I think that users with 500 or more posts should be allowed to give negative, or at least neutral reputation. I've encountered many users who I would have given bad reputation to because of trolling and other behaviors that are not enough to warrant a report or a ban but still enough to warn people to watch out for the member. Those of us with 500 posts have generally been here long enough to remember when reputation was taken away and we respect the site enough to use it properly. This is now open for discussion, but please make sure you have read my thread in entirety and keep an open mind.
Even though I do not have 500+ posts. I agree with this suggestion. If you had to have at least 500+ post to give a reputation you would respect it more.
I support this 100%
(09-04-2011, 07:08 PM)3D™ Wrote: [ -> ]Even though I do not have 500+ posts. I agree with this suggestion. If you had to have at least 500+ post to give a reputation you would respect it more.
I support this 100%
Thanks for the feedback. Hopefully others share your same opinion.
I do agree, it should be allowed, since 500 posts is a hard to reach milestone without spamming.
Then it would be Like HF ub3rs going around randomly neg repping people neg rep was disabled for a reason so no one would complain about negative reps.
(09-04-2011, 07:45 PM)Billy Mays Wrote: [ -> ]Then it would be Like HF ub3rs going around randomly neg repping people neg rep was disabled for a reason so no one would complain about negative reps.
There's a difference between people who have actually earned the right to rep through posting and those who purchase permissions to bully other users who can not give rep. For instance, I would give you negative rep for all the trolling and LQP you have been doing, but it would be a wasted effort as you will be banned soon anyways.
(09-04-2011, 07:57 PM)Thomas Wrote: [ -> ]There's a difference between people who have actually earned the right to rep through posting and those who purchase permissions to bully other users who can not give rep. For instance, I would give you negative rep for all the trolling and LQP you have been doing, but it would be a wasted effort as you will be banned soon anyways.
But your trolling aswell cause of the way i was typing you retard
Don't be such a hypocrite I saw you making fun of my typing
that Makes you as worse
Billy, there's a good reason why you're account was banned. Even if that happened it would be considered reputation abuse, which is mentioned somewhere in the rules post Omni made. Report the person to a mod and problem solved. If this was added it wouldn't be a big deal, not too many people with 500+ posts right now, even though if the forum was to get bigger this could be reconsidered. Although I think Omni just wants to keep this a supportive forum.
Those who don't deserve a positive rep, won't get one, and those who do, will. Simple rule to go by, and it would cause less disputes through the reputation system for staff to deal with (one of the reasons I heard Omni mention as to why he didn't include negative reputation before). Giving out a negative reputation only causes problems, and really the reputation system is still as efficient without it. However, now we don't have a way to tell the average no-rep people from the people that deserve to be recognized as a bad member of the forum.
Instead I think it would be better to make all warning levels visible.
I don't think this forum should allow the use of negative reputation, although I do agree we should be able to give nutural reputations.
We tried hard to get negative reputation removed, let's not even allow abuse to take place and keep it disabled.