Usergroups and Promotions

Thanks dig.

Oh did i mention, i can't see who gives me rep!! I feel like a teenager who just found out about B3D and signed up last week to know what anisotropic filtering is!!!!!!! Only with the biggest..... post count.......

 

Well, I was one, tho I forgot you couldn't see them anymore and didn't sign it as is my usual practice with folks who can't see them. Some generic sympathy message or other.

 

Posting bad threads about to other users, regardless of the content, is a bit of an open invitation for them to act in the only way that they can against such posters (ie. PM or reputation) - in such cases, the appropriate and really, only, people to be made aware of the offending threads should be the moderators and admin.

 

Which i always do.

Do you not think that taking 700 points away from me was a bit much?

As i said, i don't care about the points, it's the principle, and the fact that a big -700 hit reverted me to this Homo Erectus kind of status, deleting all my private messages, with a smaller inbox, can't delete my posts, can't see who gives me rep...



(and yes i chose my words very carefully)

 

Well, Neeyik, it's not exactly like the standards have been laid out all that clearly by site staff. Go back to the first post in this thread. "Abusing" it says, without pouring any content into it. I did start a thread about my own personal standards for giving neg rep, and others contributed to it, some explicitly stating they'd use whatever standards they saw fit --and I don't recall site staff hopping in to correct that either.

So I understand we're all feeling our way along, and a generic statement like "abusing" can be handy so as not to hem in too much freedom to act as the thing evolves. I'm not a big fan of "forum lawyers" either. All I'm saying is that remedial action in such an environment might be tempered a bit by recognition that we are all feeling our way along. The entire system is barely three months old.

 

Yes it's like i've been aborted without asking me for permission!! ... no wait...

Ok it's time to turn this thread into a (please delete as appropriate) Iraq/Christian/Abort/US-Economy/Stem-Cell-Research thread. Alternatively, into a PS3vsX360vsRevolutionvsPC/Sony'sdoomed/MS's-a-monopoly/Nintendo-are-teh-kiddy thread.

I miss the old days, when it was all about GeforcevsRadeonvsParhelia.

 

Come to think of it, what then is the purpose of neg rep? I would agree "hey, help me out I hate this guy" would be inappropriate. But if "geez, look at that, how disgusting!" is also inappropriate, I'm at something of a loss to figure out why we have neg rep at all --your point above seems to suggest that report bad post ought to cover it. If you look at my first post here http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=23068 I basically disarmed myself from smacking someone for an egregious post aimed at me.

 

Hmm, I see that I didn't fully type out what I was thinking. I was referring to directing other users ("friends") via PM to posts which are abusive towards the user in question - in such cases, mods should be noted immediately, rather than potentially generating a negative rep frenzy. On the other hand, if another user is typically posting generally inflammatory or childish remarks in the odd post or two, then that clearly warrants some negative rep from other people. There is clearly a fine line between the two and I fear that it is too easy to swing heavily towards one way if one user plus his/her friends can assign quite a few rep points by virtue of their account status; it would almost be like "virtual" bullying.

 

Oh. I got lead down the neg rep path by the above and silence's comments on the way out the door.

Edit: Re Wavey's, that is.

 

That I was replying to you, not Neeyik. And what I meant was that the conversation above and silence's parting shots, seemed aimed at neg rep collusion for the remedial action that occurred, rather than what you'd just said. So I was acknowledging the correction.

 

It's ok Dave, we still love you.

 

Good advice.
For everyone.

 

I report the really bad posts as well as neg-repping them.

Strangely people with high-reps seem to think they're immune from being reported.

Jawed

 

Just so I'm straight, was the issue positive rep circle jerking? Or virtual bullying? Or both?

 

What I got out of it was mostly one, some of two, and a goodly bit of "when you're the goliath in the system in the first place you get even less latitude for either".

 

I'm one of the people who got a fair amount of unsolicited rep from Silence. He genuinely seemed to be enthusiastic about the rep he gave, but I was surprised by the quantity of rep. He must have been giving rep all over to get around the "you must spread more rep around" limitiation. I got the impression that there were people he wanted to rep, maybe people who would rep him back, and in order to do so he had to spread a lot of rep around to a lot of people in order to get around the rep limitations.

Having said that, when someone gives you a lot of good rep and leaves you encouraging comments, it's natural to want to repay the favour - it becomes a positive feedback loop. Silence may just have been handing out so much rep to so many people, that he simply got back a lot of rep from those who felt they wanted to recipricate.

It's possible there was some organised plan for people to rep each other up as much as possible, but I think it's more likely that Silence simply liked handing out rep all over, and liked the fact that people felt they had to pass that good rep back to him when they had the opportunity. Silence worked hard at spreading rep around, and a lot of that came back to him in spades.

I don't know how or why you could stop such a thing, unless you know it was an organised campaign to break the rep system, or can get inside Silence's head and know that he really didn't mean the rep or the enthusiastic comments he gave, but was merely participating for selfish reasons.

 

This is exactly why i believe that once u hit a certian post count while your in the green you should have reputation disabled by default. Not given the choice .

That way those that are bad posters are banned .

Repuation just gives us problems . Lots of problems . Get rid of it except where it can be usefull .

For new members of one year or less membership just do a blanket reputation system. That way at the one year mark the mods can take a few minutes and read through the feedback system and see if the posts ar ereally out of line and either kick them from the forum (if they haven't been already) or give them a limited ban .

Otherwise the rep system sucks . I spoke out about sony in the unreal 2k7 thread and how certian people are taking comments about two diffrent games and saying the engine runs better on the ps3 . I posted against that idea (not saying it runs better on the xbox as i don't know ) and that there is no way you can conclude that with 2 diffrent games with diffrent dev cycles and at diffrent parts in the hardware life of the system.

But i still got hit with feedback (which has since disapeared for the most part , who knows why)