Neg rep regulation?

[Prydogga]

I thank every thread I think deserves it, cos deep down we all (I don't mean that literally) care a little bit about rep, I'm a competitive bastard so I'm always trying to top a 500 milestone and even the worst posts I see I try not to neg, depending how I see it, people have off days, rant/vent, the piss people off, it's natural, and the internet. So no neg needed

 

[13point9]

I thank every thread I think deserves it, cos deep down we all (I don't mean that literally) care a little bit about rep, I'm a competitive bastard so I'm always trying to top a 500 milestone and even the worst posts I see I try not to neg, depending how I see it, people have off days, rant/vent, the piss people off, it's natural, and the internet. So no neg needed

this, get rid of neg rep and just have report post, should make people think twice before just dishing it out haha

so then you just give rep to people rather than take it away =)

 

[Randy]

90% of the time I sign my neg. reps just because if the person wants to make an actual effort to correct what I perceived as a bad attitude, they usually end up visitor messaging or PMing me as a result and we can talk it out. Lately, I've started leaving a +rep or just a visitor message instead of a neg. but there are exceptions. I don't care about retaliation neg. reps because it usually doesn't amount to much. There are a small handful of situations where I don't sign my neg. reps but that's just when it's obvious the person's not going to learn anything and they'll probably just use it to mouth off in the thread, and prefer not to provoke that.

As an aside, I find the rep system to be somewhat relevant. Whether or not the majority of rep. is given because of useful posts or funny/silly/retarded posts is debatable. For me, I usually compare the number of posts a person has to how much rep they've accrued. If they have a shitload of posts and a dwindling amount of rep, I usually assume that they post-whore without much relevance. Considering how many people there are on here these days, and how quickly threads blow up into 100+ posts, I tend to use indicators like that as to which posts I read and don't read when I'm scanning through.

EDIT: One last thing on the issue of neg. reps. Sometimes a person's post isn't necessarily grounds for getting banned or deleted but it's prickish and deserves attention. A lot of times if a person has a history of that, you'll go into their page and see a bunch of assorted negs. from different topics. Usually a good indicator the guy's a problem and for those of us that report thing regularly, it makes people like that easy to weed out.

Also, some people just need to be told when they're being a cock-knocker.

 

[TomParenteau]

I sign my neg reps. But you know, I pretty much stopped giving them anyway.

I neg repped JymEllis, and regretted doing it right away. It was a conflict that should have been resolved with a couple PMs instead. I apologized, and I don't think I have neg repped anybody since! JymEllis & I get along great now.

 

[MorbidTravis]

idont neg rep anyone now unless they really deserve it.

 

[darren]

If you're going to give someone rep – positive or negative – you should have the stones to sign it with your name. Anonymous rep is bullshit, especially negative rep where people hide behind their little veil of anonymity to talk shit.

And if someone gives you negative rep, justified or not, be an adult and just roll with it instead of doing a retalitory "tit for tat" rep in response.

Personally, i think the rep system is kinda stupid, and some people get far to wrapped up in it, like they do with their post counts.

 

[MorbidTravis]

i stopped signing neg rep in the fear that it would cause unwanted drama with someone by them neg repping me all the time.

 

[Netherhound]

If you're going to give someone rep – positive or negative – you should have the stones to sign it with your name. Anonymous rep is bullshit, especially negative rep where people hide behind their little veil of anonymity to talk shit.

And if someone gives you negative rep, justified or not, be an adult and just roll with it instead of doing a retalitory "tit for tat" rep in response.

Personally, i think the rep system is kinda stupid, and some people get far to wrapped up in it, like they do with their post counts.

Well said

 

[BigPhi84]

If you're going to give someone rep – positive or negative – you should have the stones to sign it with your name. Anonymous rep is bullshit, especially negative rep where people hide behind their little veil of anonymity to talk shit.

And if someone gives you negative rep, justified or not, be an adult and just roll with it instead of doing a retalitory "tit for tat" rep in response.

Personally, i think the rep system is kinda stupid, and some people get far to wrapped up in it, like they do with their post counts.

I agree with you on this, but at the same time, I remember reading a Mod-created thread where they said to not sign your neg rep. Apparently, people were retaliating neg rep with neg rep, regardless if they originally deserved it or not and this was creating a lot of problems for the Mods.

 

[El Caco]

No it's not well said. Giving advice to disregard the rules is not good advice.

Do not sign your neg rep. Rep abuse and neg wars were out of control, now it is just a few members abusing the rep system and the neg wars are over bar the occasional tool (thank fuck) so not signing neg rep is working and it will stay that way.

Third announcement down http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/feedback-and-suggestions/announcements.html