Reputation

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mesmerale

Banned
Messages
2,560
Role
Diaper Lover, Babyfur, Sissy
Over the course of the past few days, it's been apparent that we've been having a few problems with the Reputation system. While these problems need to be fixed, that isn't my subject content right now.

My desire to create this thread stemmed primarily from two sources. First, the thread is bedwetting all that bad.., created by jter42.

The second source is the blog entry Damn you all, created by Point Blanch.

Both of these threads indicate that people are unhappy with the use of the Reputation system, as well as the level of awareness that the average ADISC member has regarding the Reputation system.

Furthermore, this thread is in the Mature Topics because I want to keep a mature conversation in here. A true discussion of what the Reputation system is. I would also like members to enter this thread will a previously established "mature" mindset towards the subject.

So, what is Reputation? What is the Reputation System?

How should the Reputation System be used? How is it currently being abused?

What does Reputation mean to a person? Is it important, or just code on a desktop?

Perhaps a few people want to say, "Hey, some of these questions are already up and posted by moderators. Why not just read those?"

My reply is that while some of these answers are in those types of threads, they clearly are not being read, or they're being forgotten, so this will be useful.

This is also a medium of discussion. The official thread only discusses Reputation as "What one should do" and "What one shouldn't do". Not what people think of it or what it means to them. This sort of thing should be discussed, and it's surprising that it hasn't already been discussed in the last year. No one finds it a bit strange that a community could go an entire lifespan (albeit only a year in length) without discussing a system that they all use, and that many posts revolve around? (This may be a hyperbole, as I've not done a thorough search of the forums to see if my claim is true. But I have searched a bit, and haven't found any other threads like this as of yet.)

My point is, the Reputation system is something that we all use, some of us don't care about it as much as others, but it's still there.

What do you think it means?

Here's my belief.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Reputation is an indicator of a person's ability to carefully put together a helpful, encouraging, spirit-lifting, or otherwise enjoyable post. If a person receives positive reputation, he or she has posted something that was viewed as helpful, or interesting, or funny, or some other positive quality. If a person receives negative reputation, he or she has posted something thoughtless, or hurtful, or spiteful, or some other negative quality. Negative reputation does not mean that the person posting is a bad person. It means that they are having difficulty understanding the rules, or controlling themselves, or assimilating themselves into the community, or making themselves understood.

The Reputation system is a network of positive and negative reputation sharing which reflects the credibility of a person's posts among a forum or forums. It allows a member to give a particular post of another member positive, neutral (A form of reputation that I feel many members are unaware of), or negative reputation, along with a comment as to why such reputation was given. The system can either be accurate, or flawed, and is moderated because of that. Whether or not the moderation is successful is a matter of opinion.

The Reputation system should be used as an attempt to correct undesirable behavior, or commend desirable behavior displayed within a post. To clarify, positive reputation should be used to commend, and neutral reputation should be used to correct behavior. Negative reputation, when used at all, should only be used to reprimand the blatant disregard of previous attempts to correct or make one aware of undesirable behavior.

The Reputation is currently being abused due to the reasoning behind the giving of reputation. Negative reputation is being given when neutral reputation should be used. The judgment of others is overly critical and such high standards are being reflected in Reputation system. Negative reputation is being given for things that should have been given more thought. More effort in understanding the relevancy of the post before the negative reputation was given. Negative reputation is being given for first-time offenses, where neutral reputation with a comment on what should be fixed would be more than suitable. Lastly, the Reputation system is being used as a means of revenge. It is being treated as a game. Negative reputation is being used to punish a person for things that do not reflect his or her behavior in a post. Negative reputation is being assigned to posts that do not deserve it, simply because it is believed that the person deserved the negative reputation out of spite, or a means of bullying in order to make one feel better about oneself.

To me, Reputation is very important. It reflects what others in the community think of my input, and it gives me a good feeling when I see such comments regarding my posts. I enjoy the feeling that I get knowing that other members appreciate my addition to threads, and to the community as a whole. Where I to receive a negative reputation, I would need a very detailed reason as to why, and I would want to do my best to understand what I'd done to deserve such a reprimand, in the eyes of whichever member(s), and to learn from it. If I was given a negative reputation out of spite, I would be disappointed in the member abusing the Reputation system, and would be upset the the Reputation system could be used for such a spiteful reason.

All in all, the Reputation system is one that can make a person feel very good, or very bad. It can be used to commend people for positive input, or reprimand people for negative input. What it should be used for is primarily to commend for positive input, and then to make one aware of his or her own negative qualities without reprimanding said person.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What does Reputation, and the Reputation system mean to you? What are your responses to the questions above? Why do you feel that way, and by all means, state any other relevant opinion or fact that you have.
 
Messages
3,353
Role
Private
Ruthlessly pared down to its data elements, reputation is the only "peer-reviewed" metric on this system, and it suffers from functional ceiling effects. Meaning if it's over 10, it may as well be a million as reputation over 10 is not displayed.

That said, it's nice to see +rep points for a post because it removes some of the "echo chamber" feeling that comes about when posting on the 'net.

However, as rep is single-blind, its other utility - following people and clustering in groups - is largely lost.
 

Dream

Est. Contributor
Messages
2,296
Role
Diaper Lover, , Carer
First off I want everyone to read the rules thread. http://www.adisc.org/forum/announcements-news/697-rules.html

That well explain why Point Blanch and jter24 got neg rep and moderated for their action.

As for my opinion on reputation. I been neg rep and pos rep before and I don't really care but take this advice. If you do get neg rep, don't bitch about it. Take it like man and move on with your lives because of this rules...

Rule #5 of the rules of reputation system...Do not complain about negative reputation on the public forum!

Reputation comments are reviewed regularly by the admin team, and invalid comments will be removed. People who are found to abuse the rep system regularly, or who post many invalid rep comments, will be temporarily (or permanently!) excluded from giving reputation.
You may request a review of the reputation in the Requests forum. The administrators might reverse it, but that is entirely up to them.
If you complain about your negative rep in public, you will get more negative rep and/or a ban from the site.
The sad part is that Point Blanch's Blog breaks that rules lol.
 

Silikon

Est. Contributor
Messages
392
Role
Private
The way I see it a reputation system will be biased no matter where you go. The more popular member will almost always get more rep than someone who's not as well known and may even contribute more to the site. Anyone here who is set with a moderated status, whether rep or modset, automatically has the rep kiss of death, and will get neg repped for every nitpicky thing possible, making it nearly impossible to get back to a normal or even higher status, even if that person were to make an improvement in behavior.

There is no way to get around this with a reputation system in place, but what I would think would help it is to set the reputation system so that only those with X amount of positive reputation (let's say 5, for example) or higher are allowed to give out either positive or negative reputation. What this would do is cut down on the possibilities of unfair or exaggerated (nitpicky) reputation, limiting it so that only higher ups who know how the rep system works can give out rep where it is needed, instead of having people spam rep left or right and abuse the system.
 

Boogeyman

Est. Contributor
Messages
2,003
Role
Diaper Lover, , Carer
Why not get rid of rep entirely? The mods are doing a great job.
 

Mesmerale

Banned
Messages
2,560
Role
Diaper Lover, Babyfur, Sissy
The more green things the better?

I like green :D
Why? What makes it so important to you?

Ruthlessly pared down to its data elements, reputation is the only "peer-reviewed" metric on this system, and it suffers from functional ceiling effects. Meaning if it's over 10, it may as well be a million as reputation over 10 is not displayed.
Meaning that once it's hidden, it's use in judging a person is skewed? Or something different?

That said, it's nice to see +rep points for a post because it removes some of the "echo chamber" feeling that comes about when posting on the 'net.
Could you explain the "echo chamber" feeling, please?

However, as rep is single-blind, its other utility - following people and clustering in groups - is largely lost.
What makes it's other utility important, out of curiosity. Why would following people be significant?

Lukiieeee. My OP covered this! That's the emotionless, concrete-and-explanatory-but-without-opinion version.

What do you think Reputation is?

First off I want everyone to read the rules thread. http://www.adisc.org/forum/announcements-news/697-rules.html

That well explain why Point Blanch and jter24 got neg rep and moderated for their action.

As for my opinion on reputation. I been neg rep and pos rep before and I don't really care but take this advice. If you do get neg rep, don't bitch about it. Take it like man and move on with your lives because of this rules...

Rule #5 of the rules of reputation system...Do not complain about negative reputation on the public forum!



The sad part is that Point Blanch's Blog breaks that rules lol.
I used those two members as a reference, and as an explanation as to why I made this thread. I didn't ask why they got moderated or got neg rep. I didn't state any view as to whether they deserved it. And I didn't ask for an opinion on either of those topics.

As for your opinion on reputation: Have you always not cared about it? Did something change in your viewpoint after awhile on TBDL/ADISC?

The way I see it a reputation system will be biased no matter where you go. The more popular member will almost always get more rep than someone who's not as well known and may even contribute more to the site. Anyone here who is set with a moderated status, whether rep or modset, automatically has the rep kiss of death, and will get neg repped for every nitpicky thing possible, making it nearly impossible to get back to a normal or even higher status, even if that person were to make an improvement in behavior.

There is no way to get around this with a reputation system in place, but what I would think would help it is to set the reputation system so that only those with X amount of positive reputation (let's say 5, for example) or higher are allowed to give out either positive or negative reputation. What this would do is cut down on the possibilities of unfair or exaggerated (nitpicky) reputation, limiting it so that only higher ups who know how the rep system works can give out rep where it is needed, instead of having people spam rep left or right and abuse the system.
Wouldn't that create more of a bias? It'd create a group who could give rep, and a group who could not. One group would have a vast amount of power, the other, not so much.
 
Last edited:

Jewbacca

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,076
Role
Other
Moderation is the key, but more-so self-moderation. For some reason, people don't really understand the power of a warning. People seem to see things as black and white, and don't realize the effect that the several shades of gray have. and also why do people hide behind the anonymity of rep. I, for the most part, make sure to sign my rep, whether it be positive or negative, and I make sure to give a rather descriptive explanation of why I gave the neg rep. And I always make that the person has been warned beforehand prior to neg-repping.

Rule #5 of the rules of reputation system...Do not complain about negative reputation on the public forum!

The sad part is that Point Blanch's Blog breaks that rules lol.
Actually that's where you're wrong, Point's blog isn't breaking the rules, because a blog is not in the forum, yes it's part of the site, but a blog is not a forum, because blogs are personal, and not group input. And technically you could in fact complain about rep in the regular's Vip or staff forum and not be against the rules, because those are technically private forums.
 

Mesmerale

Banned
Messages
2,560
Role
Diaper Lover, Babyfur, Sissy
Moderation is the key, but more-so self-moderation. For some reason, people don't really understand the power of a warning. People seem to see things as black and white, and don't realize the effect that the several shades of gray have. and also why do people hide behind the anonymity of rep. I, for the most part, make sure to sign my rep, whether it be positive or negative, and I make sure to give a rather descriptive explanation of why I gave the neg rep. And I always make that the person has been warned beforehand prior to neg-repping.
So it's about self control and awareness that not everything deserves harsh rep judgment?

And I deliberately do not sign my posts, even though it is usually clear that it was me, out of respect of the reasons that reputation is anonymous. I don't sign no matter what kind of rep I give.
 

Fire2box

Est. Contributor
Messages
10,934
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
There should really just be a set amount to how much rep you can get from one post, Like 3 positive or 3 negative.

The biggest problem with the system is that is there are no real rules to giving out rep. I can give out +rep for whatever reason same with negative ones, of course they can be overturned by Moo if he thinks its unfair. But really it can be rather easy to point out something funny or useful or something bad. Really everyone has different views, I got positive rep and negative rep on the same bloody post once.

Yet they both stayed, so was it a good post or was it a bad post or was it just people being you know whats?
 

Mesmerale

Banned
Messages
2,560
Role
Diaper Lover, Babyfur, Sissy
There should really just be a set amount to how much rep you can get from one post, Like 3 positive or 3 negative.

The biggest problem with the system is that is there are no real rules to giving out rep. I can give out +rep for whatever reason same with negative ones, of course they can be overturned by Moo if he thinks its unfair. But really it can be rather easy to point out something funny or useful or something bad. Really everyone has different views, I got positive rep and negative rep on the same bloody post once.

Yet they both stayed, so was it a good post or was it a bad post or was it just people being you know whats?
While I agree with you overall, this is closer to what I want to avoid. It's fine to point out what you think the issues are. But finding a solution is for another thread.
 

Jewbacca

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,076
Role
Other
So it's about self control and awareness that not everything deserves harsh rep judgment?

And I deliberately do not sign my posts, even though it is usually clear that it was me, out of respect of the reasons that reputation is anonymous. I don't sign no matter what kind of rep I give.
yes to the first part, but for the second part, I find that too many people hide behind the veil of rep for neg rep too often. I just don't see what exactly people are afraid of when attaching their name to some negative criticism. If they get neg repped back, it's easily disputable, the only reason that I can think of is that the people truly don't feel that the neg rep that they're giving is deserved.

but there is a difference between being fully anonymous throughout all your rep and choosing to be anonymous when it is convenient.
 

Dream

Est. Contributor
Messages
2,296
Role
Diaper Lover, , Carer
As for your opinion on reputation: Have you always not cared about it? Did something change in your viewpoint after awhile on TBDL/ADISC?
No, nothing changes my opinion. To me, reputation isn't a big deal. Just because someone has over 100 rep doesn't make them any better then someone with only 10 rep. It the way you act on the site that matters and reputation is just a award for it. If your going be a dumbass and created a thread where you post the same fucking thing over and over again for 8 fucking pages, then your going to get neg rep for it but if you act smart, and post kind and intelligent thing then you well get pos rep for it. Reputation is only award, it not that big of a deal.
 

Mesmerale

Banned
Messages
2,560
Role
Diaper Lover, Babyfur, Sissy
yes to the first part, but for the second part, I find that too many people hide behind the veil of rep for neg rep too often. I just don't see what exactly people are afraid of when attaching their name to some negative criticism. If they get neg repped back, it's easily disputable, the only reason that I can think of is that the people truly don't feel that the neg rep that they're giving is deserved.

but there is a difference between being fully anonymous throughout all your rep and choosing to be anonymous when it is convenient.
I understand. I think what we're referencing is the situations where a member will give a positive rep with the comment: Funny! Made me smile. :D ~ [name]

And then a negative rep with the comment: Why would you even say that, go crawl back into your hole.

Right?

No, nothing changes my opinion. To me, reputation isn't a big deal. Just because someone has over 100 rep doesn't make them any better then someone with only 10 rep. It the way you act on the site that matters and reputation is just a award for it. If your going be a dumbass and created a thread where you post the same fucking thing over and over again for 8 fucking pages, then your going to get neg rep for it but if you act smart, and post kind and intelligent thing then you well get pos rep for it. Reputation is only award, it not that big of a deal.
(All merged. =) )

Aren't awards given when one is aware of what they are doing?

And isn't punishment only given when one has already been made aware not do something? If a child draws on the wall, he is warned not to do it again. If he does it again, that is when he is punished, no?
 
Last edited:

Silikon

Est. Contributor
Messages
392
Role
Private
Wouldn't that create more of a bias? It'd create a group who could give rep, and a group who could not. One group would have a vast amount of power, the other, not so much.
Not necessarily because the people in that group (which would still be regulars I assume, but just regulars who can give out rep) would be getting rep from users who know how not to use it, so people who are able to get to a point where they can hand out rep have shown good posting habits, that way you don't have the random guy with no rep handing out negative rep because it disagreed with them or anything like that.

Of course it wouldn't be perfect and there would still be bias, but there would probably be less drama over the rep system if this happened.
 

Fire2box

Est. Contributor
Messages
10,934
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
While I agree with you overall, this is closer to what I want to avoid. It's fine to point out what you think the issues are. But finding a solution is for another thread.
Oh okay...

Well then....

I think the reputation system is useless, pointless and is clearly being used in a bad way. But in the end I don't even care anymore since I gone as high as I possible can go on the rep scale. My views can sometimes upset people for all kinds of reasons, however if I let that stop me from posting my thoughts then I most likely wouldn't be able to post anything at all.

I wonder if more people then just me feel like we can't post what we really want to without fear of being neg-raped into moderation and have all our posts flaged thus taking time away from the moderators and just over all making this site worse every passing year.

::Rant over::
 

Mesmerale

Banned
Messages
2,560
Role
Diaper Lover, Babyfur, Sissy
Not necessarily because the people in that group (which would still be regulars I assume, but just regulars who can give out rep) would be getting rep from users who know how not to use it, so people who are able to get to a point where they can hand out rep have shown good posting habits, that way you don't have the random guy with no rep handing out negative rep because it disagreed with them or anything like that.

Of course it wouldn't be perfect and there would still be bias, but there would probably be less drama over the rep system if this happened.
Alright... But again, this is getting more into solution and less into opinion, so moving on. :)

Well, considering I started and wrote the majority of the content for that article... ;)
And you mean to tell me that you didn't be sure to keep the wording detached and monotonous so as to keep the content away from your personal beliefs and more geared toward the betterment of ADISC as a whole?

Oh okay...

Well then....

I think the reputation system is useless, pointless and is clearly being used in a bad way. But in the end I don't even care anymore since I gone as high as I possible can go on the rep scale. My views can sometimes upset people for all kinds of reasons, however if I let that stop me from posting my thoughts then I most likely wouldn't be able to post anything at all.

I wonder if more people then just me feel like we can't post what we really want to without fear of being neg-raped into moderation and have all our posts flaged thus taking time away from the moderators and just over all making this site worse every passing year.

::Rant over::
Alright...

But isn't it possible to state what you really want to state without wording it in a way that makes it worthy of negative rep?
 

Fire2box

Est. Contributor
Messages
10,934
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
But isn't it possible to state what you really want to state without wording it in a way that makes it worthy of negative rep?
It could be but that's not always the case. What is always the case is you can not make everyone happy at the same time, hench why you can ALWAYS get negative rep at ANY time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top