Neg rep.

[Freakazoid]

I agree that idiots should be neg repped, but 80% of them are neg repped for the same post atleast 2 times ,just by another modrator, wich can be a lil extreme.

 

[Rui]

I think you would be luckier in the Site Discussion forum. But since it's not that far, you might not be THAT unlucky.

By the way, that's the same as positive reputation. You get repped multiple times. But I understand your point.

 

[Freakazoid]

True true. But you won't go to jail if you allready did your time for a crime :emote_razz:

 

[Rui]

I'm sorry if I sounded threatning, but no, it was not a threat in any way. Just telling you that you posted in the wrong forum.

 

[Freakazoid]

I'm sorry if I sounded threatning, but no, it was not a threat in any way. Just telling you that you posted in the wrong forum.

No no. You sounded fair, I just posted a fact

 

[GST_Nemisis]

only mods can give neg rep, why is this?

 

[Jacek]

only mods can give neg rep, why is this?

to prevent even more abuses like:
"lol he's my friend, I'll neg rep him lololololol"
"OMG you beat me in replying, -rep bastard!!111"

 

[GST_Nemisis]

lol do people actually do that? has it happened in the past? because on electro-tech-online.net they have neg rep and it works for them....im just curious, i dont care i dont wanna neg rep anyone i just wanna know.

 

[brad.dude03]

No, negative rep has ALWAYS been a power of mods and above. People would abuse it so bad, as me and RagingSpeedHorn displayed one eventful day when we got in arguement and the rep system bugged out. That's why it's confined to moderators and up.

Positive rep on the other hand, has just been recently adjusted so that only users with more then 50 rep can give it to also prevent abuse. I don't see why, since the rep system is designed to prevent abuse (you can only give so much rep a day, you can only give rep to a person every so often) but the admins decided to impose this limit to prevent people from giving rep for "ahmahgahd lol j00s my friendzz h4v3 s0m3 repzz!" moments.

The +50 rep system relies on the fact that someone who has 50 or more rep is considered responsible enough (having demonstrated said responsibility in order to earn said 50 points) to spread reputation themselves.

It's sad that we have to do this (it seems we can't trust users any more) but it must be done.

 

[Wolverabid]

Reputation

Only moderators and administrators can impose negative reputation penalties. All users with 50 reputation points themselves may ADD to others' reputations.

Ralle implemented these settings because reputation abuses had occurred. Rep Solution and Reputation Enabled! are threads that help to (partially) explain the current situation.

I hope to soon create a thread that will explain the Hive's system in great detail.

 

[SuPa-]

I really disagree with that rule regarding people with +50 rep and up to have the privilege to add rep even if they're peons. We're peons too, so we should have the same amount of privileges as other hive peons do, and 50 rep is a lot to get.

 

[brad.dude03]

I would be more then happy to help you with that Wolve, as you see I've spoken a lot about the reputation system and tried to learn about it as much as possible... MSN me if you require anything from me

But yes, those threads should clarify the current state of affairs, and until that rep document is created, you could always view the FAQ for information...

@Supa: you posted while I was posting. To answer, it doesn't MATTER hwether you're a peon or not, it's how good a peon you are You see, it doesn't make any sense. You have to EARN the privlidge of giving reputation, so do you think it would be fair for those who have worked for the 50 rep if we just start allowing new users with 0 posts the same privlidge? It ain't happening.

The whole reason thatr we have a 50 rep minimum is so that we can give the privlidge of reputation-giving to RESPONSIBLE users who have proven themselves in the eyes of other responsible users. This makes it much less likely that the rep system will be abused.

The fact is, we've created class division. Those who have proven themselves to be responsible in rep-giving are above the other peons. They sort of fall into the 'trusted users' category. Now the admins intention is to make it easy for users to get to 50 rep, so no worries, as long as you behave and help out, you should get there in no time.

 

[SuPa-]

Oh... I didn't know the admins had that intention, i pictured it something along these lines before
-Well before it wasn't a 50 rep minimum, or was it? If their wasn't, it would've been much easier for early members to gain rep, since everyone who liked someone's work and gave them rep, would actually of GOTTEN that rep.-

 

[ragingspeedhorn]

Bahh, rep sucks, who cares.

 

[brad.dude03]

Oh... I didn't know the admins had that intention, i pictured it something along these lines before
-Well before it wasn't a 50 rep minimum, or was it? If their wasn't, it would've been much easier for early members to gain rep, since everyone who liked someone's work and gave them rep, would actually of GOTTEN that rep.-

Yes, but they got rep for all the wrong reasons, so thats why we imposed the limit.

 

[NiKaNoRoU_GR]

>Bahh, rep sucks, who cares.

After deep thought, the ubtrual answer is: agreed.

 

[bestpaladinman]

Bahh, rep sucks, who cares.

right! i have a neg rep, but i didn't care.