[nirvAnA]

It has now been almost a week where the ability to give negative reputation was removed from the reputation system. This whole thing came about after Pinder's suggestion to me to have neg rep removed. I felt there were merits in his suggestion and there was mixed response in our admin chat so I decieded rather then straight away removing it, to test it out for a week and let the community give their feedback after trying it out, and then re-evaluate.

Q: Should there be negative rep in our rep system?

Reasons for removing was stated in this earlier post:
"It was brought to my attention that the negative reputation was harming the community. In an ideal world, the reputation system would have just be used as a way to express how you felt about a particular post's CONTENT. However, people were taking the neg reps the wrong way, getting angry at those who have neg repped them, blindly neg repping people back etc.

Worse of all, some people were just using the system to neg rep people they didn't like when someone else who posted the same content would not be neg repped. Basically it was making most of the community more and more angry with each other, making poor relations even worse and fueling a lot of unnecessary drama."

Reasons for having negative rep:
Its a fun to use feature and we should be able to express our dislike for something, freedom! Its an easier way to express with a simple frowny than making a long post thats far too much effort. People who abuse this can always have their rep powers taken away so others can continue using it.

The rep system is not to be taken personally, it is just an opinion after all. *unless a personal attack is embeded in the message, or u dont like the poster so u neg rep him then look for a reason in his post to justify it - thats something else and falls under abuse.

Other alternatives:
Keeping it but renaming the reputation word to something else, like "likes"
Keeping it but disallowing comments for negative rep.
Keeping it by removing the frowny face which seems to piss people off lol
Keeping it but also allowing neutral comments for neutral commenting which carries 0 weightage and has a chat box has an icon


Admins and mods will re-evalute based on the feedback given in this thread and votes collected.

[TAminimat]

I reckon you should add the neutral comments and just penalise people "abusing" the neg rep.

Quick Comments

	mGGAequitas:	neutral comments are good
	Ruski:	Agree
	Zanderax:	Here you go

[aLtShortizz]

I like this last one.

[Baldie]

I too am a fan of an ability to neutral chat respond.

It's pretty common for people to get +reped as a reply instead of the person quoting them and posting a reply.

On longer threads sometimes responses can be lost and if there is an ability to respond directly on the post it would mean it would be localised. Only potential issue is if it becomes a thread within a thread - but plenty of ways to avoid that such as limiting the amount of chat responses you can do to a post etc.

[deL]

I would like a rep system where you can only spend X per day - say double whatever your rep power is (mine would be 8) and you can choose how much rep to give to a single post so you can give +1 to 8 good posts or +8 to a really good post or something. Do the same with -ve rep but just allow 1 neg rep? That should mean the overall +ve rep is a lot more than -ve and if 5 people unfairly rep something just one +ve rep could undo it all. Also if people wanna -ve rep something they have to really want to because it means they can't -ve rep someone else.

Not sure what a good refresh time would be. I like -ve rep cos it hits people hard who make stupid posts and is a better alternative than what usually happens in forums - everyone replying with insults or sarcstic comments and derailing an entire thread for 1 shitty post.

Quick Comments

	nirvAnA:
	Rage:	I like this one the best.

[Bash]

Originally Posted by TAdeL

I would like a rep system where you can only spend X per day - say double whatever your rep power is (mine would be 8) and you can choose how much rep to give to a single post so you can give +1 to 8 good posts or +8 to a really good post or something. Do the same with -ve rep but just allow 1 neg rep? That should mean the overall +ve rep is a lot more than -ve and if 5 people unfairly rep something just one +ve rep could undo it all. Also if people wanna -ve rep something they have to really want to because it means they can't -ve rep someone else.

.

I'm not sure on the +different amounts of rep, but i like the idea of limiting how much rep you can give either way.

[Maynarde]

The major issue with the rep system isn't actually the rep system, it's the people that are sensitive to negative rep.

I liked it fine the way it was, but it became pretty glaringly apparent especially in the last couple months that neg rep was starting more than just a few arguments and it was kind of seeming like an expendable feature at the time. I'm all for giving the new system a go, but either way I won't be sad to see the rep system stay or go. That said if it does stay here is my two cents:

• Perhaps take out comments instead of taking out neg rep? Make it a bit more "reddit points" like. Certain posts in the thread get highlighted dependent on their score, or hidden if terrible. Also that way threads won't be continued after their closed via rep comments. It makes me sadface.
• Go to Internet 101 people and get used to the fact that there are people on the Internet that won't agree with you. Don't take neg rep personally, it's only points on a web forum and people are always more willing to pos rep so it's not like you can't get em back.

Quick Comments

	nirvAnA:
	Zepph:	good ides

[Peleus]

Personally I judge the posters by getting to know them and reading what they write rather than a number under their name or how many people agree / disagree, so I find it all rather redundant.

Quick Comments

	Rageboredguy:	at risk of repping in a rep thread.
	Maynarde:

[Mayo]

Originally Posted by Peleus

Personally I judge the posters by getting to know them and reading what they write rather than a number under their name or how many people agree / disagree, so I find it all rather redundant.

Definitely doesn't work that that in other communities I can say from experience.

If you run into someone with red bars under their name in Gotgames and Gametech (CSS) or 0% on CyberGamer, you know to stay away from them.

[Dox]

Originally Posted by Mayo

Definitely doesn't work that that in other communities I can say from experience.

If you run into someone with red bars under their name in Gotgames and Gametech (CSS) or 0% on CyberGamer, you know to stay away from them.

Ahahaha, you made it sound like those are the types you don't want to meet in a dark alley.


I don't think anyone should ever be banned for neg rep.

But I did enjoy it. People get so fired up over it though, probably best to please the majority!

Quick Comments

Mayo:

I wouldn't want to meet them here or there. Wouldn't meet them anywhere!

[iMSystem]

IMO overall the entire rep system is pointless.

If people have something to say, or commend on the post they can quote it and reply, thus prolonging the life of a thread (better if it is a high quality thread) if it is a shit thread, simple lock and be done with it.

As far as I can see, there is no beneficial point of having a rep system, other than denoting who the majority of people like and dislike. Which, shouldn't really be made public unless needed

Quick Comments

Maynarde:

Have some pointless points, because I agree!

[iVnStinger]

I agree with System entirely. This "rep system" is being run by people of the community, with different views. If you make a comment that has good intentions but the community does not agree with it. This can cause issues cause say player X just signed up to sc2sea. Known player, everyone loves him. But he shares his thoughts that offend people. He automatically goes red and has bad rep. But should he be marked as a bad rep guy if he only made 1 comment?

No, the rep system should be put in the hands of people who understand what is going on. For example, admins. Rep should be given based on ingame actions as well.

The most common example of misused rep is when it's given to a person who made a joke. You are saying person X, who has hacked and been rude before, gets positive rep because he made a funny joke. Is this really what rep is? And this is also causing people to make apology threads, such as mine (I made my in blog so rep couldn't be given) so that they get what we call "rep trains".

I'm sorry if I'm lacking in clarity, but to summarize :
The rep system should either be removed or only used by people who are trustworthy and are not biased.

EDIT: And I agree with the thing being neutral where you can comment on a specific post without quoting it as that would take up a lot of space.

[iMSystem]

Also, relevant

Quick Comments

	Zepph:	YES
	nirvAnA:	LOL jlo's husbands name!!!!!!!!
	ToRVenom:
	asdfSchnitzel:
	TCPLemminks:	Childhood achieved
	inFeZa:	agreeeeeed
	Mezza:	Nice!

[deL]

Originally Posted by System

Also, relevant

Someone with only 568 points would say that.

[VB_WhiplashJC]

I thought the issue was that people were using neg rep to post things without the threat of moderation?

Quick Comments

inFeZa:

i can still say you're a complete idiot and give you + rep at the same time

[Maynarde]

Originally Posted by VB_WhiplashJC

I thought the issue was that people were using neg rep to post things without the threat of moderation?

Nah people were still definitely getting moderated for neg rep comments lol

EDIT: Goddamnit Dox, beat me by like 5 seconds HE SO FAST

[UHF]

I think turning it into a 'like' system and removing the negative rep is a good idea. That way you can quickly let people know you agree/like/appreciate something with cluttering a thead with "I agree" posts.

The negative rep system is kind of pointless, because most people don't care if people disagree, and the people that do care would rather you expand on why you disagree further than a simple shaking head.

[Dox]

Rep comments can (and have been) moderated!

EDIT: I'd also like to add that I primarily appreciate the positive aspect of the rep system so that threads don't get cluttered up with shit posts like "hahahahah" "LOL" and "^", because I'm a big time offender when it comes to stuff like that.

Prime example:
http://www.sc2sea.com/showpost.php?p=84440&postcount=20

Quick Comments

Asrathiel:

Agreed. And I said it in my later post before I saw yours :P

[nirvAnA]

yea whiplash is right. people will never get banned for normal neg rep, they will get banned if they use the rep comment loophole to post something ban worthy in it to circumvent the infraction system. But as it was a third party "thank you"add on thing that i kinda tweaked into a reputation/comment thing, the functionality is lacking and mods cant remove/edit comments, u need admin privelleges for that and then have to manually infract the persons profile. so theres a huge lack of moderation whereas mods can shut down bad posts/threads fast.

come to think of it the neg rep is where a lot of the major dramas started and i wonder if it didn't exist would the drama have been avoided or just manifested itself in other ways.

also dox gives a great example on why positive rep is good!! we dont need people posting just to say "lol" and "hahaha" when they can just rep and yea i hoped the neg rep system worked the same way but people took it wayyy too personal, as frogmite suggested it might have to do with the "reputation" name - if it was called something else it might have been taken less seriouesly. like sc2sea karma. idk.

[Heady]

Is it possible to make neg rep anonymous to prevent retaliatory behaviour?

[nirvAnA]

Originally Posted by Acies

Is it possible to make neg rep anonymous to prevent retaliatory behaviour?

this is possible but its open to abuse since the same pple can always be down repping the same person they dislike over minor stuff and the community will think its the general perception of the community.

[TAScarecrow]

I'd rather see no rep system entirely. I don't get how you expected people with differences of opinion not to use the neg feature? Punishment/drama based on neg reps that don't follow the positivity bandwagon (it's minus imaginary pts ffs) is just silly. The one-liners aren't even quotable, making the system even more flawed. Either have a hidden +/- for posts to eliminate drama or nothing at all.

[|Erasmus|]

The assumption that rep is not modded is because people see a stupid post get an infraction stamp, but there's nothing to suggest a rep comment has suffered the same fate. People would probably be less likely to overreact to something way out of line if they could see that it had been dealt with by the admins...

[Dox]

Originally Posted by |Erasmus|

there's nothing to suggest a rep comment has suffered the same fate.

deth would like a word with you

Quick Comments

	syfChadMann:	lol
	Maynarde:	Good ol moderated neg rep

[|Erasmus|]

Originally Posted by Dox

deth would like a word with you

I just said there's nothing to show on the rep comment that says the moderator has given an infraction or w/e, unlike a post. I'm well aware that they have been moderated at times, just saying the perception may be different because noone really knows whether they have been (non mods at least) unless it's publicly discussed.

[Mayo]

There is a cool system at GameTech that could possibly be ustalized here?


They have a system where tyou can 'like' a post which shows up as "*usernames* like this".

You can also give positive or negative reputation which only the member sees in their control panel (You must leave a comment for neg rep) but the number shows up on their mini profile when they post.

100 rep points = 1 rep
So when you + or - rep someone and you have for example 800 points, you give or remove 8 rep from them.

You get 1 rep for your first 50 posts and from then on in, it's user made only.


Example is my profile on GameTech: http://www.gtesports.com.au/communit...html#post50254
I have one like on that post and you can see I have 1 rep.

Quick Comments

nirvAnA:

[Jaywalk]

imo:

disconnect the link between the rep system and a persons account and change the name of the system.

so you can see if a post has likes and dislikes to gauge general community response, but the person has nothing to be offended about, as the dislikes wont follow them around pinned to their account.

Quick Comments

nirvAnA:

[ThatGuyDoMo]

In my experience of forums with a rep system, I always found people would tend to post for the sake of the +rep. I'm not saying this is everyone or even a majority, but it is present.

Personally I don't think it bothers me at all, the rep system is fine most of the time but it doesn't really add anything to the forum / community. People should not have rep on their minds when posting, they should be motivated purely by their desire to contribute.

So I guess I'm saying remove it, but either way it doesn't bother me

Quick Comments

iVnStinger:

Always being a manner man....

[Asrathiel]

Originally Posted by nirvAnA

Its an easier way to express with a simple frowny than making a long post thats far too much effort.

I think that if someone really wants to show someone that they disagree with them, then they should go to the effort of posting, and if they can't be bothered, then it seems to me that they don't care enough about the issue, so they should just ignore it...

On the other hand, if you do agree with someone, or think their post is funny or whatever, then the positive rep (or likes or whatever) is an easy way to say that without having a heap of posts all saying, for example, 'Hahahaha that's so funny'. In other words it's a way to let someone know you liked what they posted without clogging the thread up ^_^

I like it how it is with the 'likes', but the 'neutral' idea might work too.

Quick Comments

	nirvAnA:
	mGGSouth:

[Jaywalk]

+ [asraths post] +

Originally Posted by Asrathiel

I think that if someone really wants to show someone that they disagree with them, then they should go to the effort of posting, and if they can't be bothered, then it seems to me that they don't care enough about the issue, so they should just ignore it...

On the other hand, if you do agree with someone, or think their post is funny or whatever, then the positive rep (or likes or whatever) is an easy way to say that without having a heap of posts all saying, for example, 'Hahahaha that's so funny'. In other words it's a way to let someone know you liked what they posted without clogging the thread up ^_^

I like it how it is with the 'likes', but the 'neutral' idea might work too.

i agree with the part that the system is a good way to show you like something without clogging up a thread.

[Bash]

Maybe Add "Neutral comments" , and put neg-rep back, and see how it goes, i reckon having neutral comments would clear up alot of the neg-rep anyway, as people can comment constructively without the need to negrep, but can still do so if they feel the need.


But ask- if you put neg rep back, will you have the problem again?
If you leave it out, will you have the problem?
And in 2 years time, will people be asking admins "Man i wish this site had a simple, convenient way for me to say "this post is shit" in 150 characters or less"...?

[mGGDrGooSe]

The main advantage of the rep system for me is the commenting. Like and dislikes such as on FB is useless and will just encourage laziness IMO. I find it very worthwhile to be able to place a comment on a post, because I dont want to waste screen space with a single line comment followed by several lines' worth of white space in the post. Also I look at the length of some threads and immediately Tl;DR if its more than a few pages and just doesn't look worthy of paying attention too.

Having a positive and neutral rep system with comments is the most efficient and useful IMO. Besides, why let the abusers win by getting rid of the system? If people are generally confused about the purpose of neg rep (and you want to keep it) then can we code a confirmation box that details what neg rep should and shouldn't be used for? That way abusers can be dealt with in immediate and severe terms without cause for complaint.

[NOM]

i think that there should be positive negative and neutral. but comments are hidden like spoilers so they don't flood the forums.

[Flamga]

Still think having both neg and positive rep is good, even having neutral would be awesome. If not just to stop pointless comments, or small comments from cropping up. and those that end up abusing it can just have their rep power taken?

[TAScarecrow]

I guess you do need some sort of comment system, each post takes up so much space compared to TL. It's either that or ditch the massive avatars, awards and signatures

[nirvAnA]

Originally Posted by TAScarecrow

I guess you do need some sort of comment system, each post takes up so much space compared to TL. It's either that or ditch the massive avatars, awards and signatures

I don't like all the white space too, there is probably a way to reduce the post length, just haven't figured out yet. Maybe smaller avatars and rewards/achievements go under another column displayed on the right of the post. am always looking to improve the user interface if anyone wants to do some mockups of what it could look like go ahead another option would be to paginate the achievements

And looking at flamga's signature above, i definetely need to put a limit on that lol it should be a short and simple one line thing like tl, i never changed anything from the default settings yet.

btw when click on "submit reply" it previews all the other previous replies below without the avatars and it looks veryyyyyyyyyy plain, have a look

[Flamga]

Originally Posted by nirvAnA

I don't like all the white space too, there is probably a way to reduce the post length, just haven't figured out yet. Maybe smaller avatars and rewards/achievements go under another column displayed on the right of the post. am always looking to improve the user interface if anyone wants to do some mockups of what it could look like go ahead another option would be to paginate the achievements

And looking at flamga's signature above, i definetely need to put a limit on that lol it should be a short and simple one line thing like tl, i never changed anything from the default settings yet.

btw when click on "submit reply" it previews all the other previous replies below without the avatars and it looks veryyyyyyyyyy plain, have a look

I can reduce it if needed, just put that in there because we have the ability to. Although I dont like just having one line though sorta makes the sig pointless :/ but then again thats a different thing entirely

[syfMiley]

I don't mind

[dippa]

Originally Posted by nirvAnA

It was brought to my attention that the negative reputation was harming the community.

don't agree with this point; i think the real harm was how some people reacted to neg comments as something of substance rather than what they are - throw-away one-liners - and then it began to derail threads which actually created division and hate.

neg rep can be used to exercise one's wit and it's a far better mechanic for keeping away poorly thought out posts/threads than the current system. because you can only positively rep something, the only way to bring something to light is to post in the thread, which could be counter-productive if it leads more people to read the thread/post in the first place (when it really should be shut down into the seventh circle of hell).

[SLCN.Kez]

I really liked the negative rep system. And my list of who has neg repped me and thus who I have to kill at LAN will entirely go to waste!

Quick Comments

	PiG:	hehe
	Mayo:

[NvPinder]

Positive rep serves a good purpose, its a way of saying "good post"/"+1"/"I agree" without having to do a full post, and also for supporting good contributors to the site and all that kind of thing. I honestly think positive rep system is great. No one likes seeing 1 line "Good post +1" posts, but at the same time its great to have a way to say that without just spamming the crap out of the page.

Negative rep however is the dumbest system in the world. It literally gives you the option of saying "your post is shit" without giving any valid reason and or legitimate arguments as to why, and no real way to reply to the negative rep either without just randomly negative repping back (abuse of which the site's head admin is literally the most liberal abuser of, despite complaining about everyone elses "abuse" of the system).

For example, rather than neg rep, imagine the comments in neg rep as posts which start with "You post sucks, -one line reason which is often personally insulting-". There's no WAY any posts like this would EVER be allowed on any forum, they're non-contributing and don't add ANYTHING to ANY discussion, it's just a way of saying "you're a dickhead" and the system 100% promotes you doing it (except of course to certain people, lol). There's no other purpose for it other than to say "Your posts sucks" in like 20 characters.

If someone disagrees with you/your post or whatever, they should have to come up with and put down in words a decent reason so as to have a discussion on the topic. The neg rep system promotes the opposite in a way more hostile way and has led to some of, if not the most heated arguments/situations where girly community members get upset we've had on this site from the beginning.

edit: I don't understand why people are promoting this idea of "you should be able to comment on a thread without making a full post". That is literally just promoting poor posting quality and dragging down the site as a whole. If you call it "neutral" rather than "negative" it changes absolutely nothing. There should really ONLY be positive as a way to reinforce good posts without spamming up the forums, anything else and you should have to have a decent argument, not just say "no i disagree" in a comment without any thought out response. Giving the ability to downrep without comments more or less does the same thing but even worse. I just get a "Your post is shit" with no reason as to why/how at all and it's completely legitimate by the sites rules and nothing i can do to respond other than post a shitty "HEY **** YOUR REP EXPLAIN YOURSELF" reply or the classic "HAVE SOME DOWNREP BACK HAHA TAKE THAT!

Quick Comments

Asrathiel:

Agree, except for the part where you use 'girly' as an insult :P

[nirvAnA]

yea flamga sorry, i dont mean to single you out like that. just saying maybe with a sig limit the posts wont look so big!

pinder: im just going to let that unecessary jab at me go so the thread doesn't get derailed and so we can continue discussion on the merits/demerits of the system

[Flamga]

Originally Posted by nirvAnA

yea flamga sorry, i dont mean to single you out like that. just saying maybe with a sig limit the posts wont look so big!

No im the best example :P all cool man

[TAEdgE]

pinder: im just going to let that unecessary jab at me go so the thread doesn't get derailed and so we can continue discussion on the merits/demerits of the system

That jab is just a small part of it, his post is still really good and he isn't derailing. I agree with positive rep being a way of avoiding clutter and negative rep being a way of calling someone a dickhead in 20 pixels or less.

Quick Comments

deL:

dickhead

[Flamga]

Originally Posted by EdgE

That jab is just a small part of it, his post is still really good and he isn't derailing. I agree with positive rep being a way of avoiding clutter and negative rep being a way of calling someone a dickhead in 20 pixels or less.

I suppose negative rep gives us a way to say we disagree without having this real strong opinion or explanation why, or sometimes when a heated debate is going on and we disagree but not directly involved.

But people do abuse it and they should have the ability taken away from them. Its the problem of a few ruining it for many

[TAEdgE]

Originally Posted by wTFlamga

I suppose negative rep gives us a way to say we disagree without having this real strong opinion or explanation why, or sometimes when a heated debate is going on and we disagree but not directly involved.

But people do abuse it and they should have the ability taken away from them. Its the problem of a few ruining it for many

Well in my eyes it is abused a lot, because the idea of 'counter rep' is just stupid.

A post should be judged on what it is rather than what someone else said in reputation comments. Many members use positive rep for the sake of it just to save someone some points which really don't mean anything. What I personally do is I read and judge for myself and I do not judge based off of the reputation comments...

Counter rep just frustrates me and it is bought upon by the fact negative rep existed.

Quick Comments

Bash:

< im nodding, because i agree.

[mGGDrGooSe]

Originally Posted by wTFlamga

I suppose negative rep gives us a way to say we disagree without having this real strong opinion or explanation why, or sometimes when a heated debate is going on and we disagree but not directly involved.

I disagree with this. This should not be the purpose of the neg rep. If you have a logical disagreement with an argument that is made, you MUST make a post with a clear and concise explaination. Neg rep should be reserved for people being outright dickheads, etc. It's the community's way of saying that the post does not constitute appropriate behaviour.

RE: the idea of counter rep. I think thats a perfectly good use of rep. If it's the communities poll about appropriate behaviour, then counter rep is a democratic method of gauging the communities position, rather than a mod's.

Quick Comments

TAEdgE:

An infraction with logical reasons for said infraction is the simplest way imo

[Flamga]

Originally Posted by Drgoose

I disagree with this. This should not be the purpose of the neg rep. If you have a logical disagreement with an argument that is made, you MUST make a post with a clear and concise explaination. Neg rep should be reserved for people being outright dickheads, etc. It's the communities way of saying that the post does not constitute appropriate behaviour.

Also people have a different view on what is a bad post as well :/ of course those sorts of quotes deserve that. But as Edge said, it those that are abusing it and unfortunately thats why its come to this.

Although I do agree with you

[NvPinder]

Originally Posted by wTFlamga

I suppose negative rep gives us a way to say we disagree without having this real strong opinion or explanation why, or sometimes when a heated debate is going on and we disagree but not directly involved.

But this is the biggest problem, which is something Maynarde brought up early in the thread which is completely inevitable, people take offense to these small "your post sucks", which people take offense for, and rightly so if they don't give a decent reason or explanation. If i post a big 5 paragraph post and people have the option of "your posts sucks" as a response, it pisses me off, you should give a reason, this is a discussion board, this isn't ******* reddit.

But people do abuse it and they should have the ability taken away from them. Its the problem of a few ruining it for many

This is another big issue which was kind of my point singling out nirvAnA as an example in my previous post. What the **** is "abuse of the rep system" exactly, everyone has a ******* different opinion, I've seen people claim its any of:
-Using the rep system if you disagree with a posts content (ie: this guys opinion is retarded - downrep "no you're wrong")
-Using the rep system as a way of getting back at a person for downrepping you, even tho you had nothing against the post when you first read it.
-Too many of one particular group of people using the downrep system on one post (EG: the infamous "TA rep train"), even though they all might agree with the post being wrong.
-Downrepping simply because you don't like the person and it has nothing to do with their post
-Downrepping because there gramma/formatting/not enough detail in their post, despite having no argument with the post's point itself.
-Downrepping too harshly (EG: someone posts something you want to downrep for any above reasons, and you simply downrep with "You're a dickhead" or something).
-Downrepping because of a persons attitude in the post (EG: comes off arrogant/assholish, despite you not disagreeing with any facts/opinions in the post)
-Downrepping too liberally (IE: downrepping too much, even if you only slightly disagree with any of the posts content)

And probably many more I can't think of off the top of my head. People have been banned. FROM TOURNAMENTS. For doing things many would consider not even remote abuse of the system, whilst others slide completely because of everyones differing opinions on exactly what compensates a good enough reason to downvote a post.

I just can't for the life of me understand why anyone would want this system on the website. It is literally the starter of the biggest shitstorms on this entire website.

Quick Comments

	nirvAnA:
	deL:	You're a dickhead
	TCPLemminks:	Your chin looks like balls dickhead
	ProAnnn:	I was wondering why noone downreps this but realise you can't downrep

[Flamga]

Originally Posted by NvPinder

But this is the biggest problem, which is something Maynarde brought up early in the thread which is completely inevitable, people take offense to these small "your post sucks", which people take offense for, and rightly so if they don't give a decent reason or explanation. If i post a big 5 paragraph post and people have the option of "your posts sucks" as a response, it pisses me off, you should give a reason, this is a discussion board, this isn't ******* reddit.



This is another big issue which was kind of my point singling out nirvAnA as an example in my previous post. What the **** is "abuse of the rep system" exactly, everyone has a ******* different opinion, I've seen people claim its any of:
-Using the rep system if you disagree with a posts content (ie: this guys opinion is retarded - downrep "no you're wrong")
-Using the rep system as a way of getting back at a person for downrepping you, even tho you had nothing against the post when you first read it.
-Too many of one particular group of people using the downrep system on one post (EG: the infamous "TA rep train"), even though they all might agree with the post being wrong.
-Downrepping simply because you don't like the person and it has nothing to do with their post
-Downrepping because there gramma/formatting/not enough detail in their post, despite having no argument with the post's point itself.
-Downrepping too harshly (EG: someone posts something you want to downrep for any above reasons, and you simply downrep with "You're a dickhead" or something).
-Downrepping because of a persons attitude in the post (EG: comes off arrogant/assholish, despite you not disagreeing with any facts/opinions in the post)
-Downrepping too liberally (IE: downrepping too much, even if you only slightly disagree with any of the posts content)

And probably many more I can't think of off the top of my head. People have been banned. FROM TOURNAMENTS. For doing things many would consider not even remote abuse of the system, whilst others slide completely because of everyones differing opinions on exactly what compensates a good enough reason to downvote a post.

I just can't for the life of me understand why anyone would want this system on the website. It is literally the starter of the biggest shitstorms on this entire website.

In which case the only way something of a rep system would work is if any commenting value was taken from the rep and only gave + or - , and then comments were below. Honestly either way I am not bothered, rep system or not I couldn't care less if I get neg rep as you said its opinion based and people will just neg for no reason.

However I still maintain that there are people that just rep for the sake of it instead of a good reason (I will say I have + rep sometimes, and yes most likely I was drunk or bored) Unfortunately since there are so many differences of opinion in the system there wont be conformity in what deserves +/- rep. In which case the system should just not exist.

Of course we still need to have a good idea of who the trolls are as well. Which the only way would be to see who has been banned and given infractions, of course within reason.

[Rage]

The way I see it, as much as some of the ideas in this thread are good ways to improve the rep system...

The rep system itself is like any other rep system on a forum. It simply is another way for people to measure the size of their internet penis.

It is good for nothing significant, and bad in plenty of ways. Nobody would mourn it in any significant way if the rep was just disabled. Any good forum doesn't bother with this kind of nonsense.

[mGGDrGooSe]

Put it this way, if you would punch someone for having said what they did in the post to your face, then neg rep it. Otherwise leave it. (Well maybe not punch, but you get the idea :P)

[nirvAnA]

omg flamga your new signature lol!

i think this thread has produced a lot of good agruments on both sides thus far

[Champi]

I cant even give positive rep comments

[inFeZa]

Give it back

[Cute]

I like the idea of being able to +1/like a post, as others have said, it saves a ton of "I agree 10char" posts. I don't really think adding a comment is needed. Generally, if you're agreeing with a post, it's pretty obvious why. Maybe even hide who likes a post, would encourage users to actually read and decide whether or not they agree with something, as opposed to just liking cause other people have (I do it all the time lol).

I don't like the negative rep idea much. If someone disagrees, it'd be nice for them to elaborate, in a civil manner, on their reasons why in a post of their own, rather than just some dumb one liner (which a lot of people take personally).

Quick Comments

nirvAnA:

yea pinder's point spot on!

[xpaperclip]

A lot of positive rep is given to announcements and news (and articles, how could I forget!?). I think this should be the intended use of rep, expressing approval of a contribution to the community that is not limited to mod/admin discretion.

Agreement or disagreement of a post ('+1's, etc), on the other hand, I feel would be better served by being done in a more localised fashion by a like/dislike system that isn't suddenly reflected everywhere else. Then, anonymity and consequentially retaliation become less of an issue. (In fact, recall that once upon a time, the buggy rep display meant some users couldn't even see who gave rep!)

+ [Ramblings. I spent ages trying to articulate my view on the 'state of the rep' and failed. Read only if you are insanely bored and like reading bad pieces of half-finished writing.] +

I feel reputation has caused a lot of unnecessary unpleasantness on this site, and a lot of it I feel stems from what reputation is supposed to represent. The name "reputation" suggests it is a judgement by the community of an individual's value. Some therefore take neg rep very badly and it is easy to see why. The whole system has an extremely conspicuous manifestation - is next to your name on every single post you make.

It is quick and easy to give, requires very little detail, and is difficult to respond to. This is a community of gamers. There are many pros among us. We are naturally competitive. Some of us hold strong views and are not afraid to express them directly. It is therefore natural to take such a public means of saying "I disagree" with no means of rebuttal badly.

The only way to give or take away rep is through posts, and is more often than not used as a means of indicating agreement or otherwise with the contents of the post, rather than its merit as a contribution to the discussion. This is a perfectly fine goal and saves masses of '+1'-type posts (which, with the current layout of this site I agree would be insane). However, when it is aggregated and presented as a representation of your person, I feel there is a disconnect between how it is used and what the number is labelled to be.

Quick Comments

nirvAnA:

i found your "half-finished" writing really eloquent

[TCPLemminks]

For me, the rep system is something that motivates me to write more articles for this site.
It made it more obvious that the time I spent was being appreciated by the community.

That being said I agree with the point Pinder made.

Also I feel blogs deserve equal recognition, perhaps a rating system? The widget above should still show latest blogs though.

Quick Comments

EveVendetta:

Good idea about the blogs being rated

[xpaperclip]

Originally Posted by TCPLemminks

Also I feel blogs deserve equal recognition, perhaps a rating system?

Individual blog posts already have a star-based rating system in the top right corner, it's just not so visible and thus not so widely used nor (as far as I can tell) aggregated anywhere.

Quick Comments

SC2SEA StreamBot:

testing neutral rep

[crAzerk]

For me, the rep system is something that motivates me to write more articles for this site.
It made it more obvious that the time I spent was being appreciated by the community.

I had a similar view as this when I first started out writing stuff for this site - while obviously the whole 'take pride in your work' and intrinsic motivation and all is important, sometimes having that +rep just makes it more worthwhile and ... tangible.

Though personally I didn't really care much about rep once it got to several hundreds, and after nirvana removed the top 10 rep list I also stopped monitoring (or desiring) more rep.

My personal take on this issue is like what already has been mentioned - it generates conflict and/or 'abuse', but it's an interesting feature to have around for sure, and serves as a good motivator. It is a double-edged sword, and it'll come down to admins making a decision about what's best for the site, with no definite answer.

EDIT: @Lemmink's rep comment haha it's always good to see a long line of rep acknowledging the effort you put in, but after seeing a similarly long line of rep for someone just making a witty comment or posting some meme you will realize it's really nothing much, and your motivation shifts back to being intrinsic ^^

Quick Comments

TCPLemminks:

Only cause you started getting over 9000 reps per post :P

[NDG.Stitch]

I don't think that the repping system is really needed on this site. Too often I feel that some of the people that comment on threads say something positive just so you get rep. It feels like to some extent, I do that too, and sometimes I just want to compete with people on getting rep points (I know very childish of me, but I'm sure I'm not the only one out there).

Then again, also I agree that too often people downrep with very useless comments. Thing is, if you disagree, the person who posted wants to hear WHY you disagree, not just a face that frowns under their thread. I wouldn't mind thumbs up or thumbs down on a entire thread, but for each reply/post, it just doesn't seem necessary as abuse and being bias is just way too easy to fall for.

[Cordance]

A few thoughts.
It is Human nature to take a negative worse than a positive. Negative rep has no set value or price. Bad rep is spent at the value of the spender but received at the value of the receive. Causing people to have issues on the receiving end.
Negative rep is "working" now because of moderation the larger the site becomes the harder it is to moderate the bigger differences you get between moderates etc. Better to remove it now before it becomes a bigger issue later.

To me negative rep is the kind of thing that works as a bunch of mates but as the site grows there are more and more people coming to the site that arnt mates yet. In Australia it is common place for a greeting or getting attention of a friend to be an insulting term "Hey dickhead" for example. However if you use the same language in a larger social group people are going to take offense. You dont get your bosses attention by calling out dickhead across the office at least if you want a job the next day.

As far as positive rep I feel its more like "brownie points". Its a nod to say something is good no matter how significant the good is of the post. A positive unlike a negative is not often an issue if someone takes it too positive.

Quick Comments

nirvAnA:

[TABottles]

I feel sc2sea had started develop it's own online culture with the old rep system. I don't mind what happens just don't make me ''like'' things.. too much facebook as it is

[Xeen]

You don't need a coded number to tell you who makes posts worth reading, reading the forum will do that.

Rep systems are pretty much always silly, exploitable, and give people a way to respond unconstructively to posts. They also collapse into 'agree/disagree' systems more than a way to determine quality posters.

[crAzerk]

You don't need a coded number to tell you who makes posts worth reading, reading the forum will do that.

I don't think anyone actually relies on the rep points/rep on the post to determine if the post is worth reading. If anyone actually does please correct me here.

As Bottles says, the rep system is part of the sc2sea online culture that I'd hate for to change (esp become LIKES zomg wtf!! noo!!)

I never looked as the rep system as a way to 'determine quality posters', but more of a way to motivate (or discourage) good posts (bad posts). And consequently the Rep Points adds to e-peen as everyone knows.

[Xeen]

The rep system IS 'liking' posts, so why you're adamantly against that is confusing to me. 'Likes' are somewhat better because they're only tied to individual messages and thus there is no incentive to try to game the system or grind up points to show off - and yes, newer people do look to reputation scores.

Furthermore, it's a lot easier to chime into a discussion with a 'like' or 'dislike' without actually contributing and with no way for the poster to reply. This is not a good thing, because forums should encourage people to actually make points and encourage discussion. Why have a char limit on replies if there's a way to entirely circumvent that?

[nGenLight]

^ A Guy like this only having 110 points whilst an individual who only posts garbage like BENJI SUX!!! has 600 points should show you just how accurate the rep system is in determinging useful posts.

[TABottles]

If the ''like'' system is what takes it's place nothing is going to change. It's not even the systems fault honestly. It shouldn't be about competing for reputation or likes at all. People getting pissy over the numbers under their name need to take their e-peen to the na server. LIKE IF YOU AGREE

Also - as light said what we have now isn't accurate. I know i'm not ''A name known to all'' - perhaps making these ''ranks'' reflective of post number rather than rep would help the flaming. But then again it means shit all and the sooner this is accepted the better.

[Cyanide]

Kinda skimmed through this thread, have always been lurking in these forums too and have seen how rep has been used and abused. Del mentioned limiting the number of reps per day, which seems like a good idea. Here's my tweaked idea.

1) Total reps are limited.
2) You can +rep X (X being your total amount) at one go if you wish
3) -rep is worth -1 but removes all your rep

Liking something is and always will be something silly and frivolous. Just look at facebook, the silliest of things get likes, even stupid things. I'm not taking anything away from well written posts though. I'm sure people can tell the difference between liking quality content and LOLs.
This makes +rep pretty much unchanged from before.

Negative rep being a 1 time thing only makes it such that you must really disagree to want to do it. And most of the time, you'd end up making a reply post if you really bothered about topic at hand, as someone else pointed out already.
I think this way, negative rep will not be used so frivolously, less open to abuse by the same person or groups of people engaging in negative repping and counter repping.

p.s. sleepy and not really very coherent, but i think you get the gist of it.

[raycey]

Option 1) Get rid of it completely, including accumulated 'Likes' as it just looks like a popularity contest. People get to know who's who by spending time on the site.
Option 2) Do what Gamespot has done: make it anonymous with just a tally of +'s and -'s, and if people really want to address the post and say something about it then make a new post.

Example:


P.S. Forgot to mention - rep is added by pressing on the thumbs up or thumbs down.
P.P.S. A little red number is less painful than a frowny face.

[ToRFutureBoy]

I say remove it and only have posivite reps. Admins can remove and/or ban members of the community if they post something that is offensive or abusive to another member of the community.
Positives all the way!

[IcedTea]

I agree with Raycey.

In my opinion it should just be anonymous.
Less dramas that way.

[Nemo]

Very interesting thread.

By principle I don't like rep systems. As raycey says it's often a popularity contest and the "cool guys" usually have more likes than the "constructive" or "useful" guys. And when you attack the cool guys you're sure to be rep-lynched even if they are bullies.

But first I discovered that it was not like that on sc2sea. Of course the above behaviour was present but largely minority. When you see the top rep guys, it's the builders mainly.

The second point as have pointed great writers of the site crAzerk and Lemminks, is that it's a good way to show interest and feedback on your posts. At the beginning on this site I helped some bronzies on the replay thread. And Nirvana came and +rep every single post I made there (that's why I have a ridiculous amount of points lol). I thought "Wow this guy is and thinks my posts are worth reading for low-leaguers. If it's useful and appreciated, let's go on then."

So I think +reps (or likes) is a great feature on this site and should be maintained.

In case of someone who is not doing something well, I prefer to tell him "you can do this better by doing like that" than telling him "What you say sucks" if the guy has good intentions. So usually I will not negrep anypost. And even more if someone opinion is legit but I don't agree. I respect other opinions when they are repectable.

The very rare cases where I negreped is when people were purposely mean and had no good intentions like that post : http://www.sc2sea.com/showpost.php?p=81762&postcount=77. It doesn't deserve a ban but definitely some negrep train.

I don't talk about forbidden posts that just need to be moderated.

So neg rep is useful if used in very limited intent. If used too largely to express contrary opinions for example, it's more harmful I think.

Last point I think that we should keep the small texts so we can explain why we like (or dislike) the post in question. And keep the identity showned, no anonymity so people can know who have appreciated their posts and why.

[Trusty]

Yeah I think renaming it to likes/dislikes is best.

[Bloodmyst]

Do we really need this whole reputation system? I don't know about anyone else, but my e-pen*s doesn't get any larger when my reputation points go up......

There are many other sites out there that don't even have it at all and they get along fine without it.

@ Nemo, this is kinda true. I remember something I posted up a few weeks ago and I got neg repped by like 6 TA members lol. I guess there was something TA didn't like about about my post? No hard feelings boys, I just think it's a great example.

[inFeZa]

Originally Posted by raycey

Option 2) Do what Gamespot has done: make it anonymous with just a tally of +'s and -'s, and if people really want to address the post and say something about it then make a new post.

TBH This is the best and easy fix.

[|Erasmus|]

Anonymous rep just seems pointless to me. If people are willing to 'abuse' it when it's not anonymous, that will be unlikely to get better if you make it so you can't see who is disliking your posts and address them.

Just my 2c.

Quick Comments

nirvAnA:

[Cute]

The more I think about it, the more I just kinda wish it wasn't there at all. People come to discussion boards to talk about things, a good post should be rewarded by a good response, not some imaginary points.

I guess I'm just a bit bitter cause I wish that there were more actual posts on this site hahah (that's why I'm not huge on the chatbox, but let's not go there)

[mGGDrGooSe]

I really think this entire thing has come from a lack of communication as to the idea behind the rep system. It was left up to the individual as to what the rep system meant and its purpose. I think it is a very good way of community moderation. After all, a community site should be modded by the community, not by the admins. My motorcycle forum has no moderation. The community moderates and when somebody does something annoying, the community acts. There is no reason why this shouldn't also be the case here. Let the rep system represent what the community believes to be a positive influence/contribution to the community as a whole and to also show what it believes to be a negative contribution to the community.
I also believe that re-naming the system to likes/dislikes will run counter to the above policy, as it implies a like or dislike of the post's content, rather than an assesment of its contribution to the community.

Quick Comments

nirvAnA:

[InteGrand]

We should allow people to neg rep other people' neg rep comments which nullifies the effect of the neg rep. Inception action right here

[breadfan]

Add neutral!

You could change from Postiive/Negative to Agree/Disagree, or Like/Dislike. Also, there could be an article about "How To" Rep" where you basically explain that rep needs to be made on the basis of individual posts, and shouldn't have any external context. I think it needs to be policed a little for it to work, but I think as long as the time spent doing this is willing to be put in, it's an excellent value-adding feature.

People already get the "like" concept from facebook so I'm sure it'd help the transition in thinking for some people

Quick Comments

nirvAnA:

amazing!

[nirvAnA]

Thanks to everyone for their comments.

A lot of people have suggested a neutral rep, so we have added this in and shall test it out for a while.
Thanks goes to xpaperclip for coding it up.

The majority of the community 55% vs 30% seem keen to keep neg rep, so it will be restored, and we will look into removing the possibility of leaving neg comments so it forces people who have something negative to say to post about it and not just leave a neg comment.

These aren't final changes, its just a trial and there will be a proper re-evaluation done in about a weeks time.

People who abuse the "neutral rep" and use it as "neg rep" will just have their rep powers removed.

Quick Comments

	Criven:	TEST!
	Dox:	NEUTRAL FACE LOOKS TOO NEGATIVE, I TAKE OFFENSE TO THIS!! ;)
	iM yang:	MMM GURRL I WANT SOME OF YO YELLOW FACE
	Bash:	AINT NO THANG BBY GRRL.
	ToRPandarine:	._.
	Reere:	blank face~
	neon:	scary~
	Doctor:	no effect so what do it do ? O:
	TCPKiaSu:	joinin the train
	mGGDrGooSe:	Ccccombo breaker. Nice to see the choices back again.
	TheGentleman:	Excellent!
	mGGDaedalus:	just cause i could :)
	neKo:	My face when
	ToRVenom:	dont like nutural
	iVnStinger:	WOOOO
	Satu:	;3

[TheGentleman]

I like the ability to comment on peoples posts. It provides a fast and easy way to provide an opinion (either in favour or against) the respective post.

Originally Posted by TAminimat

I reckon you should add the neutral comments and just penalise people "abusing" the neg rep.

On another note, this is a great idea. I strongly support neutral comments.

[raycey]

I disagree with this outcome. What's the point of neutral rep? It looks like an obsolete version of pos rep. I also don't think neg rep should come back as it's bound to upset people (no-one likes to see a frowny face under their post). If anything the neutral rep should replace neg rep.

[mGGDrGooSe]

Hahaha, the neutral rep image just changed before my eyes. Psychadelic! Thought I was going insane or something.

Quick Comments

	Asrathiel:	This thing is creepy as shit
	FaDeHellfyre:	I'm gonna have nightmares about this faceless smiley... or is it a mouthless pacman?

[TheGentleman]

Quick Comments

	Rageboredguy:	Should so be the neutral rep face!
	TCPLemminks:
	neKo:	this is ok

[Asrathiel]

Originally Posted by ESLHellfyre

ESLHellfyre:
I'm gonna have nightmares about this faceless smiley... or is it a mouthless pacman?

Oh god one day it's gonna open its mouth and it'll have all these sharp slimy teeth and it'll eat us all up!!!

*runs screaming*

[FaDeHellfyre]

Originally Posted by Asrathiel

Oh god one day it's gonna open its mouth and it'll have all these sharp slimy teeth and it'll eat us all up!!!

*runs screaming*

*shudders*

Maybe fire will hurt it? Maybe it's friendly? MAYBE THERE'S STILL HOPE!

[IcedTea]

Lol. The neutral face scares me.
Its like.. I HAVE NO FACE. 0_________0

My imagination is just too wild.

[faithHunter]

The neutral face should be a straight face instead of a blank face.

[xGKingdelete]

just imagine it as a yellow dot point

[nirvAnA]

btw its kinda hard to decide which icon to use. Anyone is welcome to submit something better and I'll just use whatever people like.

Keep in mind how they will look when compared next to the other reps, thats why I initially had a chatbox icon thing but changed it to on dox's suggestion for consistency reasons.

Original:


First attempt:


Member comments: Inconsistent

Second attempt (ty system):


Member comments: Looks too negative?

Third attempt:


Member comments: Too similar, soulless?

Fourth Attempt:
korean face accidentally over written sorry

Suggestions: (Ty Gentleman)

(Smirk!)

(Smaller mouth, less negative looking)

[TheGentleman]

Actually, I like this one:

Current:

but line face is probably the most easily understood.

[dippa]

third option (line face) is best I think; blank face is kinda soulless.

[TheGentleman]

I've put forward two more possibilities:

, which looks similar to except that the mouth is less long and therefore looks less bored.

and which looks sort of content.

Quick Comments

	mGGDaedalus:	smirky face is perfect!
	nirvAnA:	nice!

[Dox]

Smirky face looks TOO HAPPY, DOOOOO NOT LIIIIIIIIIKKKKKKKEEEEEE.

Quick Comments

	neKo:	Don't hate
	TheGentleman:	Smirks can be evil too ;)... see Dr Evil
	inFeZa:	this should totally be the dislike face

[dippa]

wut

smirky face is perfect for me

implement this NAO

Quick Comments

nirvAnA:

it was implemented an hour ago, crtl + f5! and look how useful neutral rep is! :)

[Asrathiel]

I like the smirky one too. Probably it's not gonna eat me in the middle of the night like the other one...

[NDG.Stitch]

I agree with people that think the rep system is not really useful.
To me I think it just seems like its biased, and it's not really a useful tool. If my posts are good and you like it, I'd rather have someone actually reply and say why they liked it and stuff instead of having a head that nods that goes to my rep. To me it just feels like having it there not only makes it more of a competition around SEA to only satisfy the viewers, but it also gives me a very childish image of our server. Overall I don't mind it, but I don't think its a necessary thing to have on this forum.

[inFeZa]

I like it how it is.
Keep it
As for the faces.

Idra = Negative Rep
White-ra = Positive rep
Liquid Tyler = Comment

Quick Comments

	mGGSouth:
	mGGDrGooSe:	Nice man, Nice.

[nirvAnA]

Mvps and mods have suggested that neg rep be removed again, with reasoning along the lines of pinders original suggestion.

Will try it out for the next 2 weeks.
Feedback during that time is welcome.

[TASlowHands]

If I were to call out a whole team or clan out on there actions and generalise, I'd expect to incur the scorn of the entire clan. Maybe some people need to start calling out individuals and not 'Teeeeee ayyyyy'

Then you wont have lots of people mad at you and get all sad and shit

[Rage]

I haven't really seen any significant abuses of negative rep.

The only thing I really see that I see as a downside to the rep system is the now-infamous TA-train, which isn't so much a failing of the rep system as it is an inevitablity of a forum where people can post things.

Quick Comments

	syfChadMann:	blame TA - good work.
	ToR.Arnor:	boom
	TAkrunch:	I wish neg rep was back
	Champi:	you've gone too far, adding u to the list, buddy
	ToRVenom:	i think this is correct

[inFeZa]

relevant

Quick Comments

ToR.Arnor:

[VoxMSI.Rogue]

lol so what, people post retarded shit then cry because they get neg repped?

............................

Quick Comments

	Fourby:	I would neg rep you right now
	TAriiChard:
	Zepph:	this. people need a nice cup of harden the *%$# up
	ToR.Arnor:	those people are mostly your friends
	mGGDaedalus:
	syfMiley:	-1
	neKo:	You speak the truth.
	nirvAnA:	I think many underrate how important epeen is to people lol

[inFeZa]

Now i can troll without the fear of being negative rep'd

Quick Comments

mGGDaedalus:

IM TRYING TO FROWN

[Rage]

Well, i admit that its usually not done without some reason, even if it is taken too far

It doesn't really bother me - most people on here recognise it when it happens.

For a good example of what I mean, you can look at the chobo hacking thread. It wasn't just people saying retarded stuff getting downrepped - even people who were just calling for some thoroughness were being downrepped.

[Fourby]

Just give people infractions for overuse of stupid neg reps LOL

Quick Comments

	ToR.Arnor:	Agreed
	NOM:	+1

[syfChadMann]

You post shit you get negg'd.. you post good stuff and add to the community - you get up'd..

Now, you post shit - nothing happens.. what are you trying to reward here?

If someone is abusing neg rep - remove their rep-powers after a warning for a particular length of time.

Quick Comments

	ToR.Arnor:	from experience, you do :D
	Zealo:	you do more than anyone

[TAEdgE]

People's names should be removed from rep, maybe a colour denotes the worth of their rep or something like that.

Positive rep stays with the option of no comment (although this could change), and Neutral/Negative both require a comment. This isn't 100% going to make rep as unbiased as possible, but it removes giving reputation based on the people who have already given rep and having a mini discussion with that person.. I dunno I just thought of this, it's not very air tight xd.

Quick Comments

Zealo:

[Rage]

you can't make a system that isn't abusable by someone who really wants to abuse it, i think, and its detrimental to try
the negative rep system is good for everyone except when its being abused - the solution isn't to remove it, the solution is to punish those who abuse it

Quick Comments

	nirvAnA:
	TAavanar:	i agree with your last line
	mGGDrGooSe:
	Zealo:	♥... **** i'm abusing it now aren't i?

[Mayo]

Won't that just encourage the TA Rep train and then noone can be held accountable for their actions?

Quick Comments

	ToRSpartaz:	Valid point Chris.
	Zepph:	They share a lot of the same views and therefore shouldnt all be allowed to neg rep the same post? leave TA out of this

[TAEdgE]

Originally Posted by Mayo

Won't that just encourage the TA Rep train and then noone can be held accountable for their actions?

No it won't.

It is seriously frustrating me now. It isn't a valid point as much as it is an easy assumption to make. Take it from someone who is in TA Chat and reads it 24/7. No one EVER, and i mean EVER links something and says hey everyone down rep this (except for really early ones, like on Benji), or everyone up rep this. Everyone scrolls through the forum, reads something, and agrees. The only reason a lot of TA might rep something is because they see another TA did and they agree enough to rep. Go back to my earlier post - if the names are removed, there will be none of that. Then you might argue 'you could go and scheme in TA chat and bypass the system' well you know, people are adults and if I personally see this i'll alert someone about it, and even then the admins can still see any indications of this.

Having such a large clan that have often shared similar opinions and ideals causes a stack of TA tags together in certain posts. Take jayaiwhy's post, TA is getting publicly insulted and belittled and who doesn't expect TA to be angry at this and comment? Look at it from my point of view - Yes, TA are defending in large numbers, but the positive reps are not based on quality of post, but rather just to add their own dislike of TA. This can be seen as an anti-TA rep train, and is equally as bad.

I just feel that all the things people see wrong with negative rep, or most of them at least branch back to TA and i can see why, but in reality nearly every member has down a rep for the sake of 'counter rep' or a negative rep that insults or doesn't add anything. Without trying a team (such as AsG for Chobo) can combine 5 reps together, or friends just rep other friends for the sole reason that they are friends. Rep system has many flaws and I wish there was just a global neutral rep where you could comment with a one liner that at least adds something, rather than a frowny face saying 'no' or a happy face just obnoxiously sitting there.

Edit: i'm not saying that TA members are saints, they do say some stupid and harsh things at times and follow most of the above problems with the rep system, but they do not deserve nearly as much blame as they are getting.

Quick Comments

	ToR.Arnor:	Yep, it may stop ppl up/down stuff just cause friends do and actually take the time to read!
	x5_Bard:	OBNOXIOUS SMILING WHICH SAYS I AGREE WITH YOU
	TAminimat:
	iMSystem:	I'm not from TA, but I'm +repping this post. LOOK OUT
	inFeZa:	TA REP TRAIN THIS WOO ... err... i mean... (srsly he's 100% correct)
	[TA]LoSt:	Well said mate
	Champi:	thanks for putting a lot of my frustration into words :)

[neKo]

Why do people even care about what rep they are given? like does anybody honestly look at their rep and go "hell yeah im so ******* repped up" It means next to nothing.

Quick Comments

BAD.BiGbiRd:

Look at my comment/rep

[syfMiley]

Originally Posted by Rage

I haven't really seen any significant abuses of negative rep.

The only thing I really see that I see as a downside to the rep system is the now-infamous TA-train, which isn't so much a failing of the rep system as it is an inevitablity of a forum where people can post things.

What the **** is this rep train that you are talking about, don't blame this on us because we all might look at a post the same way.

Rep is just meant to be like a "comment" on other peoples forum posts, either have it all or just remove it, if you have something that important to say then just post it as a reply in the thread yourself.

Enjoy your points/numbers guys!

[Mayo]

It's kinda like the old Neg rep wars in the old GotGames.. NRC, Neg Rep Crew etc.

They would just +rep each other all day every day and neg rep everyone else.
They ended up with like 100k rep and people they didn't like would have -100k rep.

The TA rep train was an example

[Zepph]

I don't think negative rep should be removed because some people get so uptight about losing brownie points on a forum. At the end of the day, if you make more quality posts than silly posts you will keep your good rep (and therefore your epeen if it matters that much to you). If you get a lot of negative rep perhaps you should be thinking about the manner in which you express your opinions, or whether or not your posts are actually relevant or accurate instead of getting upset that people seem to have ganged up on you.

I feel negative rep is a good way to signal to people what makes a good post or contribution to a discussion. Similarly, it can indicate a bad post or when someone is out of line in something that they have said when what they have posted doesn't constitute a ban or infraction.

Quick Comments

	syfChadMann:
	Bash:
	Fourby:	+1 for e peens
	TAEdgE:	Good post, be thankful you can't have an e-peen!
	NOM:	Listen to this chick, she knows her shit. :)

[Bash]

Originally Posted by Zepph

I don't think negative rep should be removed because some people get so uptight about losing brownie points on a forum. At the end of the day, if you make more quality posts than silly posts you will keep your good rep (and therefore your epeen if it matters that much to you). If you get a lot of negative rep perhaps you should be thinking about the manner in which you express your opinions, or whether or not your posts are actually relevant or accurate instead of getting upset that people seem to have ganged up on you.

I feel negative rep is a good way to signal to people what makes a good post or contribution to a discussion. Similarly, it can indicate a bad post or when someone is out of line in something that they have said when what they have posted doesn't constitute a ban or infraction.

This, x1000.

Although i do think it does need to be moderated alot more strictly, some people put outright insults as a comment on their neg-rep, instead of anything useful, (IE "Go die"), i know they dont seriously want someone to die, but there needs to be a bit more concensus on what is acceptable and what is not.

People should rep a Post , because its a positive contribution to a thread, instead of +/- repping a person , because you do/dont like them.

[Fourby]

The last time i remember an ACTUAL TA rep train happen was a LONG time ago, all the recent ones were just neg reps on stupid posts who actually deserved them, (maybe some of the ones asking for thorough evidence werent deserved, idk i didnt see them im referring to stuff like chobo being a cock and his initial ego post of his desktop) everyone just herp derps to say " oh look another TA rep train when we have all just neg rep'd individually coz the post was stupid.

TA is a close group of people, its easy to assume that we have common thoughts on things.

We dont have a guy running around messaging everyone like HEY COME NEG REP THIS GUY COZ I DID.

:Btw this isnt a shot at mayo, just everyone has been saying "TA rep train" alot lately and its actually starting to get silly

Quick Comments

	syfChadMann:	The blind stero-types of TA members has to stop.
	syfMiley:	We have big schlongs!
	Champi:	i love when u say things for me, cos now i dont have to :D

[Mayo]

Thanks for your explanation.

From personal experience, it did encourage it in other communities.
I care about the SC2 community as you guys are totally baller, I don't want you to turn to poo like others.

Quick Comments

TAEdgE:

Not lashing out at you, just built up annoyance that i've explained haha

[KFCrumpet]

iread rep comments byt dont look at someones rep score. if its valuable info in the post i take from it. if its stupid i just ignore it. a +ive rep score isnt going to make me better at anything, neither is a -ive rep. at the moment it feels like a lot of people are treating this site like a school yard popularity contest.

[syfMiley]

Originally Posted by cRFourby

The last time i remember an ACTUAL TA rep train happen was a LONG time ago

I can only recall no more than 2-3 instances where we ran a "train" on people and that would of been 10 months ago, after those 2-3 "trains" it hasn't happened since then.

[xGKingdelete]

I think neg rep was fine, often people counter rep undeserved neg rep

[VB_Rhuubarb]

'TA rep train' is sc2sea's version of artosis pylon. A term that was coined to a certain group, but is now done by anyone... so to speak. :P

Quick Comments

inFeZa:

11/10

[TheGentleman]

Originally Posted by nirvAnA

Feedback during that time is welcome.

Did someone say... Feedback?



Also...

Quick Comments

	Rage:
	syfChadMann:	funny, but not actually relevant.
	VB_Rhuubarb:	Nice meme :D
	nirvAnA:
	Bash:	where art thou relevance
	neKo:	I want negative rep.
	FLuX:

[Rage]

personally i think rep in its entirety is silly and simply having a comment function for posts would suffice

but if we are going to have a rep system i don't see the point in neutering it by having only positive rep

[syfChadMann]

I absolutely agree with Zepph - I think the better option would be to moderate rep.. if the reason behind neg rep or positive rep is silly - then the rep-er should be warned or punished.If the Rep is based on opinion or a comment on the value of the post - then its fine.. if it is simply, 'I don't like you' or 'counter neg rep cause I do like you' they are both stupid reasons for giving any type of rep. They should be moderated, warned about mis-use of rep and penalty of rep being removed for a length of time.

[iMSystem]

Originally Posted by TheGentleman

Did someone say... Feedback?
Images..

This is what I feel Neg rep is needed for, posts like these don't help with the discussion at hand and shouldn't need to be posted. Sure it is funny, and witty, but is completely irrelevant.

Originally Posted by cR.ChadMann

I absolutely agree with Zepph - I think the better option would be to moderate rep...

Moderating rep seems like a huge waste of manpower IMO.

If you are now needed to have moderators go through all rep comments then the whole system has failed.

Quick Comments

	nirvAnA:	System I think thegentleman was just trying to get the topic back on track - the feedback
	Bash:
	Carnifex:	Nirv; It added absolutely nothing of value to the thread.
	neKo:	Nirv, system is right.
	Fourby:	Nirv; my rep comment is pointless
	inFeZa:	agreed
	Dox:	Nirv; i am batman

[syfChadMann]

Originally Posted by System

Moderating rep seems like a huge waste of manpower IMO.

If you are now needed to have moderators go through all rep comments then the whole system has failed.

indeed, but I think if there was a system where if someone felt they received an in-appropriate rep, they could refer it onto a mod - along with enough notification that miss use of rep will be punished - people will refrain from making stupid rep comments - at the moment I see the moderation of rep seriously missing the point, some users have received forum bans, some for similar or worse rep comments have received nothing. This is the biggest problem with the rep system - Along with people that are too angry about what someone says on the Internet.

Quick Comments

	iMSystem:	Sounds good to me - A report button might be enough then
	Zepph:	yeah

[TheGentleman]

Originally Posted by System

This is what I feel Neg rep is needed for, posts like these don't help with the discussion at hand and shouldn't need to be posted. Sure it is funny, and witty, but is completely irrelevant.

Moderating rep seems like a huge waste of manpower IMO.

If you are now needed to have moderators go through all rep comments then the whole system has failed.

Whilst I agree that my previous post was a little off topic, it is sometimes the off topic posts that make a forum a more enjoyable place. But I disagree that neg-rep is required for that post.

As for the rep system itself. I don't believe that the rep system is necessarily flawed... it has benefits and the comments that are made regarding some posts through the "rep" system are often helpful.

I propose an alternative:

Don't remove the ability to like/dislike/neutral rep BUT don't have these values shown to the public. In this way the "reps" refer to single posts only and can still be used by mods and admins to identify helpful members of the community.

Quick Comments

	nirvAnA:	This is really interesting!
	inFeZa:	nah i like the funny comments
	neKo:	But that means you are taking away the original reason for rep comments.

[TheGentleman]

Originally Posted by TheGentleman

Don't remove the ability to like/dislike/neutral rep BUT don't have these values shown to the public. In this way the "reps" refer to single posts only and can still be used by mods and admins to identify helpful members of the community.

For clarity... this is my suggestion:

Quick Comments

	nirvAnA:	hmmmmm so it becomes like a mini forum discussion
	iMSystem:	To be honest, it's obvious which comments are + and which ones are - :: Still an interesting idea
	TAavanar:	love the idea
	dippa:	sick idea
	Zepph:	I like this
	Zealo:	yay i get to be an example! :)
	BaKaiNu:	But I like the faces!

[Rage]

i dont think anyone expects super thorough moderation. if a mod happens to catch a silly neg rep in his normal course of duties, he can nab it.

[ToR.Arnor]

Just get rid of the system entirely imo, itll just become a circle jerk (pretty much there already), I dont see why we need a system like this? Sure its cute and fun, but like all rep systems it gets abused, and eventually does more harm than good.

People who continually post good content will still have a big epeen regardless of their rep score because people will see them do it, the people who post brainless dribble may actually have their epeen reduced because they wont have their mates up voting it, sure I dont care about epeen and perhaps many others here do not either, but there are obviously some who do.

Quick Comments

	Carnifex:	This. If anything just keep the comment system open and change the image for it.
	Zepph:	valid points :3
	TAEdgE:	agreed

[iMSystem]

Originally Posted by TheGentleman

Don't remove the ability to like/dislike/neutral rep BUT don't have these values shown to the public. In this way the "reps" refer to single posts only and can still be used by mods and admins to identify helpful members of the community.

I think this was brought up before, but like you said, I rekon we ditch the entire numbers thing and just have the ability to comment on a post, and that is it.

Use this badboy for everything and have no +/- reputations anymore.

Quick Comments

FLuX:

I like this one.

[nirvAnA]

Certain stuff I can limit are

Number of reps given per day (Might make people spend it carefully)
Number of reps given before given to the same person again

The idea of the rep system initially was to encourage people to post valuable stuff, and collect brownie points which isn't really worth a lot but its at least tangible and I know it spurred on a lot of people to spend more time to make good posts. I think the problem here is with the neg rep.

Quick Comments

Zealo:

[syfChadMann]

Originally Posted by nirvAnA

Certain stuff I can limit are

Number of reps given per day (Might make people spend it carefully)
Number of reps given before given to the same person again

The idea of the rep system initially was to encourage people to post valuable stuff, and collect brownie points which isn't really worth a lot but its at least tangible and I know it spurred on a lot of people to spend more time to make good posts. I think the problem here is with the neg rep.

how about limiting the number of neg reps given to a post/ or up reps.. sure there are some posts that everyone loves to content of and should be celebrated - like when dox announces another huge event supporting the community - that guy deserves it..

but if circle jerks and rep trains are an issue.. limit the number of +/- reps available - after all, I think people get the idea that their post was stupid with 2 or so neg reps.. then a bunch of neutral reps saying - 'bad post big boy'..

[Fourby]

Originally Posted by TheGentleman

I propose an alternative:

Don't remove the ability to like/dislike/neutral rep BUT don't have these values shown to the public. In this way the "reps" refer to single posts only and can still be used by mods and admins to identify helpful members of the community.

Wow, This is actually pretty smart.. So basically leave comments and take away the faces?

Quick Comments

TheGentleman:

More or less.

[Zealo]

i get neg repped as much as anyone, usually it's because i've actually posted something retarded without thinking. i've edited or removed posts pretty quickly based on rep comments more than once.

sometimes it's bullshit like chadmann saying "because you neg repped me!!!" but i'm not going to get upset about that, the ability to neg rep is still a good thing i think, if someone doesn't like me/what i post i'd rather know about it. anyone who get's upset about a downvote they feel they didn't deserve is probably sensitive enough to get upset about something else stupid anyway.

[syfChadMann]

Originally Posted by Zealo

i get neg repped as much as anyone, usually it's because i've actually posted something retarded without thinking. i've edited or removed posts pretty quickly based on rep comments more than once.

sometimes it's bullshit like chadmann saying "because you neg repped me!!!" but i'm not going to get upset about that, the ability to neg rep is still a good thing i think, if someone doesn't like me/what i post i'd rather know about it. anyone who get's upset about a downvote they feel they didn't deserve is probably sensitive enough to get upset about something else stupid anyway.

please link these allegations?.. and they are probably because I posted that CHobo could have been either hacking or stream cheating.. and you called me a retard - in a neg rep.. which I felt deserved a neg rep for you.. cause I was contributing to a discussion to catch a cheater, but you just felt like making it personal?.. good job big boy

Quick Comments

	Zealo:	i was calling you a troll, for the record
	x5.Revenant:	^Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh BURNT

[mGGDaedalus]

Whenever I'm about to post a rep comment I look at myself in the mirror and try to pick the face that closest resembles mine.

Quick Comments

RicocheT:

There's no smiley face for an ugly person like you though...that's why you never post rep comments

[Shieldz]

no neg rep is better but yeah rep system isnt that useful

[Pandan]

I'd say I'm in the party with quite a few people (Maynarde I believe) here; the points mean nothing to me whatsoever.

I do, however, love that people can just give a smiley/frowny face to something they like OR just post a quick comment instead of making additional posts.

It's the off-topics exchange of rep that's retarded, like in Zealo's example (without getting in to who did what), but the concept of "because you negged a post of mine earlier" is just stupid.

I reckon take away like power and number of likes, and just have it as a quick social pointer or something. If people aren't coveting 'social status' from the rep, then the system should get used correctly, right?

Quick Comments

iM yang:

i disagree with your post

[Kepler]

I feel that ratings in general just promote a circlejerk.

Someone could be a massive douchebag, or completely wrong, but still have a legion of supporters and come off as correct because of his massive positive rating on a post.

I say get rid of positive and negative comments, but still let you comment. No 'reputation system'.

It's straddling the edge of becoming Reddit in some sense, which is something every website and forum should strive to not be.

Quick Comments

	Pandan:	OMG WTF COPIED MY POST AND GOT FRONTPAGE!! THINK OF THE KARMA!! :(((((((
	Cute:	I agree (I would uprep, but that'd be a bit too ironic for my liking)
	iM yang:	you're cute, not cute, you; science

[Dox]

Just gonna throw this out there:

It's kinda tragic that this thread is still going despite the MYRIAD of improvements this site really needs. The freaking rep system has received months of un-needed attention.

IF YOU DISAGREE NEG REP ME

Quick Comments

	TAkrunch:
	Bash:	LIKE THE SEARCH FUNCTION!
	FLuX:	Curse you Dox, you know we can't neg rep!
	iM yang:	i disagree with your post

[Cute]

Originally Posted by Dox

Just gonna throw this out there:

It's kinda tragic that this thread is still going despite the MYRIAD of improvements this site really needs. The freaking rep system has received months of un-needed attention.

IF YOU DISAGREE NEG REP ME

Just out of curiosity, what do you think needs improving?

Quick Comments

	Pandan:	I would really like to see Dox's fully thought out opinion on this. Perhaps enough for it's own thread :P
	iM yang:	everything

[inFeZa]

Originally Posted by Dox

Just gonna throw this out there:

It's kinda tragic that this thread is still going despite the MYRIAD of improvements this site really needs. The freaking rep system has received months of un-needed attention.

IF YOU DISAGREE NEG REP ME

I agree! So much effort that is put into improving a thing that everyone regards as like the points on whoseline. (it doesn't matter)

Why so much effort if everyone is just like meh being down or up repped doesnt matter.

Quick Comments

iM yang:

i disagree with your post

[Benji]

I've said this before, but I feel it needs to be mentioned again.

Remove the entire system. The reputation system discourages posting in fear of receiving negative points on the system (despite the points meaning nothing, there's a psychological part to it as well). It also encourages circle jerking and mindlessly up voting your friends posts. Any posts against the main group of members (TA and friends) gain no leverage due to the mass down voting which causes fear to speak out against the group. Even the removal of the down voting system will not fix this as one side of the forum argument will have a ton of happy faces, which reflects in the opinion of a new user.

From the side of 'It encourages people to post', this is a terrible argument because if someone is only posting so they can get up votes, their motivations are poor and should not be rewarded. At the same time it discourages posts that do not conform to the masses, which means only the opinions of the largest group will matter.

It's a little sad when someone hosts an awesome weekly tournament and receives very few up votes, whilst someone else posts an opinion in a popular thread that conforms to the masses and gets showered in likes.

Remove the system, it is horrible for our community.

Quick Comments

	Champi:	i disagree with some of the points u made, but overall i agree with you
	Pox:
	PiG:	great points
	Zealo:	upvoting for irony
	iM yang:	i disagree with your post

[Rage]

I think commenting on posts is a useful fun feature. It saves people making an entire post if they only want to agree with someone without adding any value of their own.

But the rest can go, I think.

[nirvAnA]

Some people make really good points. After consideration on what will be best for the community in the long term, the new trial will be something we never did before.. removing positive / negative rep and only leaving it as a comment feature.

There will also be a bigger emphasis on "site achievements" now.

Lets see if this is a step in the right direction.

Quick Comments

	Asrathiel:	Noooooo..... my points.... :P :P
	FLuX:	Looking through a thread and thought something was missing; it's strange but I think I'll get used to it
	Peleus:	imo change the face because it looks a bit weird to have comments like this.
	Bash:	im okay with it. however i am not okay with having this smug face represent my opinion.
	Zealo:	counter to asrathiel's nuetral vote
	mGGDaedalus:	this is all i really use it for anyway
	inFeZa:	great! now i can call people buttholes and they cant down rep me

[syfChadMann]

Originally Posted by nirvAnA

Some people make really good points. After consideration on what will be best for the community in the long term, the new trial will be something we never did before.. removing positive / negative rep and only leaving it as a comment feature.

There will also be a bigger emphasis on "site achievements" now.

Lets see if this is a step in the right direction.

Sounds good.. I agree with that option
Or perhaps the option of not showing someone's rep.. but that might not change too much as I couldn't tell you who was above 500 and who was below, outside of the obvious, like Dox or nirvAnA above and Ziek below

Quick Comments

	neKo:	-1 negative rep
	iM yang:	i disagree with your post

[Rage]

Remove the face - looks a bit weird to have the face when it doesnt have a meaning

Quick Comments

iM yang:

i disagree with your post

[nirvAnA]

face has already been removed. crtl + F5 will show the temp placeholder we have set up.

thegentleman is working on a proper permanent icon

Quick Comments

iM yang:

i disagree with your post

[inFeZa]

TA COMMENT TRAIN!

wooooooo

Quick Comments

	syfChadMann:	chooo chooo
	mGGDaedalus:	COUNTER REP!
	TAkrunch:	=(
	Fourby:	Im shaking my head in spirit ***
	TAavanar:	BOOM bubbles everywhere
	iM yang:	i disagree with your post
	nirvAnA:	Bubble bubble bubble pop

[breadfan]

I don't like not being able to leave actual rep. But I think it's still pretty good timing with some explosive posts going up recently. I am all for this as a temporary measure when the situation calls for it. But the rest of the time, I want to be able to throw rep around!

Quick Comments

iM yang:

i disagree with your post

[Kepler]

Positive/Negative rep just leads to circlejerks. I'm glad it's gone.

Quick Comments

	iM yang:	fapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfa pfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapf apfapfapfapfapfapfap
	syfChadMann:	I disagree with yang's fap.
	breadfan:	I prefer oblong jerks.

[inFeZa]

I think the comment stuff is completely pointless.

Quick Comments

	iM yang:	:))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
	TAavanar:	im commenting on you commenting that commenting is pointless

[Rage]

the reason I like comments is that they are a great easy way to agree with a post without having to come up with any content for a post of your own - and we don't really want a forum littered with posts like "I agree" or "+1", especially not when the SC2SEA forum layout is fairly bulky and far from streamline - each post takes up a lot of space what with crazy image signatures and huge avatars etc

Quick Comments

	iM yang:	i disagree with your post
	syfChadMann:	yangyangyangyangyangyangyangyangyangyangyangyangya ngyangyangyangyangyang
	mGGDaedalus:	Exactly how I use them. Here, have no rep!

[PiG]

I like the removal of rep system 90% of the forum posts were just reputation stuff!

Quick Comments

	syfChadMann:	I agree - here some re... oh.
	iM yang:	counter re- damn..

[TheGentleman]

I didn't think I'd like this change but I've grown to like it. Whilst up voting valuable threads was certainly a wonderful idea in theory I've come to relise that the rep system is flawed and has the potential to punish or dishearten people who make constructive posts.

For example: in my graphical contribution thread I made some recent suggestions for the BSG and GPD tournament achievement icon changes. I've put time and effort into these but if someone didn't like the change (and a handful didn't) they could neg-rep the post which I would otherwise consider a contribution.

The "sub-comment" feature allows people to express their opinion without necessarily "punishing" a valuable poster.

Quick Comments

nirvAnA:

wise words!

[Nemo]

At the the contrary, I preferred things before. Up voting helpful posts was a way for me to give a little "gift" to people who are doing the invisible work. It's no longer available and I think it will have a bad effect on motivation for those on the long term.

Today I wanted to give Aequitas upvote for a replay analysis, I only could give this smirk face, it doesn't seem the same.

I vote for making like it was before : 3 levels of comments appreciation and rep point count. I don't care if some people get their points for pure "coolness", I care that those having some for work don't get them any more.

Quick Comments

nirvAnA:

Maybe a thanks system would work

[breadfan]

Originally Posted by Nemo

At the the contrary, I preferred things before. Up voting helpful posts was a way for me to give a little "gift" to people who are doing the invisible work. It's no longer available and I think it will have a bad effect on motivation for those on the long term.

Today I wanted to give Aequitas upvote for a replay analysis, I only could give this smirk face, it doesn't seem the same.

I vote for making like it was before : 3 levels of comments appreciation and rep point count. I don't care if some people get their points for pure "coolness", I care that those having some for work don't get them any more.

I think the big problem is that we went to like/dislike, but the culture never changed that it wasn't just about the one post. Maybe it could go back to the way it was before, but with no tracking of neg reps? That way, it doesn't stain peoples' personal record (which is what gets people annoyed IMO) and helps encourage people to like/dislike based on the merits of a single post, rather than the person posting.

[PiG]

Originally Posted by Nemo

At the the contrary, I preferred things before. Up voting helpful posts was a way for me to give a little "gift" to people who are doing the invisible work. It's no longer available and I think it will have a bad effect on motivation for those on the long term.

Today I wanted to give Aequitas upvote for a replay analysis, I only could give this smirk face, it doesn't seem the same.

I vote for making like it was before : 3 levels of comments appreciation and rep point count. I don't care if some people get their points for pure "coolness", I care that those having some for work don't get them any more.

I was sad to lose this positive element too! But it was often used to back up aggressive posts which leads to a bad forum culture. In the last month we had many people responding to slightly aggressive posts with even more aggressive posts because they would feel like they were being ganged up on simply because their were 5-6 +reps on the instigating post. There might be some "thankyou for quality post" option but the problem is stopping people from using that on a post that starts a fight.

I had a long think about it and think for the moment this is the best option. If someone makes a really valuable post then you can still respond and perhaps ask another question or even simply say "omg thankyou so much for that post it was very helpful". People have been saying to me "but we don't want the forum clogged up with posts like this". Meh I say. The fact that it takes more effort to make an actual post means if u get responses like that it means alot more then a few rep comments anyway. It also encourages people to post more actively.

Some have said to me that the commenting and +- rep helps encourage lurkers to post more but ive noticed for the most part it just allows the regular posters to find an easier way to interact to writing well thought out posts. This leads to an overall decline in forum quality.

TL;DR: Sad to lose the rep system but think there will be more positives than negatives!

Quick Comments

	nirvAnA:	so smart!
	Baldie:	I suggest putting the TL;DR part at the top alike an Executive Summary ^_^
	iM yang:	i disagree

[Nemo]

Originally Posted by PiG

I was sad to lose this positive element too! But it was often used to back up aggressive posts which leads to a bad forum culture. In the last month we had many people responding to slightly aggressive posts with even more aggressive posts because they would feel like they were being ganged up on simply because their were 5-6 +reps on the instigating post. There might be some "thankyou for quality post" option but the problem is stopping people from using that on a post that starts a fight.

Generally, suppressing good things because some people might abuse it is not a good thing.
I think generally really bad posts were downrepped and then discouraged. Of course you had some abuse of people being downreped because they were not howling with the others, it was not that frequent.

had a long think about it and think for the moment this is the best option. If someone makes a really valuable post then you can still respond and perhaps ask another question or even simply say "omg thankyou so much for that post it was very helpful". People have been saying to me "but we don't want the forum clogged up with posts like this". Meh I say. The fact that it takes more effort to make an actual post means if u get responses like that it means alot more then a few rep comments anyway. It also encourages people to post more actively.

10 posts of "thank you" is not possible. We had posts with nearly 30 upvotes, generally those people really appreciated it. Giving just a comment instead has not the same positive effect.

Some have said to me that the commenting and +- rep helps encourage lurkers to post more but ive noticed for the most part it just allows the regular posters to find an easier way to interact to writing well thought out posts. This leads to an overall decline in forum quality.

I don't understand this one.

Edit : Look at this to understand what I mean : http://www.sc2sea.com/showpost.php?p...&postcount=522

[Shieldz]

Now its a lot better without the rep system :P.

[inFeZa]

It should be Starcraft Themed. I don't like this post, so i'm giving you a cloaked banshee.

Oh this is a good post.. here's some minerals.

Quick Comments

NOM:

Must build additional pylons before you give more minerals to " "

[Rage]

Originally Posted by SQL.inFeZa

It should be Starcraft Themed. I don't like this post, so i'm giving you a cloaked banshee.

Oh this is a good post.. here's some minerals.

That is a ******* awesome idea.

[x5.NotoriouS]

Originally Posted by SQL.inFeZa

It should be Starcraft Themed. I don't like this post, so i'm giving you a cloaked banshee.

Oh this is a good post.. here's some minerals.

do this! ~~~

[Bash]

Originally Posted by SQL.inFeZa

It should be Starcraft Themed. I don't like this post, so i'm giving you a cloaked banshee.

Oh this is a good post.. here's some minerals.

only problem is all the site achievements and shit are being moved away from a starcraft theme, be a bit weird/inconsistent.

Would be sick as though.

Quick Comments

TheGentleman:

Not everything, the avatar rewards for posting still are SC2 themed.

[syfMiley]

Liking the changes atm!

[Baldie]

Hahaha as if the original rep system wasn't centered around resources in the first place. Minerals for total posts and gas for rep likes

The only downside to no rep system at a core is it is harder for people new to the forums or who don't know the "names of the community" to source reputable members. It's good to hear that site achievements will now be taking preference over a rep system as this should avoid most of the issue. I just think it is important to create a system with achievements where we don't have 10,000 achievements but equally anybody can come to the site and go "oh this person has x amount of achievements, he/she is obviously someone with a good reputation. If I have questions I can perhaps contact them" etc.

EDIT: Another alternative is for achievements to have a hidden reputation level (e.g achievement x gives 50 hidden reputation points" and utilise the pre-existing ranking system located above icons. In the old rep system you would gain a higher "badge" based on your total reputation - much alike ranking up in the army. A system could be formed where lots of achievements aren't necessarily required, instead people can get a sense of your contribution to the community based on your rank.

Regardless if we are going down the path of achievements, the current layout for posts needs to be changed or we are going to eventually have 2 responses per page

[TheGentleman]

Remember, we are having new achievements added (see this post) to try and better encourage what the rep system was designed for. It has been proven in many games (World of Warcraft, StarCraft 2, Diablo 3, Skyrim, Team Fortress 2, etc...) that achievements are an excellent motivator and so with the new achievements on this website (New and Quality member of the Month/Fortnight) it's entirely possible that more quality posts will be seen.

[AsylumofSouls]

As an addition to this topic, can we change the comment function such that you can edit comments after you've posted them?
Spelling errors and comments made irrelevant by post edits are annoying

Quick Comments

TheGentleman:

This I feel is reasonable. Also the "Like it!" button should be changed to a "Comment" button.

[NOM]

I miss not having positive rep. smiley faces on the forums made me smile.
Now I find it rather bland with just text.

Quick Comments

AsylumofSouls:

I agree with this post :D