of my team who post regularly on these boards. I don't have nearly the well founded history that the vast majority of people with high reputation do.

To add my own personal perspective: I'm almost a hybrid of John and Matt. (Tell me that's not cool). Like Matt, I haven't been around awhile. (A little over a month). Also like Matt, I don't know many CD users in "real life." (I think the count stands at about 1.) Like John, I feel that there's abuse of the reputation system from personal experience. But my reputation isn't suffering. Because, like Matt, I've gotten positive reputation from 4 or 5 different CD users (key word: different). And a lot of them are pretty high up there in terms of reputation. So the idea that they're only giving rep to each other is disproven.

I'm not telling you this to make anyone mad, or to brag about my reputation, or anything like that. I don't like making people mad and I don't necessarily think my rep is much to brag about. But I'm telling you this to give you another perspective. John's been around for a few years. Matt for a few months. I've been around for a month. And in each case, the reputation system seems to be working just fine.

The bottom line: The reputation system is a system designed to allow people to be encouraged and constructively criticized by their peers. No good deed goes unpunished; all democracies are corrupt. There will always be someone ready and willing to abuse the system, but these "someone"s represent a small enough portion of the population that they don't matter. As shown by the examples listed above, the good balances out the bad. John has an insane amount of reputation, despite the fact that someone is abusing the system against him. Matt also has lots of reputation, without the "advantage" of knowing the "elite" personally.

Why is that? It's because, regardless of whether there's someone giving negative rep to those they don't like or positive to those they do, John and Matt are smart guys who write great posts. And the majority of the CD community is intelligent enough to recognize that and responsible enough to reward them for it properly. If this weren't the case, if the majority of users were abusing the system, they would not have the kind of reputation they do. And I don't think there are many people who would argue that these 2 don't deserve the rep they have.

So take it all with a grain of salt, form your own opinions, lead by example, act responsibly, be graciously professional, and everything will be ok.

And that's true for anything, not just a silly system based on virtual green dots.

[Greg Ross]

Originally Posted by Matt Leese

Shouldn't that be proper english and not good english?

Matt

Well, if you really want to get nit-picky, it would be "standard" English.

[GregT]

Originally Posted by Matt Adams

I've never been angry and shot from the hip on these forums... I guess there's a first time for everything.

Let's take a look at the top 5 people with the most reputation on these forums:

Andy Baker
JVN
Dave Lavery
Ken Leung
Joe Johnson

These guys have a lot of reputation points. You know why? Because these five individuals consistantly write concise, sincere, worthwhile, timely, and intelligent posts on a wide variety of topics, sharing a lot of mature insight, including some incredible technical knowledge. They've been around for a long while.

Yes, and they completely deserve it. Don't get me wrong. I wasn't trying to put down people with a lot of official reputation. I think most of these people would be respected without lots of green dots.

I really don't see this thread going anywhere but into a battle between have and have-nots, so I'm done.

Sorry if I offended anyone.
Greg

[Matt Adams]

Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil

In some regards, remember the superlatives section of the high school yearbook? I think the reputation system is working like that, mostly a popularity contest among a clique.

Mike, I'm not shooting for any sort of personal attack here... I'd just suggest that you reread my post which you actually quoted.

In short, you and the handful of other people that suggested the reputation system is a popularity contest don't have any proof. It's making you (and those who have shared this opinion) sound like whiners. I'd suggest you try to save some face and quit this unfounded arguement which has ruffled the feathers of a lot of dedicated and passionate people.

The reputation system is not a clique, unless you consider the "clique" to be the 50 or 75 most active members here on CD. That doesn't sound like a clique to me, it sounds like like an online community.

Some don't believe that the people who are among the top of the reputation rankings deserve to be there. I'll even agree with you, there's a lot of people that I'd place higher on the list. That's fair, we're all entitled to our opinion. However, the community has spoken; the reputation system is a democratic process. Not everyone will agree all the time. And that's okay.

This isn't a battle between the haves and the have nots unless you make it one. If you see someone that you think should be higher in the reputation rankings, (and this bothers you so much you can't sleep at night), find their posts and give them positive reputation.

Unless, of course, that person is you... in which case you should perhaps use this as a good lesson in humility. True respect and admiration from your peers is something that must be earned, not something that we can demand.

Matt

[MikeDubreuil]

Originally Posted by Matt Adams

Mike, I'm not shooting for any sort of personal attack here... I'd just suggest that you reread my post which you actually quoted.

Matt, the reason I left a blank space between the paragraphs was because the two ideas were mutualy exclusive. I don't think that you or the people you listed are in here for a popularity contest.

I may look like a whiner. Am I a little upset that I don't have more reputation? Sure, I help out a lot on the boards and recieve very little reputation for it. However, this is something that doesn't just effect me. I certainly am not losing sleep about my reputation situation.

For my involvement in this thread I have received 1 positive, 2 negative, and 3 grey points (of which would have been green). I don't think I'm speaking for just myself when I say that the reputation system could use some improvement, and that some members might be taking advantage of it.

I guess the only way I can give some proof is to talk in general terms. I don't want to call people out, because that is unfair. There are certain people who have a lot of reputation, but if you look at their post history, you're left scratching your head. When you look at others and wonder how they could have enough time in the day to have such great posts.

I'm not sure if I'm going to continue with my argument. Not because I think I'm in the wrong. It's just after writing the previous paragraph I realize it would be very difficult to explain the situation without being offendingly specific in the instances where the system might be abused.

This is not a personal grudge I hold against people. Please don't think about it that way. I'd love to have lunch and talk FIRST with everyone in this thread. I just don't always understand why they have such high reputation, maybe a lunch with them and I'll understand

[ngreen]

I think to have such high positive reputations these people have had to consistently have good post.

I have five green dots (nearly six) since January. I'll tell you how I've got them.

First I'm here a lot and post a lot. I'm averaging 5 and a half post a day. That gives me a fair chance at having a lot of good post (or bad ones).

Next, I try my hardest to answer questions when I have expertise of sorts in them. This really doesn't get you a lot of points usually because people who really need this help aren't high enough in the system. But nonetheless I still enjoy.

Next, I form sincere opinions and present them in such a way that it is not a personal attack. Yes sometimes I flame but try to approach things from a positive or constructive side. No one here needs to hear me complain.

I try to make the forum as fun as possible by using humor. I am deeply sarcastic and have to be careful that these comments come accross as I intend.

I respect the forums and try to use "forum etiquette" - maybe someone should teach a class.

This is just what I do and it has been okay for me.

I know the system isn't perfect but nothing is. I've seen some good ideas for improvement. So if you have a complaint against the reputation system don't just complain. Change how you post. Offer a suggestion of how to improve if. Give us something better to replace it.

Just because a computer doesn't work all the time doesn't mean we go back to doing everything on paper.

[Brandon Martus]

One other thought ... I have found a hack that would let other people see your last X reputation messages on your public user profile page. They would appear just as they do in your user control panel, but wouldn't have names attached to them. (you'd still see who they were from in your profile)

I think the intent of the hack is to help others see what people are saying about your posts. Anybody have any thoughts on this.. is it worth installing? Would it help to keep reputation points on track? Too revealing? Good idea? Bad idea?

[sanddrag]

Originally Posted by Brandon Martus

One other thought ... I have found a hack that would let other people see your last X reputation messages on your public user profile page. They would appear just as they do in your user control panel, but wouldn't have names attached to them. (you'd still see who they were from in your profile)

I think the intent of the hack is to help others see what people are saying about your posts. Anybody have any thoughts on this.. is it worth installing? Would it help to keep reputation points on track? Too revealing? Good idea? Bad idea?

I think it would be too revelaing. But that's just me. Perhaps a pole for this question?

[Astronouth7303]

I can see it both ways. I think that sshowing rep comments would be good for, like, 1 or 2, maybe 3, comments visible. This way, one knows if it was really worth while, was just stupid, or was serious.

And the people with like 20 reps probably got a UFH or a WFA, or nominated someone. (check the FAQ).

Are points from high-rep people worth more than points from low-rep people?
I have 7 green, 1 red, and 1 gray in my user CP. Yet my public profile only shows 1 green. What's up? I'm not getting this.

[fred]

I actually didn't look at this thread for a while because I really didn't pay attention to reputation points. I only have 1 little green dot and 3 points so I don't think that anyone can accuse me of being biased here. I would just like to ask everyone here to take a small step back and look what is being argued about.

Little green dots. I know that having a lot of green dots next to your name probably looks very cool. In my opinion though, if somebody doesn't want to read your post because you don't have enough green dots, than that person probably isn't worth talking to anyway. I know I wouldn't want to become friends with someone who liked me or what I did just because I had the latest style of clothing or something.

I think reputation points can be helpful in the long run. If you get a negative rep point, I don't think should automatically assume, "Oh, that person is just a moron, they don't know anything." Take a look back at your post, look at it from an unbiased view. Is there something in there that you could have changed? Also, don't get angry if you don't think that you are getting enough good rep points. Just remember, little green dots...

If someone wants to judge me by the appearance of my avatar (go Flyers!) or how many green dots I have or how many posts I have made, than I wouldn't really care much about what that person said to me or how much respect he treated me with, just my 2 cents...

[Yan Wang]

Hm.. kinda ironic that the reputation system is getting a bad rep. It's just a bunch of dots. Who cares? You know a good post or bad past when you see it. I don't need dots to tell me that. Any fairly active person who's used the forums for a month will know who posts good (I meant "well") and who... doesn't. The only problem I have with the rep system is with the immature people who abuse it.