[Poll] Reputation

[DeletedUser]

I think it'd be best to use positive reputation only, but I'm more a supporter of a rating system using Bayesian averages. It's a rating system that uses popularity, voting averages, and the actual votes to give a rating to something. It works great for user voted lists.

Here's the formula for Bayesian averages:
(v ÷ (v+m)) × R + (m ÷ (v+m)) × C
R = average rating
v = number of votes
m = minimum votes
C = mean vote

 

[DeletedUser]

I looked at my reputation today. I have a neutral and a bad comment on there. The bad said this:

"No, it's off topic beause he said something completely true and then you started spamming, as you always do."

So basically, instead of someone posting in reply, they decided to carry on their argument to the reputation system. Sorry, the system is just overly lame.

 

[DeletedUser]

All of my latest reps have no comments.

I recently got one with the comment literally just a dot.

 

[DeletedUser]

No, it favours the most popular poster e.g. people like WFA and TjD would have sky-high reps.

Be interested to know, this is not the case, i actually have a few -reps.


My opinion on this Rep system is a report system/someone to mail, if we think we have been unfairly -repped.

Having just positive rep's after thinking about it, could work. I mean you +rep posts you think deserve it, and those people are seen to have decent posts etc. Which would make people want to post better to be +repped, and being able to voice honest opinions without fear of being -repped.


But alas, i am not fussed what happens with rep system tbh, it has its pro's and con's

 

[DeletedUser]

Just positive reps
Members can give positive reputation points only

Honestly, this is the best option. It removes the aspect of negative rep, which means members will be given a reputation representing their highs, not their lows. It completely removes the trouble of counter-repping when someone is neg-repped, and lowers the need for moderation.

But if I had my way, I'd just remove the thing - so I'll vote to Remove the thing.

 

[DeletedUser54]

Be interested to know, this is not the case, i actually have a few -reps.


My opinion on this Rep system is a report system/someone to mail, if we think we have been unfairly -repped.

Having just positive rep's after thinking about it, could work. I mean you +rep posts you think deserve it, and those people are seen to have decent posts etc. Which would make people want to post better to be +repped, and being able to voice honest opinions without fear of being -repped.


But alas, i am not fussed what happens with rep system tbh, it has its pro's and con's

But the problem is that people will just give unjust reasons for it and make modding even harder. The more I think about it I must agree with DC and you here. Either just have it positive reps or scrap the thing at all.

[th][EDIT: Ban-discussion deleted.][/th]

 

[DeletedUser]

But the problem is that people will just give unjust reasons for it and make modding even harder. The more I think about it I must agree with DC and you here. Either just have it positive reps or scrap the thing at all.

@Tillyboy -> He is banned, it isn't his avatar.

Well, when i firstt read it, i thought it would be a watse of time, but after thinking about it, i think this is the best option.

Also:

Don't change anything
Keep it like it is now. Anonymus reputations are doing well. The system is fun!

This could work, but i assume more and more people with complain when they are -repped.

Publish the "reppers"
Publish the "reppers" for the repped user. Every user may see, who gave the latest plus or minus to his/her reputation in his control panel (where you acutally can see your latest reputation comments). Personally I see a lot of abuse here. Even more than right now. A lot of "community famous" members will get their fanbase to kill a member's reputation after receiving a single negative reputation vote.

by naming people who rep, opens for rep system to abuse and people to be targetted.



Getting rid of it, may be an option, but i prefer being able to +rep posts i think deserve it.

 

[DeletedUser]

I looked at my reputation today. I have a neutral and a bad comment on there. The bad said this:

"No, it's off topic beause he said something completely true and then you started spamming, as you always do."

So basically, instead of someone posting in reply, they decided to carry on their argument to the reputation system. Sorry, the system is just overly lame.

Someone decided to give me negative rep for this post with the comment "The system is not lame!!". I do fully appreciate the irony, but does show how the system is rubbish :icon_razz:

 

[Nauzhror]

Personally I vote for the "only positive rep". Removes the whole "you insulted me once 6 months ago, so now I neg rep you once a day every day as part of vendetta" and makes the rep system more about the individual posts, as it should be.

 

[DeletedUser]

now i change my mind, if only plus reps are given it is better, or remove the system entirely:icon_confused:

 

[DeletedUser]

that way people only receive +reps when they deserve it and if someone states an opinion that someone else disagrees with they cant get a -rep

Therefore i think just having positive reps is the best option

Fully agree.

 

[DeletedUser]

i got minues repped for saying that most people don't use

here are the comments

DRAFT - [Poll] Reputation14.06.2009 05:00 Loads of people do: observe.
DRAFT - [Poll] Reputation 14.06.2009 00:32 I use it ;0

 

[DeletedUser]

Fascinating.

 

[DeletedUser]

How about a limit on neg repping?

i.e. A repper having given out neg rep must give out a pos rep before being able to neg rep again.

That way people won't be able to go around neg repping anybody and everybody without also handing out the positive. It would encourage people to be more choosy when handing out the rep.

Of the options currently suggested in Thars 1st post, I like it as it is.

 

[DeletedUser]

What's wrong with just derepping people? Unless it's unjust then there's no reason whatsoever why it shouldn't be allowed. All that would do is encourage people to hand out positive reps to anyone and everyone just for the sake of being able to derep again, which wouldn't help anyone.

I like the fact that you need minimum requirements to derep/rep though, otherwise any derep/rep will just appear grey and have no effect.

 

[DeletedUser]

I think it should publish the reppers.

I got two negative reps, one for "My awful signatures that wasted someones valuable time" and one for my 'Incomplete night bonus guide"

I wish I could question them both :/

 

[DeletedUser]

[th]Update: Poll added

Since there weren't any suggestions anymore, which could be added with the standard settings of the board, I'll stay with the actual four. Please re-read the whole thread before voting to get to know the benefits and disadvantages of every setting.

Here's the short discription for the possible choices:
http://forum.tribalwars.co.uk/showpost.php?p=22816&postcount=1

I just want to mention it again to prevent any discussion afterwards: I still may overrule a majority, but I surely will consider the results. [/th]

 

[DeletedUser]

The whole random - repping was getting on my nerves, and I really don't see the point in it anymore, so I voted to scrap the rep system.

 

[DeletedUser]

The whole random - repping was getting on my nerves, and I really don't see the point in it anymore, so I voted to scrap the rep system.

I voted only postitive reps.

If it was the originally I would have nearly 10 more +reps >.>

 

[DeletedUser]

If you enable just +reps, expect to see a lot of post-whores boost in rep just because it can't be countered by people who find their posts annoying/useless, etc.

The -reps are the only thing that are keeping people who make stupid posts from shooting up in rep just because they post a lot.

That and the +rep becomes less significant since it's the only option. Now I hand out +reps pretty sparingly, but when everyone is just +repping left and right it becomes a very useless system.