Bad rep blues

[cardy]

Hay, Irontiger

Dont worry be happy!

http://www.youtube.c...CI&feature=fvst

[IronTiger]

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.

[editor]

I guess I'll be the one who says what everyone is thinking.

People are modding IronTiger down to vex him.

IronTiger does things to encourage them because he enjoys the attention.

Can we move on with our lives now?

[BryanS]

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. =)

[TheNiche]

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.

[Pumapayam]

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.

[editor]

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.

[editor]

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.

[editor]

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.

[TheNiche]

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.

[Pumapayam]

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.

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.

[IronTiger]

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!

[editor]

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.

[UrbaNerd]

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

[Pumapayam]

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.

[editor]

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.

[TJones]

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 !!!!

[Highway6]

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.

[IronTiger]

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

(a) the post was spam/rude

( 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.

[Highway6]

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

[Pumapayam]

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.

Does option (b ) actually exist outside of junior high?

I'd go with option (d), don't let it bother ya.

[Trae]

I don't thin the reputation thing is working very well. Maybe we can see who has negatively, or positively rep us? I've been seeing well thought out post given negative reps (I just rep the people back up). Doesn't make sense. Unless the person is attacking you or something, why negative rep it? Don't negative rep if you disagree with someone. If you agree, yeah.

[editor]

I don't thin the reputation thing is working very well.

I think it's too soon to say.

Maybe we can see who has negatively, or positively rep us?

I think that would be extraordinarily bad. At best, it would discourage people from using the system. At worst, it would make people think that certain other people are out to get them.

I've been seeing well thought out post given negative reps (I just rep the people back up). Doesn't make sense.

It sounds like your opinion of the post differs from another person's opinion of the post. That doesn't mean the system is broken.

Unless the person is attacking you or something, why negative rep it? Don't negative rep if you disagree with someone. If you agree, yeah.

I think the positive/negative system might end up filtering out a lot of the snarky one-liners from people who disagree with a post, and also make the needless "Ditto" answers unnecessary. Hopefully in the long run it will make the quality of the threads better because pointless one-liners will become a thing of the past.

[Highway6]

I think the positive/negative system might end up filtering out a lot of the snarky one-liners from people who disagree with a post, and also make the needless "Ditto" answers unnecessary. Hopefully in the long run it will make the quality of the threads better because pointless one-liners will become a thing of the past.

Phhhfffptt ... As if.

ps.. I'd so give myself a -1 for this if i could.

[Pumapayam]

Phhhfffptt ... As if.

ps.. I'd so give myself a -1 for this if i could.

I broke the system and gave you a +1.

[Trae]

I think it's too soon to say.

I think that would be extraordinarily bad. At best, it would discourage people from using the system. At worst, it would make people think that certain other people are out to get them.

It sounds like your opinion of the post differs from another person's opinion of the post. That doesn't mean the system is broken.

I think the positive/negative system might end up filtering out a lot of the snarky one-liners from people who disagree with a post, and also make the needless "Ditto" answers unnecessary. Hopefully in the long run it will make the quality of the threads better because pointless one-liners will become a thing of the past.

LOL, just look at my post you quoted and at all the negative rep I got. Did I attack anyone? Nope. All I did was express my opinion and that's what I get. I think the system is broken right now. Negative rep should be for people who attack others, etc., not for a disagreement.

And I doubt it takes away from the one-liners. Right now, it discourages me from posting anything.

[Highway6]

LOL, just look at my post you quoted and at all the negative rep I got. Did I attack anyone? Nope. All I did was express my opinion and that's what I get. I think the system is broken right now. Negative rep should be for people who attack others, etc., not for a disagreement.

And I doubt it takes away from the one-liners. Right now, it discourages me from posting anything.

"Negative rep should be for attacks only". Your attempts to write some sort of rules = whining = people likely to vote it down.

[Pumapayam]

"Negative rep should be for attacks only". Your attempts to write some sort of rules = whining = people likely to vote it down.

Trae, I don't care about your reputation. You will alway be a valuable HAIFer to me.

[editor]

LOL, just look at my post you quoted and at all the negative rep I got. Did I attack anyone? Nope.

I don't recall stating that the reputation system was a method to rating civility.

All I did was express my opinion and that's what I get.

And apparently not everyone agrees with your opinion. Just as you have the right to voice your opinion through words, they have the right to voice their opinion through pressing the red minus button.

I think the system is broken right now.

You are welcome to have that opinion. However, you have to realize that in a community of tens of thousands of people, not everyone is going to agree with you.

Negative rep should be for people who attack others, etc., not for a disagreement.

Again, that is your opinion. Others appear to see it differently.

And I doubt it takes away from the one-liners.

I see each vote as a one-liner averted.

Right now, it discourages me from posting anything.

As I've stated before: Who cares if you get negative points on your posts? It doesn't restrict your access to HAIF. If people clicking a red minus hurts your feelings, then it's really way past time to put on your big boy pants.

[editor]

Trae, I don't care about your reputation. You will alway be a valuable HAIFer to me.

Exactly. Personal relationships are what's important, not silly numbers.

Looking at your personal profile just now shows that your fellow HAIFers have already rated you four out of five stars. They like you as a person. That doesn't mean that friends can't disagree about things.