Reputation points suggestion

[esskreemr]

I've been thinking about the rep points situation. Probably too much As for the total, I'm not that concerned. The part that gets me (and apparently alot of other people), are the neg points for apparently no reason, no comment, no signature; just a ding for the fun of it. So:

I think that there should be two options when giving out rep points, signed and unsigned. If you don't want to sign, then the rep points come out of your rep points, good or bad. If you sign, the rep points don't come out of your total. I think this would make the rep points more meaningful and people would think before they hit people with negative rep points for relatively benign posts. You could even make it so that the person recieving the points gets 2 and the person giving the points gets 1 for signed. That way there is a net advantage to giving the rep points (negative or positive).

I'm sure Craig has more to do than recode his site every day. So this is just a suggestion from a concerned netizen of Fencing.Net

[Craig]

The upgrade to the forum allows me to set by usergroup who can apply negative reputation.

Due to complaints about negative rep. (which have been reflected in other community sites, not just here), I've removed the option for all but Admins (me) and Moderators (Zelda, Gav).

Craig

[D'Artag-NOT]

I appreciate that, Craig. I got dinged for a post that simply stated "I consider myself a moderate". Now if I'd been nasty or rude, that would've been one thing, but I don't think that simple statement (in a thread that specifically asked posters to identify their political stance) warranted a ding.

[noodle]

just as an addition, some posts deserve negative points and 3 people makes it kind of obvious who handed them out. i think the fencing experts would do well as kind of meta-moderators that are allowed to hand out negative rep points since they should know what they're talking about and i doubt they'll do it for unreasonable purposes.

[Zilverzmurfen]

The upgrade to the forum allows me to set by usergroup who can apply negative reputation.

Due to complaints about negative rep. (which have been reflected in other community sites, not just here), I've removed the option for all but Admins (me) and Moderators (Zelda, Gav).

Craig

Just out of curiosity...when was this done?

[Gav]

just as an addition, some posts deserve negative points and 3 people makes it kind of obvious who handed them out. i think the fencing experts would do well as kind of meta-moderators that are allowed to hand out negative rep points since they should know what they're talking about and i doubt they'll do it for unreasonable purposes.

I think this is a good idea as well. All of the experts are guys who have been reasonable in the past.

[esskreemr]

Yes, there definitely should be some level of control.

[Inquartata]

Fencers approving of control, who'd a thunk it?

[D'Artag-NOT]

Fencers approving of control, who'd a thunk it?

Foilists, of course.

[esskreemr]

That's it, you get neg rep points for that quip!! Hey wait...

[D'Artag-NOT]

That's it, you get neg rep points for that quip!! Hey wait...

Heh, heh, heh . . . bwah ha ha . . . MBWAAH HA HA HAAAA! (Where's the emoticon for maniacal laughter??) I may pun with im-pun-ity!! The WORRLLLD is MIINNNE!

[MikeHarm]

I think I might of dinged you for that one. I thought it was too uncontroversial for my taste.

I appreciate that, Craig. I got dinged for a post that simply stated "I consider myself a moderate". Now if I'd been nasty or rude, that would've been one thing, but I don't think that simple statement (in a thread that specifically asked posters to identify their political stance) warranted a ding.

[a517dogg]

I got dinged for talking about soccer! gahd.

http://www.fencing101.com/vb/showthr...142#post145142

[Peach]

I got dinged for saying I had a good reason for saying Ann Marsh was going to do well in the WS--her name was on the list of people entered. . .

[mifencer]

I got dinged for saying I had a good reason for saying Ann Marsh was going to do well in the WS--her name was on the list of people entered. . .

Ann got 3rd in WS, and 1st in WF... I wonder how her footwork was?


Seriously:
Am I missing something about these rep points? Do you guys really worry about this? Or if I accumulate enough, do I get a free kitchen appliance from Craig?

[noodle]

Ann got 3rd in WS, and 1st in WF... I wonder how her footwork was?


Seriously:
Am I missing something about these rep points? Do you guys really worry about this? Or if I accumulate enough, do I get a free kitchen appliance from Craig?

nah, free entry into the fencing.net tournament

[Peach]

Worry? No. What, me worry? It's just a curiosity. However, as I've said elsewhere, if people have nasty things to say about me, I'd rather they said them behind my back where I don't have to know about it. That's why I'd rather we didn't have the negative reputation stuff.

Ann's footwork was fine, and that's why she did well in the III and I-A women's sabre, but as for the bladework, timing, and ROW understanding she's not really a sabre fencer yet. It looked like she was having fun, though.

[Maeve_Mari]

nah, free entry into the fencing.net tournament

Correct that to be: Admission into the, as of yet, "Imaginary fencing.net Tournament!"

[D'Artag-NOT]

Am I missing something about these rep points? Do you guys really worry about this? Or if I accumulate enough, do I get a free kitchen appliance from Craig?

Mifencer, need you ask? Of course the rep points matter! They're just like the points on Whose Line Is It Anyway?!

[Tireur]

Mifencer, need you ask?

Sounds like a SWTSU fencer, eh?