Jump to content

Bad rep blues


IronTiger

Recommended Posts

We only upgraded to the new forum software a few days ago, and I've already got -14 in my "reputation". Often times, this means nothing in some forums (as in this one) and the world to others, but I'm curious as to why I have -14....

...can anyone clue me in?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We only upgraded to the new forum software a few days ago, and I've already got -14 in my "reputation". Often times, this means nothing in some forums (as in this one) and the world to others, but I'm curious as to why I have -14....

...can anyone clue me in?

Pointless topics? I kid, I have no idea. I have never rated anyone.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, there was another site with a "thumbs up/thumbs down" system:

DO downvote someone:

If the post breaks rules

If the post is generally not well thought-out

If the post is overly mean or inconsiderate

DON’T downvote someone:

If you have a personal grudge against the person who made the post

If you think it would be amusing to do so

In controversial topics (politics and religion, etc): if a person makes a post that is a reasonable post with nothing wrong with it, but it expresses views that you don’t like, don’t downvote it. That’s just petty.

Sounds fair.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The irony is that your last post has a -2 rating.

I don't currently have any reputation. I must not write anything interesting enough to be rated.

None of your posts give us the option of rating you. I thought you did that on purpose.

Me on the other hand, I suprisingly have a good rating so far. I don't know how it's so good because I've only seen one or two posts that have rated me.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The irony is that your last post has a -2 rating.

I don't currently have any reputation. I must not write anything interesting enough to be rated.

I think that some person thought it WOULD be amusing to mark me down to -2. Out of curiousity, is this only for HAIF members or is it anyone? I feel this is more the actions of "no-post HAIFers" or anonymous trolls than "real" HAIFers.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that some person thought it WOULD be amusing to mark me down to -2. Out of curiousity, is this only for HAIF members or is it anyone? I feel this is more the actions of "no-post HAIFers" or anonymous trolls than "real" HAIFers.

There must have been one or two posts that people just piled up on you. You know which ones they are?

Also, once you give someone a + or - , it will not let you do it again. So no one individual gave you a -2; they can't. It was two separate people. sad.gif

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've noticed that on this topic, on the Harvey Mitchell/Wellborn overpass, someone has taken time to give a minus one on every single post since May 2nd. I'm sure it's the same person. Is there a way to find out who these people are?

Edited by IronTiger
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've noticed that on this topic, on the Harvey Mitchell/Wellborn overpass, someone has taken time to give a minus one on every single post since May 2nd. I'm sure it's the same person. Is there a way to find out who these people are?

egwwww, looks like someone was out for you.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you care who it is? I hate these reputation/rating systems....They sound good in principal, but all it ends up being is a popularity contest.

puma created a thread about it somewhere saying that it could replace all the two-word "me too" type posts people submit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

puma created a thread about it somewhere saying that it could replace all the two-word "me too" type posts people submit.

Yup, it got rejected pretty quickly by the majority of the members.

I was referencing if we could mimic some on the forum functionality that was on Amazon. They have a "Was this post helpful?" button, it would eventually hide the post if it was not.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, how's this: as a whole, does anyone really, really, like the rating system now?

Looks like you should have said "if you dislike the rating system give me a negative rating".    :)

Are these total ratings for the poster or are they for each individual comment? 

Edited by LunaticFringe
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of your posts give us the option of rating you. I thought you did that on purpose.

Nope. It wasn't on purpose. I'll see if there's a way to change that. I assume if I'm being protected the mods are, too. I'll see if I can change it.

I think that some person thought it WOULD be amusing to mark me down to -2. Out of curiousity, is this only for HAIF members or is it anyone? I feel this is more the actions of "no-post HAIFers" or anonymous trolls than "real" HAIFers.

Only registered members can rate posts.

I'm guessing that the "bad" scores were from before the forum switchover. OK, so two non-posting HAIFers or two trolls did it.

There was no function to rate individual posts before the software upgrade.

I've noticed that on this topic, on the Harvey Mitchell/Wellborn overpass, someone has taken time to give a minus one on every single post since May 2nd. I'm sure it's the same person. Is there a way to find out who these people are?

Not that I know of. If someone rates every post down, then it really doesn't matter much at all since everyone gets the ding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does a bad rep mean anything, though? I know on some blogs, it will keep your replies in posts from being seen, or the text is so grayed out as to effectively disappear.

Doesn't mean anything to me. At this point, you could have -1000 and it wouldn't affect your ability to use HAIF. I haven't seen any settings in the new software that would allow me to punish someone for having unpopular thoughts.

Why do you care who it is? I hate these reputation/rating systems....They sound good in principal, but all it ends up being is a popularity contest.

We had the ability to rate individual users in the last version of the software, but I don't think many people used it.

OK, how's this: as a whole, does anyone really, really, like the rating system now?

I think it's way too soon to judge. Maybe in six months or a year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm guessing your first two posts in this thread got negative marks because you're whining.

I haven't rated you in this thread or elsewhere... because i don't want you to whine more... but i certainly want to give you a -1 for your first post.

It's all meaningless. Stop taking it so serious. And for future reference, know that if you say something that the majority isn't gonna like.. expect negative points. If you say something that the majority agrees with, expect positive points, maybe. Knowing this... if you get negative points for something, then complain about, expect even more people to give you negative points.

IF you insist on taking it serious, then take it for what it is... a measurement of what other Haifers generally think of your posts. You can either accept this, continue on your way, and not give a damn as your rating goes lower.. or you can try to improve the quality of your posts and reputation to build up your score.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm curious as to how low the system goes. I'll likely get bad posts wherever I go. As long as I'm not too obnoxious, I can watch my reputation plummet. I can then take pride that I am the HAIFer with the LOWEST score!

I have no idea. The people who wrote this software have thus far provided ZERO documentation, which is part of the reason it's been so frustrating for everyone involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm guessing your first two posts in this thread got negative marks because you're whining.

I haven't rated you in this thread or elsewhere... because i don't want you to whine more... but i certainly want to give you a -1 for your first post.

It's all meaningless. Stop taking it so serious. And for future reference, know that if you say something that the majority isn't gonna like.. expect negative points. If you say something that the majority agrees with, expect positive points, maybe. Knowing this... if you get negative points for something, then complain about, expect even more people to give you negative points.

IF you insist on taking it serious, then take it for what it is... a measurement of what other Haifers generally think of your posts. You can either accept this, continue on your way, and not give a damn as your rating goes lower.. or you can try to improve the quality of your posts and reputation to build up your score.

One of the reasons I hope people learn not to care too much about the post rating system is that I don't want people to worry about only posting popular thoughts.

I know people like me and Niche and Jeebus and Mark F. Barnes and many others don't current, and probably never will, care what other people think about what we write. But younger and newer members are likely to be more sensitive in this area.

If someone disagrees with you, don't worry about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the reasons I hope people learn not to care too much about the post rating system is that I don't want people to worry about only posting popular thoughts.

I know people like me and Niche and Jeebus and Mark F. Barnes and many others don't current, and probably never will, care what other people think about what we write. But younger and newer members are likely to be more sensitive in this area.

If someone disagrees with you, don't worry about it.

Well said.

If anything, i gotten into the habit of just rating on something that is along the lines of what I'm thinking and well stated.

I'm prepared to agree with someone's thoughts, but disagree how they state it, so I will rate appropriately and speak my mind.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oddly enough, every post of mine NOT in the College Station forum is at least a negative one...maybe it's a sign to keep out of Houston stuff. But I won't let it bother me (though maybe it is)

Posted Saturday, May 23, 2009 at 8:58P

IronTiger, on Saturday, May 23rd, 2009 @ 2:35pm, said:

Should I add that the most of you are acting like jerks right now, or is that just left to be assumed? huh.gifIronTiger, on Saturday, May 23rd, 2009 @ 5:38pm, said:

It's certainly not exclusive to the HAIF, so I shouldn't single you out of the rest of the jerks out there. Yawn. dry.gif

Think before you type! sleep.gif

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Entirely out of context: note that was nearly two months ago, before the forum updates. Also, they WERE acting like jerks...or at least that how it SEEMED (but you'd have to do some convincing)

The majority of the folks on here are not jerks!

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Entirely out of context: note that was nearly two months ago, before the forum updates. Also, they WERE acting like jerks...or at least that how it SEEMED (but you'd have to do some convincing)

OK, so it's NOT OK to call Rush Limbaugh a fat tub of goo, but it IS OK for you to call us all a bunch of jerks when you disagree with our opinions. Have I got that right? Just want to make sure I follow the 'Iron Tiger Inraweb Rules of Etiquette' correctly.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, so it's NOT OK to call Rush Limbaugh a fat tub of goo, but it IS OK for you to call us all a bunch of jerks when you disagree with our opinions. Have I got that right? Just want to make sure I follow the 'Iron Tiger Inraweb Rules of Etiquette' correctly.

No, I said you were acting like jerks. There's a difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, forgive me if this was discussed else where...

It would be interesting to hear how the board is configured, for reputation points.

Here is some information I have found:

http://invisionmodding.com/index.php?autocom=downloads&showfile=135

The admin of the above board, who apparently uses the same software as HAIF has these settings:

These are the settings I've got:

  • For every X number of days, users gain 1 point of reputation-altering power - set at 365 days. ie. every year you are a member you get one extra point of reputation power.
  • For every X number of posts, users gain 1 point of reputation-altering power - set at 1000.
  • For every X points of reputation, users gain 1 point of reputation-altering power - set at 100
  • How many posts must a user have before his reputation hits count on others - set at 50
  • How much reputation must a user have before his reputation hits count on others - set at 5 (the default reputation everybody starts with is 5 so your opinions count immediately)
  • How many reputation clicks can a user give over each 24 hour period? Administrators are exempt from this limit - set at 10
  • How many different users must you give reputation to before you can hit the same person again? Administrators are exempt from this limit - set at 10

What are the HAIF settings? They seem to be quite configurable. It would be intersted to know what the rules are set at.

The labeling gradient is interesting. For example, are TimNWendy and Chamo, both currently -1, worthy of the label "POOR" reputation? Sidegate, based on the last posts I have read, and myself, perhaps earn that -1 more appropriately, in terms of putting out a view that others may deem unpopular. Yet all of us are considered "POOR," currently. At the end of day, all we're doing is ranking popular and unpopular views/posts. A more accurate description of a person's reputation would be popular or unpopular. I wear the unpopular badge, with honor. =)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something I don't like about the rep system is that all we have to go on is the net number. It'd be interesting to see the total number of positive and negative clicks. It'd also be interesting to have a profile option to see the best-of or worst-of posts from any given member based on reputation score.

Ultimately, though, I think that the only way to make a reputation system meaningful is to eliminate the option to score a post negatively. If a post needs to be reported to a moderator, then we already have that option. Otherwise, what's the point of providing an indicator that a handful of people think that a particular post sucks? I can think of good reasons why I'd want to know that a particular post was helpful, but no reason at all to know that it sucks.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, forgive me if this was discussed else where...

It would be interesting to hear how the board is configured, for reputation points.

Here is some information I have found:

http://invisionmodding.com/index.php?autocom=downloads&showfile=135

The admin of the above board, who apparently uses the same software as HAIF has these settings:

These are the settings I've got:

  • For every X number of days, users gain 1 point of reputation-altering power - set at 365 days. ie. every year you are a member you get one extra point of reputation power.
  • For every X number of posts, users gain 1 point of reputation-altering power - set at 1000.
  • For every X points of reputation, users gain 1 point of reputation-altering power - set at 100
  • How many posts must a user have before his reputation hits count on others - set at 50
  • How much reputation must a user have before his reputation hits count on others - set at 5 (the default reputation everybody starts with is 5 so your opinions count immediately)
  • How many reputation clicks can a user give over each 24 hour period? Administrators are exempt from this limit - set at 10
  • How many different users must you give reputation to before you can hit the same person again? Administrators are exempt from this limit - set at 10

What are the HAIF settings? They seem to be quite configurable. It would be intersted to know what the rules are set at.

The labeling gradient is interesting. For example, are TimNWendy and Chamo, both currently -1, worthy of the label "POOR" reputation? Sidegate, based on the last posts I have read, and myself, perhaps earn that -1 more appropriately, in terms of putting out a view that others may deem unpopular. Yet all of us are considered "POOR," currently. At the end of day, all we're doing is ranking popular and unpopular views/posts. A more accurate description of a person's reputation would be popular or unpopular. I wear the unpopular badge, with honor. =)

Reputation is just a cumulative result.

Someone could have a +10 reputation on a single post that everyone thought was worthy of credit.

A few random -2 and -1 scattered about for a single person adds up and can mask the end value, which can result in a "poor" or "bad" reputation because the -'s outnumber the +'s.

It's a great system that can be useful and also inaccurate.

UpuPUp! is a good example of a good reputation that matches the value.

Something I don't like about the rep system is that all we have to go on is the net number. It'd be interesting to see the total number of positive and negative clicks. It'd also be interesting to have a profile option to see the best-of or worst-of posts from any given member based on reputation score.

Ultimately, though, I think that the only way to make a reputation system meaningful is to eliminate the option to score a post negatively. If a post needs to be reported to a moderator, then we already have that option. Otherwise, what's the point of providing an indicator that a handful of people think that a particular post sucks? I can think of good reasons why I'd want to know that a particular post was helpful, but no reason at all to know that it sucks.

But it makes sense. It's like facebook's "like" option. There is no "dislike" on facebook, rather you can only undo the like. So it always stays neutral or positive and never gets negative.

Edited by Pumapayam
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, forgive me if this was discussed else where...

It would be interesting to hear how the board is configured, for reputation points.

It is not configured. It is in its default state. The only configuration is Positive Only, Negative Only, Positive and Negative, and Off; plus an item about protecting certain groups from being rated.

Here is some information I have found:

http://invisionmodding.com/index.php?autocom=downloads&showfile=135

The admin of the above board, who apparently uses the same software as HAIF has these settings:

It is not the same software as HAIF. The stuff you're reading is for an unofficial modification (hack) to a previous version of the software. It is not the current nor the official reputation system.

Honestly, I have no idea what the reputation thresholds are. There is currently no documentation for this or any other feature in this version of the forum software.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something I don't like about the rep system is that all we have to go on is the net number. It'd be interesting to see the total number of positive and negative clicks. It'd also be interesting to have a profile option to see the best-of or worst-of posts from any given member based on reputation score.

I have submitted this as a feature request.

Ultimately, though, I think that the only way to make a reputation system meaningful is to eliminate the option to score a post negatively. If a post needs to be reported to a moderator, then we already have that option. Otherwise, what's the point of providing an indicator that a handful of people think that a particular post sucks? I can think of good reasons why I'd want to know that a particular post was helpful, but no reason at all to know that it sucks.

I don't know about that. When eBay changed from having Positive, Neutral, and Negative feedback to either Positive or no feedback, the feedback system became worthless because it was impossible to tell who the bad sellers were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But it makes sense. It's like facebook's "like" option. There is no "dislike" on facebook, rather you can only undo the like. So it always stays neutral or positive and never gets negative.

Sounds like Saturday morning at a T-ball game in Sugar Land where there's no scoring and everyone gets a chance at bat because we don't want to hurt the precious snowflakes' feelings.

If you have negative posts, who cares? People disagreeing with strong opinions is a sign of character. Man up, Nancy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about that. When eBay changed from having Positive, Neutral, and Negative feedback to either Positive or no feedback, the feedback system became worthless because it was impossible to tell who the bad sellers were.

Well, yeah. That's eBay. People sell things there, money is involved, and issues of trust are crucial to the functioning of the marketplace. Without the positive/negative ratings system, eBay would never have become successful; HAIF was successful long before there was ever a ratings system. We exchange ideas here. Trust is not an issue, and to the extent that we have serious problems caused by certain individuals, we have procedures in place to deal with them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like Saturday morning at a T-ball game in Sugar Land where there's no scoring and everyone gets a chance at bat because we don't want to hurt the precious snowflakes' feelings.

If you have negative posts, who cares? People disagreeing with strong opinions is a sign of character. Man up, Nancy.

But what about HAIF being a place for rainbows, butterflies, and unicorns and such. :P

If the negatives remain, I'd love to know if the software upgrade had a capability to hide irrelevant/show only relevant posts, basically only neutral, positive, and maybe a "slight" negative reputation with the option to toggle back and forth as needed.

I mentioned that a while back, back again, it was shot down.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the negatives remain, I'd love to know if the software upgrade had a capability to hide irrelevant/show only relevant posts, basically only neutral, positive, and maybe a "slight" negative reputation with the option to toggle back and forth as needed.

I mentioned that a while back, back again, it was shot down.

That wouldn't work here. People vote people down here because they disagree with their opinions (which in my opinion is still a bit unfair, but...).

It's different than YouTube where people normally spam and troll and don't even type in coherent sentences. Just go to any popular YouTube video, you'll see what I mean!

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the negatives remain, I'd love to know if the software upgrade had a capability to hide irrelevant/show only relevant posts, basically only neutral, positive, and maybe a "slight" negative reputation with the option to toggle back and forth as needed.

I'm not sure what you're asking. The software doesn't actually read and understand what you write, and since there was no rating system prior to the upgrade it would have no basis for deciding the popularity of posts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to the Internet. It is serious business, because being made fun of on it constitutes a massive attack on your reputation.

Edited by UrbaNerd
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what you're asking. The software doesn't actually read and understand what you write, and since there was no rating system prior to the upgrade it would have no basis for deciding the popularity of posts.

Sorry for the confusion, but what I was mentioning was that the software upgrade "might/could" recognize that when a post reaches a certain negative value, say -5. That post would "fade out" or collapse when compared to reputation of the remaining posts.

But, an option would remain to "show all" posts regardless of reputation if the user decided to do so.

It would be a way to view the thread context as two versions.

One version that was "modded" by fellow HAIFers with only positive, neutral, and some minor negatives revealed by default, or with the other option to click "show all" and read the thread as originally posted as we see it now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry for the confusion, but what I was mentioning was that the software upgrade "might/could" recognize that when a post reaches a certain negative value, say -5. That post would "fade out" or collapse when compared to reputation of the remaining posts.

It's my understanding that if a post receives 50 positive ratings, then it gets "highlighted." But I don't know what "highlighted" means. I assume the background changes color, rather than it ends up in a special section on the front page, or anything else that would change the structure of the thread.

As with many features of the new software, the reputation system appears to be a work in progress. We'll just have to wait and see what becomes of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, so it's NOT OK to call Rush Limbaugh a fat tub of goo, but it IS OK for you to call us all a bunch of jerks when you disagree with our opinions. Have I got that right? Just want to make sure I follow the 'Iron Tiger Inraweb Rules of Etiquette' correctly.

How DARE you point out Iron Tiger's faux pas.......Geeeeeeezzzz, what a JERK !!!! ;):lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's my understanding that if a post receives 50 positive ratings, then it gets "highlighted." But I don't know what "highlighted" means. I assume the background changes color, rather than it ends up in a special section on the front page, or anything else that would change the structure of the thread.

It's my understanding a -50 equates to being voted off the island... immediate haify banhammer... least I'm pretty sure that's what I was told.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if anyone got a -50, it would mean that either

(a) the post was spam/rude

(B) the post was not spam at all and it only got the -50 because of maliciously evil and cruel members

It's always A. Most of the time.

Edited by IronTiger
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if anyone got a -50, it would mean that either

(a) the post was spam/rude

(b ) the post was not spam at all and it only got the -50 because of maliciously evil and cruel members

It's always A. Most of the time.

c) -50 rep score ( as opposed to for one post ) would indicate a haify lifetime accumulation of annoying posts

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...