Often people consider the amount of reputation you have to be based on how reputable you are, and usually having lots of this means you are more trustworthy. However I flaw I see in this system is that many people tend to reputation farm off small deals, e.g. lots of thread designs or followers services (not directed at anyone) and seems a bit unfair to the high reputation people who work harder for the same 'green ticks'.
I'm not proposing we change this system in any way, however make a small reformation for the better- add average deal amount. Usually these days when adding reputation we add an amount (e.g. if I bought a Minecraft account for 200$, that's the amount I add.) So lets say a person has 3 rep, and has done a 200$ deal, a 50$ and a 70$ deal, they have across all deals averaged an amount of 105$.
As I said, I would rather trust a 40 reputation person who commonly handles 100$+ then an 80 rep with only 10$ deals. It just adds an aspect of realism to our reputation, especially with members who are 'reputable' exit scamming here and there.
ty for reading
I dont think this should be too hard to implement and can be shown in the reputation tab somewhere.
I'm not proposing we change this system in any way, however make a small reformation for the better- add average deal amount. Usually these days when adding reputation we add an amount (e.g. if I bought a Minecraft account for 200$, that's the amount I add.) So lets say a person has 3 rep, and has done a 200$ deal, a 50$ and a 70$ deal, they have across all deals averaged an amount of 105$.
As I said, I would rather trust a 40 reputation person who commonly handles 100$+ then an 80 rep with only 10$ deals. It just adds an aspect of realism to our reputation, especially with members who are 'reputable' exit scamming here and there.
ty for reading
I dont think this should be too hard to implement and can be shown in the reputation tab somewhere.
- Type
- Suggestion
- Status
- Denied
.
