Reputation and it's Flaws

you just dont listen...

it does eliminate the rep value, there is no such thing as rep with the like system. the only thing that can be close to rep is the person posting and how well known they are in EP, not by the amount of gems they have or posts. it's a way to show a like to a post. not to show a like to a person or user.

 

Excuse me? With all due respect, that sounds rather obnoxious. :/

Um... I didn't call it rep-value. I said "Like-value." I said it was on a smaller scale. If you read my post again, you'll see where I said that:

 

if there was no system, there would be no order. if there was no order, there would be chaos. therefore; the collapse of EP.


I'm done with this... i knew the like system would get some attention, i didn't think it would get such negative attention...

i also noticed, it seems to be the people with the most rep who are against the rep system. give it some thought.

 

I'm not being negative towards the idea. I just think it would cause more problems.

Example of my internal rep system.

Biohazard jonny. I have no idea how many gems he has, but I bet it isn't red. After what he did for me I look at him as if he has 12 red gems. See that doesn't effect anyone but me and maybe him if he reads this.

Chaos would not come from no system. People could be themselves.

I only have one more idea and that is awards kinda like the escapist. I've put no thought into it, but it would probably fail. Hey just a thought.

-- Sent from my Palm Pre using Forums

 

I have been ignoring this thread for far too long and I think it's high time that I got my two cents out about anything, since it seems to me that I tend to ignore these kinds of issues for the most part. I have spent some time reading through this thread, more skimming than anything, and reflected on a new system with some ideas in this thread and some of my own. There is a way to save this system rather than dumping it, because if it is used correctly, the rep system could be a useful commodity to this site and community.

Spoiler: A friggin' essay

I am horrible guilty of doing this, though I've only done it once....I still ensure that my windows are locked so that someone doesn't come into my room at night and breathe on me while I sleep.

As for how to fix it, it is easy. Make it mandatory that all rep is to be explained and then have mods screen the reasons. There are two flaws to this plan, being that moderators now have more on their plate.. That, forgive me mods, is a fairly minor problem. It is hardly as though reputations for reputable posts are made everyday and those that are not can be easily identified due to the lack of any content that would merit any sort of recognition. The latter of the two could be easily written off and declined.

When I first started reading this thread, I recognized the problem of having post count adding to reputation points. I also recognized it's value. A user with many posts has been around a lot longer than a new guy or even a dummy account used to gain reputation quickly. It was likely planned to prevent users from doing just that; making a dummy account and adding to their reputation quickly.

I entertained the idea of weighing the amount of reputation you have and the amount of posts you have to decide how much reputation you give, but that would be too complicated to implement and might not be able to suite everyone here as well as others. It would have to be something like an average of 10% of one one thousandth of your post count times 90% or your reputation divided by two in it's simplest form.

[(PC/1000)*0.1+0.9*REP]/2=How much given :derpe: too much mathing.

To tell the truth, I would actually go with the popular opinion of just removing it from the equation all together. If the first solution, to approve each addition to reputation, was implemented, dummy accounts would also be spotted with relative ease.

This part takes a personal sense of honor to not give into. I know that we have all given out a free rep point at some time just because we figured that the poster was pretty fun or something like that. This can, again, be fixed by regulating the addition of reputation and by adding to the rules an official wrong doing. And it is. Though it sounds minor, if a regulation system is installed, then it could be called spamming.

Though it is true that reputation is intimidating and discouraging when stood up to a new user, it is only when it is abused. When I first joined and the rep system wasn't widely used or known of, those with more than two gems stood out to me and looked impressive. For example, whenever Testyal1 posted I lent him my ear since he had four gems. Whenever Grey Nightmare posted, I checked to see if the clouds had parted That was how the reputation system was meant to be used, but now the system has been cheapened. A new member can clearly see the social circles and takes the amount of gems as a gap. Rather than being a sign of respect, it became an ivory tower. New members feel only intimidation when seeing these huge stacks of gems (and if they are less serious, they wonder if the users are compensating for anything). If we are to truly fix the reputation system, we must all start over. I'm sure there should be exceptions, such as instead of deleting everything, reputable posts are kept in the system. Again, this means more work for the moderators and admin. (I'm sure at this point Derpy Hooves is shooting daggers at me!)

Problem five is merely a summary of all the above problems. I believe that by regulating the addition of reputation points, all of this could be avoided.

TL;DR REGULATE STUFF!

TL;DR for MODS AND ADMIN MOAR WORK!!!!!


And that concludes my thoughts on this matter.

 

You're like me tenor.

This is like one of my serious times on this site. I'm never serious, I prefer care free.

But yeah topic. Removing is the only thing I can see that will fix it.

I think my post went crazy on my phone.

 

Please excuse me saying this, I honestly mean no offense but that was a bit rude of you to just say and leave it like that without elaborating, especially when the post you replied to was clearly written with some heart and thought put into it.

I don't know if you've noticed, but it seems the people who had very high rep (myself included) who had opposed the rep system have already set their rep to none, as represented by the grey gem that I, ePONY, Pixel, Saikyo, and a few others have.

I think that basically destroys any possible negative intentions created by the people with high reputation who oppose the rep system on this forum.

 

I tried doing that a long time ago but never figured out how :derpe:

 

I just told you how on Skype. :]

 

Should I +rep you for that? :derpe:

 

No one will see it. ROFLskate.

-- Sent from my Palm Pre using Forums

 

OH YOU.
​

Reminds me of that phrase where the tree falls down and no one hears it or something.

 

If a tree falls in the forest and nopony is around to hear it, will a hipster buy it's album?

perhaps users should have to confirm their own rep, by "accepting" or "rejecting" given reputation depending on it's context and whether they feel deserving of it, I foresee problems with that already but its where I would start.

 

Thats what I said. But just because I don't find rep from a joke doesn't mean the person I denied it from feels the same way.

 

Usually, it is people who have more from a system that want it to stay, and those that have less that want it to go. Here, I see a reverse trend. Somehow, this amuses me.

In any case, this rep system of ours is a strange one. There are those that care about it, and give the amount of gifs one has to load some value, and there are those that do not, and could care less what number of likes, rep+, or whatever, they have. The latter care about actual reputation, which is often significantly different.

As such, when a system is either almost entirely ignored or serves to misguide people, it should probably go. After all, when people begin to respect people because of the gems instead of people having gems because people respect them, has the system not began to reverse it's purpose?

 

All of everything you just said.

I even admitted having that problem when I showed up. I tried my hardest to get gems by trying to be other people. I looked at people like Zephyr as though he were a god because of little gems. Only after being around a bit did I learn not to care. I still wanted gems, but I was myself and the gems did come. recently though I see this system becoming a hassle. New people will come in and see red gems, green gems, purple gems, and even the grey gems. They will split everyone in to groups, obviously the red being the "best" and so on down the line. This grey gem might cause issues to. At first when I saw it I thought saikyo got such a rep boost that the gems rolled over. I now know I'm wrong, but if I could make that mistake others could as well.

I really hope the system goes. Just no system. No like button, nothing but your mind making a rep system.

Internal rep system is better then fake gems.​

 

I am going to say we tweak it.
I believe it doesn't need to be removed, but just modified to be more fair.
So with saying this, i would like a gray gem since i am against the current system.

 

Thank you for telling me this, i will go do that now.

 

We've pretty much made our decision, it'll become apparent soon.

~ THREAD CLOSED