Punish negatively repped users?

[Denu]

Neg rep is supposed to be a means of correcting a users poor behavior, right? Well it seems that too often people take this the wrong way and just get pissed off which then leads to the continuation of their bad behavior.

Why not make it so that first a person gets a verbal warning and then if the person persists then they are prevented from posting further in that thread or forum or from posting at all. The person would be notified via a pm. It would be private so the person wouldn't feel humiliated and so would be less likely to get pissed off. Then that person would be given the chance to redeem themselves. They would reply to the pm, stating which rule they broke (this would force them to go over the rules and see where they made a mistake) and how they should act in the future.

And if the person continues to behave poorly in the same manner it is at that point in which they recieve the infraction because it is obious that they have not learned their lesson. If that person recieves a certain number of infractions then they face more serious punishments such as being banned.

 

[donut3.5]

Why not make it so that first a person gets a verbal warning

We oftentimes do

They would reply to the pm, stating which rule they broke (this would force them to go over the rules and see where they made a mistake) and how they should act in the future.

That we don't do, but an interesting concept.
--donut3.5--

 

[Rising_Dusk]

Well, then we couldn't ban users like TDB, which would be a major flaw in the system.

Of course you can. You ban him under the he's-a-prick-and-doesn't-contribute-positively-to-the-website-I'm-an-admin-and-screw-you clause. It works wonders, and the reality is that in some cases, just doing it on probable cause is very much the best option. If you limit yourself by rules as opposed to judgment, all you've achieved is limiting the staff's effectiveness.

 

[donut3.5]

Of course you can. You ban him under the he's-a-prick-and-doesn't-contribute-positively-to-the-website-I'm-an-admin-and-screw-you clause. It works wonders, and the reality is that in some cases, just doing it on probable cause is very much the best option. If you limit yourself by rules as opposed to judgment, all you've achieved is limiting the staff's effectiveness.

And thus we get the 10-point infraction! yay!
--donut3.5--

 

[Hawkwing]

What Donut3.5 said oh so long ago was correct, negative reputation is basically a warning. It tells the user that if they keep this up then they will get an infraction which leads to a ban.

If a change is made I think that change should be that users with less than -9 rep will not be able to use user titles and signatures, which can contain Hive-hate messages.

 

[Just_Spectating]

how about like,
<-4 then no avatar,
<-9 no avatar + user title
<-14 no avatar + user title + signature.
if they even get more neg rep then infraction?

some users crave neg rep however..

 

[Rising_Dusk]

And thus we get the 10-point infraction! yay!
--donut3.5--

Maybe the staff here really can't make up their own mind and really does need some infraction system to hold their hand through dealing with trolls and their kin.

 

[The Last Istari]

The whole "-4 no avatar, -9, etc." thing won't work. Why? Because people will just cancel out the neg rep with the reason "Oh here's some rep to negate your neg rep."

My suggestion to keep it from happening? Make it so that if you have ANY neg rep. Only staff can rep you until you're back in positive.

 

[Joe-black-5]

The whole "-4 no avatar, -9, etc." thing won't work. Why? Because people will just cancel out the neg rep with the reason "Oh here's some rep to negate your neg rep."

My suggestion to keep it from happening? Make it so that if you have ANY neg rep. Only staff can rep you until you're back in positive.

lol each time i check a neg rep profile i find one or two saying :"here some +rep to help you get rid of your -rep"
you found the solution

 

[Linaze]

That's exactly why only staff should be able +rep negatively repped users.

 

[donut3.5]

Maybe the staff here really can't make up their own mind and really does need some infraction system to hold their hand through dealing with trolls and their kin.

Nah, the basic breakdown is as follows:
1st Offense = Verbal Warning
2nd Offense = -rep
Continued Offenses = More and more infractions based on severity.
AFAIK, that's how most moderation systems (not only in forums, but say, in schools) work (verbal warning, slight punishment, additional punishments).
Depends case by case, but I find in this case this works quite well.
--donut3.5--

 

[Just_Spectating]

Rui doesnt give verbal warnings very much.

 

[Rui]

That's because you should have read the Rules. They are supposed to be read (or given a fast look-at) as soon as you enter the forums, not once you step on the spiketrap.

 

[HappyTauren]

Guys. Look at me, I get shitloads of neg rep, but I get fifty times as much positive rep. So you are saying that...?

 

[TheBlooddancer]

HT ->

Rep

Shading in Photoshop->Punish negatively...->Just_Spectating:bwahhahahahaahaha
Just For Laughs->Septimus:I AM FIRING MY LAZOR.
Warrior of Khorne->FrIkY:grawwwrgg
Comic Contest #1->SuperCow:i like cows better
ArcaneKnight(HT&ike_ike)...->Falconeye:A useful model.
TeamGlowWhite.blp->DevineArmy:and thats why i <3 you +rep
Squiggy's Gallery->-BerZeKeR-:Emo cowZ? I must be in da wrong world. D: =P
Lure Breaker Keyblade->Ash:HAHAHAHHAHAAAAH NICE MAN, U GET REP 4 THAT!
No rep->Kaitech[SanD]:Lul

There's you shitload of rep.
Not much of this rep seems to be gained throug helping people.
If people could give -rep for same kind of reasons, thoose people gives +rep.. Then the system is so failed.
Neg rep should exist. There should be other systems, not taking awards from you. And rep should neither be "reward points" as we see in HT's rep point, he gained an awfull lot, for doing allmost nothing (No offense.)

 

[HappyTauren]

You are right. I got most of my rep for THE LULZ. For making people smile, laugh, or ROFL. But well, laughing is healthy, and I get rep for that! DOESN'T THAT COUNT

 

[Joe-black-5]

i just have a fight with someone and i got 1 -rep, and 4 +rep
guess people like to watch fights XD

 

[frostwhisper]

Oh dear. HT just earned another gem.

 

[HappyTauren]

Oh dear. HT just earned another gem.

<3 4 the lulz.

 

[Linaze]

This wasn't supposed to raise discussion about how pplz get theirz lulz gems, but about negative repz downsidez, k?

 

[Kaitech[SanD]]

he gained an awfull lot, for doing allmost nothing

HT helps people in the better of ways, laughter is good for you. Giving you answers to a trigger won't make you see the bright side to something. HT is the clown of the Hive. He's a funny guy and unless you piss him off he's generally very kind to other members. He deserves his rep.

~~~

To be honest I think Rep is un-necessary. You get a member join who is going to request one thing or ask for help one time in the WEHZ. Let's say someone constantly patrols there offering as much help as possible. Most people ignore the request section and WEHZ because there's next to no reward at all. Most people requesting or asking for help don't even know rep exists, so they get the solution to their problem and say "thanks" then never come back to the hive. Therefore the person helping all these noobs has minimal rep, yet he deserves so much...

The other thing annoys me about rep is people like TDB. He was ALWAYS starting rep parties (Where you trade rep with other people; It's now against the rules) and he has crap loads of rep. He also gets repped for saying things the 10 year olds find funny, but everyone else tuts and looks away. I havn't seen much at all that he has done on the hive except spam failed attempts at being funny. Also I do recall in earlier stages he'd stalk the WEHZ zone quoting the helpful people and saying "Do this and it'll work" therefore getting the credit for it. I think TDB has spammed so much it's pointless even giving him neg rep. On top of that he's donated, which will also lower his chances of being banned.

/rant off XD

Oh yeah, forgot to mention.. Do you think people with negative rep give a shit about Avatars, Signatures and User Titles? They are the most retarded suggestions for punishment for having neg rep EVER. I think the whole "Uploading the same map twice = neg rep" is a bit stupid. Maybe after clicking on Upload a map there should be confirmation to check if you're uploading a completely different map or updating it. There should be a scan to see if maps already have the same name and linking to the resources they have already submitted, making clear there is updating.

Neg rep and positive rep is given out too freely. As suggested somewhere else there should be a system based on stuff like Helpfulness, Funny Factor, Friendliness, Respectfulness, Spammy, Flaming, Accidental rule-breaking (Multiple uploading, accidental double post). Funny Factor and Accidental rule-breaking shouldn't add to the overall score, but instead to a secondary thing. Of course, there'd have to be restrictions to stop abuse, like for instance members who havn't been here for up to 3 months can't add to negativeness.

 

[Rising_Dusk]

Nah, the basic breakdown is as follows:
1st Offense = Verbal Warning
2nd Offense = -rep
Continued Offenses = More and more infractions based on severity.
AFAIK, that's how most moderation systems (not only in forums, but say, in schools) work (verbal warning, slight punishment, additional punishments).
Depends case by case, but I find in this case this works quite well.
--donut3.5--

Thanks a lot, I've read the rules, I know how the system works. The problem is that it achieves nothing except obfuscating real punishment from some false attempt to punish. You're trying to compare a school to forums, which is great and all, but no matter how you slice it the internet is not real life. The internet is not serious business.

You are the forum on the internet, in case you weren't aware, and because of that you can define your own rules. You can choose rules that make sense and you can then enforce them in ways so that others will make sense of them or leave. Now consider that the internet is probably more stupid than your school, no, as a matter of fact I guarantee that it is. It's either filled with smart people that willfully abuse complicated systems (HT, etc.) or stupid people that can't understand complicated systems. This is why you make systems crystal clear, simple, and unavoidable.

Negrep is your ban factor. If HT earns enough negrep, he's done. End of story. Hell, he'd already be gone if that were the case. So he'd either learn to abide the rules (Like I know he would, because he's smart), or he would leave. Trust me, he'd abide the rules. Hey! Guess what! That was the goal of the rules in the first place.

I rest my case.

 

[Linaze]

How come Rising_Dusk = So much win? Oh, because his opinions are awesome, that's why.

 

[HappyTauren]

Awesome how he used me as an example Though it is true... Hell, combined together, my infractions weight 17 points. And that is one ban plus 7 points. All my neg rep combined is probably -100. But my 1000 positive rep outnumbers it. Whenever I post something that makes no sense I also add something relevant to the topic... An easy way to fuck with a flawed system

Forgot to mention. I prefer smart trolls to stupid posters. Period.

 

[Just_Spectating]

maybe ther should be another type of +Rep system for Just the Lulz.

like, little trophies, underneath the rep, and people can check mark the +rep to be for +rep for Lulz.

 

[donut3.5]

If HT earns enough negrep, he's done.

Well, enough users give him rep so that he wouldn't ever go negative, as we can see. And if you simply want to measure how many times he's been neg repped, I think what you actually want is a removal of neg rep and instead using infractions. Or maybe combine the two. Iunno exactly, but it sounds very similar to what we have right now, so I'm not sure what the point of what you're saying is anyhow
--donut3.5--

 

[Rising_Dusk]

How what is already there isn't working, as if my previous posts weren't absolutely clear on that. It's a combination of enforcement and the system itself. Negrep is actually a much more useful system than infractions because the user can 'work' it off by helping or participating with other users. This is a sort of self-redemption policy that works great if the punishment system is taken seriously.

However, mods and staff can always keep track of how many times a user has been punished, particularly easily in cases like HT that are so few and far between. If they cause enough trouble and are then more trouble than they're worth, toast them. In HT's case, he probably isn't given enough negative reputation for his attitude and general demeanor in most topics. It's not tough, and yes, I'm sorry, but it requires the staff have half a brain about them and make solid judgment calls.

 

[donut3.5]

the user can 'work' it off by helping or participating with other users.

If we magically removed "lulz" rep, then maybe.
You do bring up a good point of the mods just banning anyone, but I don't see why you can't just replace "insta-ban" with "10-point infraction" in your mind.
--donut3.5--

 

[HappyTauren]

Yeah, guys, shame on you. You need to TOAST ME. Too bad I am sooo "important" that I just don't get banned

 

[Hawkwing]

How what is already there isn't working, as if my previous posts weren't absolutely clear on that. It's a combination of enforcement and the system itself. Negrep is actually a much more useful system than infractions because the user can 'work' it off by helping or participating with other users. This is a sort of self-redemption policy that works great if the punishment system is taken seriously.

Well, you are correct. But people who get neg reputation usually begin to neglect the entire reputation system. It's also a lot harder for people to who have neg rep to get rep unless they do something really good, that can be good and bad though. People may work harder for the rep, but they might also just give up.

As for infractions they're more or less for one people don't smarten up after being neg repped multiple times.

If we magically removed "lulz" rep, then maybe

It's called rules.

"NO GIVING LULZ REP"

 

[Kwah]

'cause thats going to work. . .

 

[Vegavak]

In order to punish negatively repped users, you must first establish grounds that the negative rep has been fairly given out in the first place. And in a few cases, it has not been.

Not only that, but I also don't see as much cracking down on obvious flame bait/trolling by mods as there should be. I wonder why negative rep isn't being handed out for this kind of behavior, when it's being handed out in such abundance for 'double posting'.

 

[Denu]

The only time I have ever seen someone get neg rep for double posting is if they do it constantly despite being told not to. But then again I don't visit all the various forums so it might be different in some places depending on the moderator.

 

[D.I.Y Death]

The only time I have ever seen someone get neg rep for double posting is if they do it constantly despite being told not to. But then again I don't visit all the various forums so it might be different in some places depending on the moderator.

I just got neg rep for that and I did it once and it was a new update/bump "double post" no warning no nothing.
Before this can be taken seriously I think the mods need some rules to keep them in check.

 

[Denu]

Well just don't double post. It is in the rules and it isn't that hard not to do.

I was refering to people who were ignorant of the double posting rule. I don't know much about your situation but if you allready knew about double posting and you were indeed in violation of that rule then you were justly neg-repped.

It isn't impossible that some moderators give out neg rep for double posting regardless of the situation. It is in the rules and everyone has the ability to look at those rules whenever they want. If you didn't know about the rule prior to breaking it then you might consider asking politely the admin who neg repped you to overlook it just this one time.

 

[Hawkwing]

Break a rule you get punished. That's why you're supposed to read the rules. "Oh, I didn't know rules were important" isn't a good enough excuse.

 

[Septimus]

Break a rule you get punished. That's why you're supposed to read the rules. "Oh, I didn't know rules were important" isn't a good enough excuse.

I agree with this statement since all forum and site have quite a similiar rules. It doesn't give a person a excuse just because he is newbie, I often encounter a new users who often violate rules at map section by either mass-upload resources or upload incomplete map for their buddy while the rules already been shown to them at the bottom of the upload button.

Most of the people here who often read and follow the rules doesn't get involve into any trouble at all such as neg rep or infraction.

Reputation system have quite a flaw especially when user often null a neg rep by given the punish user a positive rep, which gradually weaken the efficiency of this system. To have a tough system which cannot be erase by anybody rather than the admin, that is why we have infraction system.

 

[D.I.Y Death]

I agree with this statement since all forum and site have quite a similiar rules. It doesn't give a person a excuse just because he is newbie, I often encounter a new users who often violate rules at map section by either mass-upload resources or upload incomplete map for their buddy while the rules already been shown to them at the bottom of the upload button.

Most of the people here who often read and follow the rules doesn't get involve into any trouble at all such as neg rep or infraction.

Reputation system have quite a flaw especially when user often null a neg rep by given the punish user a positive rep, which gradually weaken the efficiency of this system. To have a tough system which cannot be erase by anybody rather than the admin, that is why we have infraction system.

Infractions seem to be a better system. However there needs to be lines drawn for mods as well as users for reputation which I see a complete lack of.
Anyhow that's just my opinion. Take it of leave it.

 

[Septimus]

That is why we have a admin and director to overlook the mod.

As for admin, we have Ralle to overlook them. As for Ralle, we have nobody to overlook him... lol...

 

[The Last Istari]

I'd still like to make it blaringly obvious about the whole "Oh you have neg rep, here's some rep to cancel it out"

It's really annoying and deceives people. Positive rep doesn't mean much because some people get a ridiculous amount for the stupidest reasons. However, negative rep speaks.

-1 means a slight goof up. -4 or so and beyond means troublemaker. People however go "Here's some rep to get to positive." this needs to stop some way. My suggestion once again, is make it so only staff can rep those in the red.

As for infractions. They are a useful system. But because of the whole 10 and you're gone, it can take too long to get rid of someone who just needs to get shot and banned (A few names come to mind).

 

[donut3.5]

-1 means a slight goof up. -4 or so and beyond means troublemaker. People however go "Here's some rep to get to positive." this needs to stop some way. My suggestion once again, is make it so only staff can rep those in the red.

Actually -1 just means they were neg repped by a mod with little rep power, -4 means they were neg repped by someone with a high rep power
Also, Elenai has been cracking down on those "pity-reppers", I think he already knocked Void for doing it.
--donut3.5--

 

[D.I.Y Death]

Actually -1 just means they were neg repped by a mod with little rep power, -4 means they were neg repped by someone with a high rep power
Also, Elenai has been cracking down on those "pity-reppers", I think he already knocked Void for doing it.
--donut3.5--

See neg rep is a poor excuse for minor rule violations. if anything there should be a standardized system for neg rep then. Having a big mod neg rep you for a little thing has a worse effect than a little mod neg repping you for a little thing.
Its a broken system because its not "balanced" in this respect.

 

[Joe-black-5]

Bleach tribute - spell... 08-24-2008 11:48 PM Nightbrowler i saw you got neg rep so +rep*thumbs up*
thats why neg reputation is useless

 

[Mechanical Man]

But moderators and admins can choose how much negrep to give?

And the reason is very important too. Someone who got negrep from double post/reviving (in many forums this is allowed) is probably much better user than who got negrep by stealing/flaming. Also some users get rep by some other members just to cancel it out, some not, even they were more polite afterwards.

 

[Hawkwing]

But moderators and admins can choose how much negrep to give?

I had originally assumed so, but that was a false assumption. But if so the system would be oh so much better.

 

[Kwaliti]

As far as I know, admins can issue x amount of -rep, while moderators issue 1 per 500(?) reputation points.

 

[The Last Istari]

Yeah, admins can issue how much they want. Ralle smacked UchihaSasuke.gr for 200.

 

[Pyritie]

while moderators issue 1 per 500(?) reputation points.

It's our +rep value divided by two.

 

[Kwah]

What was the reason for 200?

Anyway, rep = fail. This has been determined 100's of times before.

 

[brad.dude03]

As far as I know, admins can issue x amount of -rep, while moderators issue 1 per 500(?) reputation points.

Actually, Admins can use the AdminCP to adjust rep values, rather than using the reputation system itself.