Add a new rule for giving fake (negative) reputations.

[iBeqstZ]

Hey guys,

I think it's a good idea to make add a new rule about giving fake negative reputations. Add example that if you giving people more then 2 times a fake negative reputation a warning, if he doesn't listen, that he'll be suspended. It is really annoying if anyone get's a fake negative reputations while he wants to do deals.

That's also with me, i had first 1 negative reputation of IvanDab because i didn't loaned him since he was new on the forums and he hasn't any reputations (INFO).
After that Voxul has asked to me to buy my KothStart plugin with the src, so i said i'll give it him later since he has an own koth feature in his HCF core. One day later, i saw that C0an has posted a thread about that anyone was reselling his plugin. I've read that and i've replyed with that he wants also my plugin with the src (probably to resell also my plugin). One day later IvanDab gave me again a negative reputation with the same reason of Freddie (INFO).

Btw, if a staff member looks this thread can you look also to my 2 fake negative reputations that i've right now (they are both fake)

I've now reported both of them and the fake negative reputation that they give to me.

Kind regards,
iBeqstZ

 

[iBeqstZ]

Warning points result in suspension / ban over how many it is.

Yes but this is for giving fake negative reputations. It's really annoying right now because IvanDab gave me now for the second time a fake negative reputation while he knows that he's giving me a fake one.[DOUBLEPOST=1505835821][/DOUBLEPOST]

I've been given a LOT of false rep before, it takes days and up to a week to get it removed. For example, I have 2 negative reputation right now from the same thread where two users kept bugging me about the same question: my budget.

They just need to make rules for giving fake negative reputations so people will not give easy fake negative reputations.

 

[Tristen]

Personally, I feel that no matter how much proof you give for the report of the negative reputation, it would get denied anyway

 

[Kennedy]

Hey,
I feel like throwing in my opinion on these types of suggestions.

I don't think you guys understand what a "false" or "fake" reputation really is.
If you believe any of your reputation is false, please report it for the rule it violates.
If it does not violate a rule, it is completely valid.

If a user fakes a reputation, provide proof of the user faking the reputation in a report and it will be dealt with.
I have had many scenarios of users continuing to place a false negative reputation on my profile, and it was deleted each time. (And the users were justified for abusing the reputation system)

Also; To those who think the response time on this market for reputation and other types of reports are slow, I want to let you know the staff members do not work on our time. They work on their time, and rightfully so. This is their market, and though it may not be around if we weren't here as users, it for sure wouldn't be around without them. The response time on this community is not only faster than most other communities, but almost 4x as fast as competitors and misc. online forums. I have had many reports responded to from minutes to hours.

Be patient, and it will be dealt with. If it doesn't violate a rule, don't expect an answer or a reason why the reputation is valid. No notifications are given when a reputation report is resolved.

Thank you,
Kennedy S.

 

[Ivain]

So this is another case of a suggestion based almost exclusively on personal feelings/experience. I can guarantee you that those are almost automatically disregarded.
In my eyes, this thread is not an attempt to improve the site, it's an attempt to vent your frustration and put pressure on staff to remove your reputation.
Now, the reputation "has multiple accounts" is a tricky one. On the one hand, it implies a disregard for the rules (assuming ofc, that its true, no evidence to be seen either way), but on the other hand this may not affect trades.

By my definition it would indeed be false, since it does not contain NEARLY enough information (3 words is NOT enough).
Considering, however, that you've had it for less than 6 hours, I don't really see what you're panicking about.

Whenever you get clearly false rep, just leave a comment on said rep explaining why its false. Put the same information in the report. It may take 12, or even 24h, but after that any clearly false reputation will be removed. this has worked 3 times for me so far

 

[iBeqstZ]

Personally, I feel that no matter how much proof you give for the report of the negative reputation, it would get denied anyway

I've got few days ago from IvanDab a fake negative reputation and reported it with proof, they have removed it but for now i need to deal with few g

So this is another case of a suggestion based almost exclusively on personal feelings/experience. I can guarantee you that those are almost automatically disregarded.
In my eyes, this thread is not an attempt to improve the site, it's an attempt to vent your frustration and put pressure on staff to remove your reputation.
Now, the reputation "has multiple accounts" is a tricky one. On the one hand, it implies a disregard for the rules (assuming ofc, that its true, no evidence to be seen either way), but on the other hand this may not affect trades.

By my definition it would indeed be false, since it does not contain NEARLY enough information (3 words is NOT enough).
Considering, however, that you've had it for less than 6 hours, I don't really see what you're panicking about.

Whenever you get clearly false rep, just leave a comment on said rep explaining why its false. Put the same information in the report. It may take 12, or even 24h, but after that any clearly false reputation will be removed. this has worked 3 times for me so far

'In my eyes, this thread is not an attempt to improve the site, it's an attempt to vent your frustration and put pressure on staff to remove your reputation.'.
I want that there comes a rule for giving fake/false negative reputations, otherwise people will still do it while they wouldn't be punished really.

 

[Kennedy]

There is a rule for fake/false reputation, it's called the already existing ones.

I've got few days ago from IvanDab a fake negative reputation and reported it with proof, they have removed it but for now i need to deal with few g

'In my eyes, this thread is not an attempt to improve the site, it's an attempt to vent your frustration and put pressure on staff to remove your reputation.'.
I want that there comes a rule for giving fake/false negative reputations, otherwise people will still do it while they wouldn't be punished really.

 

[Ivain]

I've got few days ago from IvanDab a fake negative reputation and reported it with proof, they have removed it but for now i need to deal with few g

'In my eyes, this thread is not an attempt to improve the site, it's an attempt to vent your frustration and put pressure on staff to remove your reputation.'.
I want that there comes a rule for giving fake/false negative reputations, otherwise people will still do it while they wouldn't be punished really.

And yet none of the anecdotes or information are based on anything other than personal experience. You have not looked in any way beyond your own grievances, or tried to see things how others might.
You at least managed to give an example of what the rule should involve (some don't even post that much), but you don't seem to have bothered finding out if there as already something in place.
As others have already said, there is something in place. A warning exists for 'abusing the reputation system'. Whether this is giving false rep, farming rep, or through gang-repping someone, it's one warning. And I believe it's 5 points (not sure on this). Since 10 points gets you a suspension, the thing you suggested is already in place. Probably in a better way than said suggestion.

Considering you made this less than 6 hours after receiving the latest negative rep, I don't think you really gave it that much thought (you're not convincing me you spent 5 hours thinking, I don't even do that). So yes, I believe my assessment that your motivation was almost entirely personal was correct.

Ask yourself this: If the entire situation you described in the thread (which takes up 80-90% of the whole suggestion) had never taken place, would you have made this suggestion at this time?

 

[3l0Ofd8QrqJ]

Ask yourself this: If the entire situation you described in the thread (which takes up 80-90% of the whole suggestion) had never taken place, would you have made this suggestion at this time?

Users make a suggestion like this because it's an issue? Of course if they weren't aware of an issue or hadn't experienced it it would be less likely - that's just common sense.

I can guarantee anyone on here registered for a significant amount of time has faced a false rep situation. However there are systems in place against it already so this isn't really necessary.

 

[C0an]

Please Note: Some people have mis-read the thread thinking i'm the one giving a fake/negative reputation. It isn't me

PS: That Voxel/SnowBlood is ban evading from their main MC-Market account Woodlouse

 

[Ivain]

Users make a suggestion like this because it's an issue? Of course if they weren't aware of an issue or hadn't experienced it it would be less likely - that's just common sense.

I can guarantee anyone on here registered for a significant amount of time has faced a false rep situation. However there are systems in place against it already so this isn't really necessary.

Just because it's an issue does not make this anything less of a suggestion based on personal experience only, and those are almost always useless, since they rarely take into account anything beyond the scope of their own experience. Especially if they were made impulsively, as this one likely was.
How else could he have failed to notice that giving false rep was already forbidden?
if it was simply about changing rules, the post would have been more about what is wrong with how it is currently enforced/interpreted, instead of being 90% anecdote. if he'd put this information into a report, the removal of the reputation he talks about would be almost guaranteed.

I dislike people posting impulsive suggestions. I won't deny that I did it myself on occasion too, but those suggestions were also almost always shut down.

Perhaps I should write a guide on how to make a useful suggestion in addition to the one on how to tell the difference on what is false and what is real rep. So many people seem to need them, yet I know most will never see them because nobody reads the wiki.

 

[C0an]

Yeah... This kid really needs to be banned from MC-Market because of ban evading with giving me negative rep

:/

 

[3l0Ofd8QrqJ]

Just because it's an issue does not make this anything less of a suggestion based on personal experience only.

I never said that, I literally confirmed it probably is based off personal experience and justified the reasoning for posting a suggestion off that being the case.

The guy is making a completely valid suggestion, he's requesting, essentially, that changes be made to make it harder to give false rep/put more incentive on not doing it.

I feel like you make posts on suggestions purely for the sake of contradicting the OP.

 

[Ivain]

I never said that, I literally confirmed it probably is based off personal experience and justified the reasoning for posting a suggestion off that being the case.

The guy is making a completely valid suggestion, he's requesting, essentially, that changes be made to make it harder to give false rep/put more incentive on not doing it.

I feel like you make posts on suggestions purely for the sake of contradicting the OP.

I don't make posts purely for the sake of contradicting the OP. If I misread your post, that's on me. However, the reason I think you might believe that I contradict for the sake of it is because whenever I find a good suggestion that I just straight up agree with, I leave an agree and move on. If I find something I mostly agree with, I add a small modification and move on. Sometimes I might decide to leave a post on a reputation I agree with that states my reason that I agree, if I feel the need, but I rarely make a big deal out of it.
If I see something I strongly disagree with, I'll usually make a big deal out of it. I invested too much time in these forums to let rash suggestions mess things up, however unlikely it might be that Mick actually implemetents them.

In this case, I got sick of seeing yet ANOTHER reputation-related suggestion, and not even one that was given proper thought. It comes down very simply to "crack down harder on people that give false rep", except that the punishment he suggests is pretty much already being enforced, something that's pretty easy to learn if you look or ask around a little.
Yes, I may have gone a little far, elaborated a little much. Call it my irritation at seeing so many poorly thought out suggestions spilling over. perhaps if I dont bottle up that irritation, it wouldn't all end up in 1 thread like this.

 

[iBeqstZ]

3l0Ofd8QrqJ says it good .