[Pink Freud]

What's brilliant are the posts saying "it's got to go" then getting green points. Loving that.

[Swarley]

Pink Freud, on 26 February 2010 - 09:14, said:

What's brilliant are the posts saying "it's got to go" then getting green points. Loving that.

Indeed, someone gave me a greenie for saying the same thing!

[longjohn]

Waste of time. Bin it.

[xbl]

Div, on 25 February 2010 - 13:04, said:

you would be able to click on the little red or green circle and see who has given you positive or negative rep points.

Please keep it!

[Andy C]

I voted for keeping the greenies but when I think about it that's verging on the 'Everyone must win and no-one should be shown to be shit' type of politically correct rubbish that we have nowadays.
It isn't an exact science in shitness or excellency right enough.

I think I'd bin it. The site ran fine before it and dafties usually out themselves anyway without us having to refer to a reputation system.

[vikingTON]

Smurph, on 25 February 2010 - 22:06, said:

I'm not complaining about the -400something people, just some people seem to abuse them. I think they should only be used when needed. Someone on a +64 rating will have deserved it more than someone on a -50 rating, in some cases. No-ones going to decide for a laugh to give someone + points every day simply to annoy them.

This isn't a Primary 1 class. People should be free to rate (if there is a ratings system in place) without simply having a sliding scale of how many happy faces you have.

This post has been edited by vikingTON: 26 February 2010 - 11:39

[Klootzak]

It would be useful if it actually meant something - It seems rather redundant.

[Swampy]

IXI THE ONE IXI, on 25 February 2010 - 23:03, said:

Get rid of it. I've ruined coutless pillowcases crying myself to sleep over my -49 reputation on an internet messageboard about Scottish football.

<--- you

[Swampy]

The polling at present shows a clear majority in favour of retaining at least some form of the innovative and long-overdue reputation system. I do hope those responsible for counting and examining the vote take this into account.

[GordieBoys-livi-lass]

I want to keep it due to the fact that I only joined the platinum membership to get more rep buttons (A lady must defend herself in this mad male dominated hellhole), so if Div takes it away I want my tenner back!

[Thumper]

Ratings systems are only a problem when they can be gamed. If that happens then it might be worth reconsidering it, but right now it looks like it's working pretty well. Even better would be a threshold system where people could choose to auto-hide posts from users below a certain karma level, which would cut down on the wind-up merchants a bit.

[The Arch]

It should be kept until I go back to an excellent poster. I've gone from 21 to 18 in the past couple of weeks.

Sad face.

[G_Man1985]

Get rid

[Sergeant Wilson]

It's a stick to hit people with. I like it. Keep it until I get bored.

[Mak]

I think that it's quite good the way that it is. It's people who take this shit too seriously who're the problem.

Either way, can the 'positive' colour please be changed to something a bit less controversial? I don't like green, and neither will quite a lot of people on here. A nice, neutral colour like orange would be better. Thanks in advance.

[Skyline Drifter]

Yoss, on 25 February 2010 - 22:04, said:

For me personally the various new features that have been introducted add nothing, all I want is a chatsite not a social networking thing, and the less clutter there is getting in the way of that the better.

But it doesn't get in the way much, to be fair, it's not difficult to ignore and if other people like it and use the site differently then fair enough, I guess.

This pretty much.

I thought it was a stupid idea when introduced but I can't say I really give a toss and it doesn't really get in the way. I think I've given one positive dot and one negative in the time it's been here and those were in the first week.

[xbl]

Thumper, on 26 February 2010 - 19:25, said:

Even better would be a threshold system where people could choose to auto-hide posts from users below a certain karma level, which would cut down on the wind-up merchants a bit.

I think we already have such a system in place? I'm sure Div mentioned something about that...

Skyline Drifter, on 26 February 2010 - 22:30, said:

This pretty much.

I thought it was a stupid idea when introduced but I can't say I really give a toss and it doesn't really get in the way. I think I've given one positive dot and one negative in the time it's been here and those were in the first week.

I'd forgotten about the chat thing until I used a different computer thing, I'd completely forgotten about that whole thing with status updates and "top posters" that appeared on the right of the screen. I think its actually implemented pretty well. None of the silly new features bother me as I barely notice them, and as I said, I don't use the reputation system myself. Definitely keep it, the majority see sense!

[clyde til we die]

I don't even know what it is

[GordieBoy80]

Not something I use myself but if people are having fun with it then let them

[Swampy]

Only a total of sixty people at time of writing have voted for a reactionary censorship of the new feature. 17 have managed to stiffen their wrists long enough to haul themselves up onto the fence. That leaves fully ninety-two people who either endorse the current system or (far more commonly) wish to in fact see its extension.

I suspect, however, that the weight of the 'old heads' firmly in the 'nay' camp may render this clearly articulated cry from the people somewhat moot. Instead this battle must be won by force of argument, as opposed to numbers.

In this spirit I ask the reactionaries exactly why they are so bitterly opposed to a system that allows for a meritocratic gauging of users' posts?

[flogelsleftpeg]

Kilt doesnt care either way. he is so not raging about it.

[flogelsleftpeg]

mhak, on 26 February 2010 - 22:01, said:

I think that it's quite good the way that it is. It's people who take this shit too seriously who're the problem.

Either way, can the 'positive' colour please be changed to something a bit less controversial? I don't like green, and neither will quite a lot of people on here. A nice, neutral colour like orange would be better. Thanks in advance.

I back Maks sensible and serious issues that he has raised here.

[wunfellaff]

Swampy, on 28 February 2010 - 12:15, said:

Only a total of sixty people at time of writing have voted for a reactionary censorship of the new feature. 17 have managed to stiffen their wrists long enough to haul themselves up onto the fence. That leaves fully ninety-two people who either endorse the current system or (far more commonly) wish to in fact see its extension.

I suspect, however, that the weight of the 'old heads' firmly in the 'nay' camp may render this clearly articulated cry from the people somewhat moot. Instead this battle must be won by force of argument, as opposed to numbers.

In this spirit I ask the reactionaries exactly why they are so bitterly opposed to a system that allows for a meritocratic gauging of users' posts?

Because NOT all options are open............. i am not falling into your limited option gang.

[Swampy]

I don't understand what you mean. Can you clarify it a bit?

[seamus]

Since I stated it was pish Im on -11.
It is pish though and is a tool for mutual backslapping for sad cnuts on here.