This has been bugging me ever since it was implemented. The last rule of the reputation rules.
The problem with this is that this rule only makes sense in a community where all, or the overwelming majority of the community, can be expected to behave in a rational way.
Anyone who has spent a significant amount of time on here knows that this is far from the case. There are plenty of people who would ignore any reasonable efforts to improve their opinion of you, and might instead demand unreasonable things (bribes, shame, idfk what, I've fortunately never had to try it). I will not name anyone, nor should I need to. Each of you will be able to think of at least a few people whose opinion of you cannot be changed.
Right now, the only thing stopping all those people from neg-repping the people that they have a negative opinion of is 1 of 2 things. Either they don't give enough of a shit about the other, or they're afraid of revenge-repping, which under the current system can be done very easily without straight up breaking the rules, since all you need to do is explain why you have a negative opinion of said person.
This "mutal destruction" type status quo is not to my liking. I've had explained to me why a trades-only rep system will not be implemented. Whether or not I agree with the choice of solution, the reasoning is sound. (I will find a link to the thread that justis explained it to me in).
So instead, I'm proposing that the rule be changed slightly. Instead of "it is your responsibility to make sure it happens" which is essentially the spirit behind the current rule, change it to "it is your responsibility to make ALL reasonable efforts to change their opinion of you". This may mean apologizing, changing your general behavior towards them, or talking the issues out with them, or if you caused some form of damage to them, to attempt to repair that damage in some way. This might take weeks.
Now, the difference here is that if you can prove that the person who gave you an opinion-based negative reputation is refusing to cooperate despite reasonable efforts on your part, you can ask to have the reputation removed. This is not something you should do instantly, since you can't make all reasonable efforts inside a day or two.
I'll leave it up to staff to determine both what they deem reasonable efforts and what they deem a reasonable time period over which someone's opinion may be changed. This could vary from 5 days or so, to weeks to months (though I recommend about 2-3 weeks myself).
If there is an agreement on what is considered reasonable efforts to change someone's opinion, it's easy enough for staff to simply ask someone reporting their negative rep to make sure all those things have been tried, and to ask them to prove that they tried those things.
This could be done with a few basic copypastes, significantly speeding up the handling of what, for lack of a better word, I'll call 'false' reports. Judgement on the case will only need to be made once someone has provided proof that they attempted all reasonable methods of appeasing the other user.
This will also spread out the submission of reports from the actual moment of it happening, reducing the chances of it piling up. Hopefully, it will also reduce the amount of 'frivolous' reports made just on the off chance it's removed , since those will still be automatically denied, while those that truly believe the reputation is wrong will make an effort to either have it changed, or to be able to prove that the person is unwilling to respond to any attempts to repair the rift.
TLDR: Change the "it is your responsibility to change someone's negative opinion" rule to "it is your responsibility to make ALL reasonable efforts to change someone's negative opinion" and if someone can prove they've made all efforts and the other side has not responded, consider removing the negative reputation then.
Final note: By "making all reasonable efforts" I don't mean half-hearted apologies or just saying "hey man sorry I was such a dick to you, could you remove that neg rep now?" and just expecting that to be enough. I mean: keep trying until you're out of ideas and out of options.
This will hopefully remove the feeling of getting fucked over by a rule that allows staff to completely wash their hands of any opinion-based reputation, instead giving a hope that if you do attempt to resolve it yourself, it might get removed, whether by the person that gave it or a staff member that decides you did all you could be expected to.
Code:
If someone has a negative opinion of you, and you wish to improve your reputation, it is your responsibility to improve their opinion of you and therefore your reputation via communication with the reputation author.The problem with this is that this rule only makes sense in a community where all, or the overwelming majority of the community, can be expected to behave in a rational way.
Anyone who has spent a significant amount of time on here knows that this is far from the case. There are plenty of people who would ignore any reasonable efforts to improve their opinion of you, and might instead demand unreasonable things (bribes, shame, idfk what, I've fortunately never had to try it). I will not name anyone, nor should I need to. Each of you will be able to think of at least a few people whose opinion of you cannot be changed.
Right now, the only thing stopping all those people from neg-repping the people that they have a negative opinion of is 1 of 2 things. Either they don't give enough of a shit about the other, or they're afraid of revenge-repping, which under the current system can be done very easily without straight up breaking the rules, since all you need to do is explain why you have a negative opinion of said person.
This "mutal destruction" type status quo is not to my liking. I've had explained to me why a trades-only rep system will not be implemented. Whether or not I agree with the choice of solution, the reasoning is sound. (I will find a link to the thread that justis explained it to me in).
So instead, I'm proposing that the rule be changed slightly. Instead of "it is your responsibility to make sure it happens" which is essentially the spirit behind the current rule, change it to "it is your responsibility to make ALL reasonable efforts to change their opinion of you". This may mean apologizing, changing your general behavior towards them, or talking the issues out with them, or if you caused some form of damage to them, to attempt to repair that damage in some way. This might take weeks.
Now, the difference here is that if you can prove that the person who gave you an opinion-based negative reputation is refusing to cooperate despite reasonable efforts on your part, you can ask to have the reputation removed. This is not something you should do instantly, since you can't make all reasonable efforts inside a day or two.
I'll leave it up to staff to determine both what they deem reasonable efforts and what they deem a reasonable time period over which someone's opinion may be changed. This could vary from 5 days or so, to weeks to months (though I recommend about 2-3 weeks myself).
If there is an agreement on what is considered reasonable efforts to change someone's opinion, it's easy enough for staff to simply ask someone reporting their negative rep to make sure all those things have been tried, and to ask them to prove that they tried those things.
This could be done with a few basic copypastes, significantly speeding up the handling of what, for lack of a better word, I'll call 'false' reports. Judgement on the case will only need to be made once someone has provided proof that they attempted all reasonable methods of appeasing the other user.
This will also spread out the submission of reports from the actual moment of it happening, reducing the chances of it piling up. Hopefully, it will also reduce the amount of 'frivolous' reports made just on the off chance it's removed , since those will still be automatically denied, while those that truly believe the reputation is wrong will make an effort to either have it changed, or to be able to prove that the person is unwilling to respond to any attempts to repair the rift.
TLDR: Change the "it is your responsibility to change someone's negative opinion" rule to "it is your responsibility to make ALL reasonable efforts to change someone's negative opinion" and if someone can prove they've made all efforts and the other side has not responded, consider removing the negative reputation then.
Final note: By "making all reasonable efforts" I don't mean half-hearted apologies or just saying "hey man sorry I was such a dick to you, could you remove that neg rep now?" and just expecting that to be enough. I mean: keep trying until you're out of ideas and out of options.
This will hopefully remove the feeling of getting fucked over by a rule that allows staff to completely wash their hands of any opinion-based reputation, instead giving a hope that if you do attempt to resolve it yourself, it might get removed, whether by the person that gave it or a staff member that decides you did all you could be expected to.
- Type
- Suggestion
- Status
- Denied
