Let's go over THE RULES

[Darkfinn]

Howdy folks.

As many of you know... I am REALLY sick of this whole rep game. VIP, not VIP... VIP, not VIP... appeal appeal appeal... blah blah blah. It wastes my time, it wastes the Webmaster's time, it is juvenile, and really lame.

From what I can see there is a certain group of people... we'll term them the "Neg-Rep Mafia"... who are either:

1) Not quite clear on the rules governing usage of the rep system and how to tell the difference between a rude, malicious, and provocative post (deserving of neg-rep) and a post that is merely someone stating their opinion and point of view.

OR

2) Purposefully misusing the rep system to keep other members down and advance their own agenda... whatever it may be.

I prefer to stick with #1... because I personally dislike the thought that any member here would target another for simply speaking their mind.

So... to help clarify things here is a snippet from THE RULES that covers when and how neg-rep should be given.

Negative reputation should only be a last resort, for people who have screwed up, or are deliberately breaking the rules. If neither of the above applies, you should give them gray (neutral, 0-point) rep first, and explain in your rep comment what they did wrong. If they continue doing it, you can give them negative reputation for it. On the other hand, if they are seriously breaking the rules of ADISC, you should give them negative reputation immediately, and report their post to moderators.

Valid reasons to give negative reputation:

1. Insulting, attacking, ridiculing other members of ADISC.
2. Spamming the forum with messages that are against the rules.
3. Disrupting serious discussions/threads with silly or spam messages.
4. Posting obvious lies. Please think carefully before doing this because not everything that seems unbelievable to you must be a lie. Sometimes, things which seem completely crazy are, actually, the truth! Some people lead lives that most of us wouldn't believe...
5. Causing drama by purposely posting offensive or controversial messages. Remember that everyone has the right to present their own opinion in a mature manner. Doing so is not a valid reason for neg rep!


Do not give negative reputation if:

1. You disagree with someone's opinion.
2. You hate someone on a personal level.
3. You did not understand someone's joke, but the joke itself is not causing any harm.


Do not write offensive comments or insults into your rep comment! Instead, give suggestions on how the member can improve their behavior! If you curse at someone in a rep comment, or otherwise abuse the system, the rep will be reversed, and you may well be banned from using the rep system.

I would put that whole thing in my signature if I could... but alas I am limited to three lines.

Questions, comments... discuss, please.

 

[dogboy]

I've had it misused on me, though only once. I made a joke about Canada and someone didn't get that it was a joke. As I write this, my whole family is in Northern Toronto at our cottage. What concerns me is that adisc members can be drunk on their ass reading and writing threads, and negative repping members while under the influence. it's like hit and run driving. Who takes responsibility?

As someone said on Raccoon's thread, both positive and negative rep should be limited to 2 per person per thread. After that it becomes a contest. If you said something good, fine you get 2. If you've made an ass out of yourself, -2. Why go beyond that, and it would slow down gaining VIP status. It also would keep the foolish from accumulating -15 from one careless statement, and give them a more positive chance to see why what they said was offensive to the stated standards of adisc.

Personally, I have become so much more involved in my own world than here, and once school starts up for me, I really would like to get more sleep, so the cyber world may be seeing less of me if I keep to my plan. Ah yes, sleep........damn school.

 

[WoodlandWanderer]

I just thought of a few ideas and it seems like one of them is shared by dogboy. That being putting a limit on the amount of neg rep that can be given for any single post / thread.

My other suggestion would be having all rep comments approved before they are given. This is obviously a burden on staff members (I don't know how much rep is given a day) so maype it could all go into a request pool and various trusted people could be given the ability to access it.
The problem here is if one of the "neg-reppers" got in and were to dissapprove all the positive rep.

just my two cents.

 

[Darkfinn]

I don't think any amount of discussion or debate is going to change the nature of the system. At this point my primary goal is the spread of education and awareness.

If we take steps to ensure that everyone is aware of the rules and understands how the system should be used the number of incidents where rep is misused can be reduced.

 

[WoodlandWanderer]

good luck, ironically posting the neg rep rules everywhere would count as spamming and just earn you some of it.

 

[Dawes]

I'm going to describe a scenario to you:

Yesterday, I was sitting on the toilet, happily reading my book. I turned a few pages, did some humming, got drawn into the story. When I was done, I cleansed my rectum, deposited the used paper in the bowl, and then flushed. I watched as my daily children spun in circles and then jettisoned themselves down the drain. "Glub glub," said the toilet, and I picked up my book and went about my business.

Rep, you see, is like that, whether it's positive and negative. It can be good and enjoyable, or it can be painful and sudden, but either way, I flush the concept of it out of my brain a few mintues after I see it.

Clarification: Reputation points mean nothing more than digested food. They are shit and worth shit, so while it's nice to get positive rep, does it really fucking matter? While some people may think we are defined by our positive and negative numbers, we are actually defined by what we do and what we contribute. That comes at a risk, and one we should all be willing to take to cement our individuality.

Do we need twenty threads about it explaining the misuse or the use of reputation? Here's the way it works: 1) Click on the hour-glass, 2) Give some points, 3) Make a reason. People are going to use it wrong or their going to use it wisely. What we need to do as posters is be sure that we are giving people the tools by which to use it wisely. That means that we need to check ourselves before we wreck ourselves; that means we need to accept responsibility for what we say, and if it brings us a negative reputation point or twelve, so fucking be it.

Read the big-ass annoying, obnoxious, insanely over-emphasized capital letters:

LET'S STOP GIVING A SHIT ABOUT OUR REPUTATION, WHICH IS ENTIRELY SUBJECTIVE AND PRONE TO FLAWS.

Let's stop wasting our time crying tears about rep. Let's stop trying to be the superhero who teaches everybody how to use it. Let's stop bringing forward a focus on something that matters about as much as the shit I took last week that burned just a little bit. Let's stop giving a fuck about it, because this is a community based on communication, not on happy little super-fun green and red squares.

Too many red squares? Sad to be you, sucks to have an opinion, but suffer it.

Not enough green squares? Suck some dicks or play nice.

Any questions?

 

[h3g3l]

Rules are meaningless if they have no teeth.

Change is meaningless without a champion.

Data are meaningless if they do not demonstrate what their author supposes.

I propose we move to the "dick-sucking model" Rance has laid (huh, huh) out above. We should call it ... Rance-ID.

 

[Darkfinn]

Thank you Hegel... you saved me from having to post a rant on how some of us actually might give a damn about our standing here... VIP or otherwise. I would push the little red button enough to take his status away, then ask him how it feels... but that would make me into exactly what I am trying to fight.

 

[Dawes]

It's unfortunate that you express it that way, Darkfinn.

Your status here is defined by how you speak to others. It is defined by how you treat your fellow forum-members, by how you express yourself as a supportive member of the community. That status, while it is reflected by numbers, is not bound to these numbers.

One of the risks of expressing our individuality is the fact that people may not and will not always support it, understand it, or fairly accept it. This is where the majority of negative reputation comes from, and it's a viable result to anything that we say. Trying to police the reputation beyond how it's policed now threatens to undermine the flexibility of expression through both our words and our power to give and recieve reputation.

 

[Darkfinn]

I do understand what you are saying Dawes. I'm not asking for any more enforcement or changes in policy, or anything of the sort. I've seen that I cannot win that battle... and the wise warrior knows when to retire.

I am merely attempting to give everyone an opportunity to read this site's policies and examine their own judgments. In hopes that increased awareness will lead to a reduction in instances where rep is misused.

Call it a Public Service Announcement. Kinda like "Click it or ticket", "Booze it and lose it", or etc.

 

[Scritcher]

To be frank, I don't think we should have a rep system in the fist place. I may be a newbie here, but I've been on other forums where they had no rep system. These forums worked just fine, and people were judged on their character, their actions, and not numbers.

 

[Dawes]

But misuse is in itself a whole subjective topic, Darkfinn. People can be informed all they want -- when their opinions get in the way, though, they're going to feel as though their use of the reputation is totally proper.

It's a losing battle, frankly, because there are way too many human factors involved. As long as someone submits negative reputation that isn't backed up by "ur a faget" or "i hoap u chalk on a bonir," then it's likely going to be "valid."

Juxtaposing proper reasoning for negative reputation between 1) the original poster's expression, 2) the rep-giver's feelings on the matter, 3) the lost communication between the two of them, and 4) the opinions and self-righteousness of those involved is nigh impossible for both mods and members.

Truth of the matter? Negative reputation exists as long as there is positive reputation. The only true and effective preventative measure? To be sure that we, as original posters, are posting our opinion in a respectful, clear, visible, and mature manner.

 

[Darkfinn]

I suppose this brings to a head the whole anonymity of the system.

A prime example: I was neg-repped by someone yesterday. They were courageous enough to put their name with it... so I PMed said individual, explained my point of view, why I had said what I said, and pointed to the invalidity of their logic and reasoning behind giving me the neg-rep. They conceded the point and removed the rep.

I didn't have to rant and rave... I didn't even have to tell a mod. We addressed the issue like mature adults, and resolved it without needing outside assistance. I get the feeling that if I could have a face-to-face with every person that decided to press the button... our issues could be sorted out in short order.

 

[Fire2box]

The only true and effective preventative measure? To be sure that we, as original posters, are posting our opinion in a respectful, clear, visible, and mature manner.

Well there goes all the debating then, especially the political and gay rights. Since no matter what you do in those someone is always going to disagree with you and find your point of view offensive or not respectful.

Such as a topic criticizing Obama for his lack of action for real change. I forgot who started the topic but everyone attacked him/her for supporting Obama then pretty much going okay, what the hell Obama? You say this yet you don't even try to progress towards it.

The person wasn't attacking anyone yet most other people that posted in that topic were all bent out of shape about it.


Also I doubt Moo likes all the rep reviews he has to do (peachy now reviews them as well). God only knows how many people are going "Teacher Teacher Billy hit me!"

 

[Dawes]

Well there goes all the debating then, especially the political and gay rights. Since no matter what you do in those someone is always going to disagree with you and find your point of view offensive or not respectful.

Such as a topic criticizing Obama for his lack of action for real change. I forgot who started the topic but everyone attacked him/her for supporting Obama then pretty much going okay, what the hell Obama? You say this yet you don't even try to progress towards it.

The person wasn't attacking anyone yet most other people that posted in that topic were all bent out of shape about it.


Also I doubt Moo likes all the rep reviews he has to do (peachy now reviews them as well). God only knows how many people are going "Teacher Teacher Billy hit me!"

I can almost guarantee that it was because this person expressed their information poorly in a thread devoted to a very touchy subject. You don't have to be a genius to realize that when you express a less desireable opinion, you need to do so gently and respectfully. There's no reason that a proper debate should end in negative rep, and if it does, it's because someone communicated themselves badly.

A lamb isn't going to leap into a room full of tigers and scream, "I DON'T THINK TIGERS SHOULD EAT LAMBS," is he?

None of us around here are opposed to different opinions. I am almost goddamned positive of that. But feeling like this does not keep people from wanting to act on behalf of their own opinions when someone else expresses an opinion in a shitty and stupid manner.

Accountability, people. Accountability.

 

[Darkfinn]

A lamb isn't going to leap into a room full of tigers and scream, "I DON'T THINK TIGERS SHOULD EAT LAMBS," is he?

Funny you should mention that. I'm no lamb.

None of us around here are opposed to different opinions. I am almost goddamned positive of that.

I would respectfully ask that you reconsider. You'll find a lot of people here that are opposed to the opinions of we who believe that certain individuals should: grow up, shut up, man up, move out, get a job, get a life, and generally quit being such namby-pamby whiners.

Accountability, people. Accountability.

Abso-fucking-loutely.

 

[Dawes]

I would respectfully ask that you reconsider. You'll find a lot of people here that are opposed to the opinions of we who believe that certain individuals should: grow up, shut up, man up, move out, get a job, get a life, and generally quit being such namby-pamby whiners.

While they may be opposed, I don't think many people are going to toss negative reputation in somebody's direction merely for having a differing opinion. That is, of course, unless that opinion is brought forth in a really shitty way.

While I don't mean to personalize this conversation, I happen to hold a lot of alternative opinions compared to those popularly viewed on this website, and I strongly support them. In that case, I pick and choose my battles, because based on my opinion, I am accountable for picking and choosing them. One small soldier shouldn't try to take on an army. When I do choose to verbalize my opinions, though, I do so in such a way that has never -- to my knowledge -- fetched me a negative reputation point. I've had a few negative reputation points, but they were from 1) flaunting reputation, 2) posting something "annoying" in a thread about a song or something, and something else.

But never from my opinions. Why? I understand that I need to filter myself to more properly represent my opinion.

If all of our members did that more often, the negative reputation would cease to be tossed around like dicks in a circle jerk.

(And no, you certainly aren't a lamb! )

 

[Calico]

I have been given neutral reps than negatives. I don't see anything wrong with that because it's not stated in the rules about it.

Why don't you just report it to the mods if you think you have recieved an unfair negative rep. I am getting sick and tired of people complaining about it and I am starting neg rep them about it as well but this time I felt this wasn't a bitching, this was more of a discussion about the rules. I don't care of I get banned from the system, I am just getting sick of this.

If you don't like getting neg reps, change your tone and attitude and find a nicer way of telling people things and a nicer way of expressing yourself and you can still be honest but you find different words to use. There's difference between honesty and being a dick. If someone isn't willing to change their way, don't complain about their rep system. It bugs me to see people complaining about their problems when there is a solution to it but they refuse to change their way. I would not want my child coming home from school and crying to me about the teacher taking his hat because I would not want to hear it. He chose to wear the hat inside, the teacher warned him, he didn't listen, so she finally took it. Who's fault was that? It's the same with the rep system, don't like getting a negative rep, change your tone, use different words so you aren't being a dick and that isn't lying because you are still being honest but you are using different words.

Here is an example, instead of me telling my friends they are being stupid or what they are doing is stupid, I tell them "it's silly" or they are being silly. I am still being honest but I do not want to put them down because if my own friend called me a name, bye bye because I want friends who respect me, not ones who abuse me. I blocked someone online when he told me "Then don't be an idiot." I don't need to be disrespected just because I voted for a different president than he did.


Here is my rule I have for everyone, even my own kid will have this rule when I become a parent. It doesn't matter how stupid the rules are or how dumb society is but if you wish to break rules, accept the consequences and be willing to take it. If my kid wants to wear his hat indoors in school, he has to be willing to lose his hat from the teacher when she takes it from him because I do not want to see him coming home from school and complaining me about it expecting me to make his teacher give it back to him. So if someone wishes to be a dick here, be willing to get a neg rep but don't make a thread about it complaining about it. Do not bitch about something you caused and that is your fault that could have been avoided. Neg reps can be avoided, just change your tone and change your choice of words you use. If you feel it's a unfair rep you have gotten, that's what the mods are for.

 

[Hex]

Since it was my neg rep that provoked this thread, I may as well post in this thread (despite it basically being a repeat of many many earlier threads). This is not about my neg-rep, which was incorrect, and has been removed, but about the rep system in general. (And I'm not among the neg rep mafia, before someone accuses me of it. I've given out 36 +rep, 2 grey rep and 5 -rep, and before this, my last -rep was for this post back in February, which I think everyone will agree was out of line.)

The major problem with rep is their are two goals of the rep system, which sometimes do align, but at other times contradict each other.

Role models

This was the original intention of the VIP system, and since rep is linked to VIP, it's also one of the goals of the rep system.

The main thing about this goal, is it's an attempt to promote a mature attitude about things. So when I negrepped Darkfinn, I had just had a fight with my parents and took it out on you. Which was wrong, but you took it up maturely, by sending a PM explaining your point, which achieved it's intentions (removal of the neg rep). This is good from the point of the role model goal, unlike this thread.

+rep worthy in this is basically writing good posts
-rep worthy in this is (to quote the rep dialog): drama, flaming, spam, memes, or otherwise negative
^ As you can see this definition of neg rep worthy things, which is more noticeable as it is at the point of action, takes a much broader view of neg rep worthy things.


Trust

Unfortunately, VIP has gotten confused as a measure of trust (something which cannot be expressed by either an aggregration of opinions or numerically, two things it is trying to do it. Trust is very much 1 to 1) and as rep is directly linked to VIP status, rep in turn gets involved as a measure of trust.

+rep in this system is: Popularity contest
-rep in this system is: Pedo-ish or rule breaking behavior.

So to use Darkfinn as an example (I'm picking on him as this is his thread): Under the trust system, Darkfinn should definitely be a VIP/have massive rep (the two are practically the same). He's long proven himself, as any pedo who was under the amount of attention that Darkfinn regularly brings upon himself would get caught out quickly.

Under the "Role models" system, the case is less clear. While he does have very good posts and advice, he often handles things immaturely. Such as by posting his opinions on neg rep in totally unrelated threads.

(Disclaimer: I do understand his frustration that the rep was anonymous in the other thread, and I signed my rep so as to give him a chance to sort it out properly if he felt it was inappropriate).

Also:

I've had a few negative reputation points, but they were from 1) flaunting reputation

Rep > You

 

[h3g3l]

None of us around here are opposed to different opinions. I am almost goddamned positive of that.

Unfortunately, this is untrue in at least one instance. Hence your wise use of "almost."

One of the central points that we seem to return to when discussing negative reputation is a frustration that I share, and that is the lack of a signature. This is why I sign all my negative, positive, and neutral reputation comments with an identifying mark. Were this done consistently or programatically enforced, I imagine the issues surrounding the rep system would halve immediately.

ADISC is not a GDSS. As people, rather than ideas and outcomes, are prone to reputation gains and losses, we should not run in a GDSS-similar format.