Change the way reputation works

[Robert]

Hey! This has come to my attention about two times this week.

The reputation system is in need for a serious rework. I've experienced two negative reputations this week, and the funny thing is that the information wasn't correct at all. Reputations should be factual, not opinions. The reason for this change is that half the people of this forum misuse and abuse the reputation system, with "opinions" that can be proven factually incorrect, but apparently since it's an opinion it's always correct to staff.

 

[Robert]

Dont tag him in suggestions

Removed

 

[Justis]

You might not find it fair when another user has a negative opinion of you.
You might not feel that it's based of logic or factual reasoning.
Opinions aren't always fair.
Your reputation isn't always what you think you deserve; but it is an accurate representation of the way people feel about you.

If someone has an opinion of you that you feel is unjustified, and you contact them in a positive and compassionate manner, it should only be that much easier for you to work towards an understanding which will result in it's natural removal.
Which is the best thing about community managed reputation, is that it encourages members to try and communicate with each other, and be understanding; because it returns.

There will always be bias in any attempt to determine what reputation is "deserved" or not; and trying will, by definition lead to the perversion of what we call reputation. It would not be reputation at all.
If we're going to have a reputation system, it needs to be based off of everyone's opinions.

Otherwise, the only other functional option would be to remove reputation and just go with a "Vouches" tab, and only allow positive things to be said about everyone. However, then we silence the voices of those who have been wronged or know of and wish to make other people aware of the evils held within other members.
Ultimately leading to trashing in other areas of the forums, as well as bad people getting a lot of great attention because they are protected by their numbers and the bias-ness of not allowing negativity to be properly expressed.

I've covered this multiple times in several other duplicate suggestions.

Just remember:

9.5 Do not abuse the reputation report system. This means you shall not attempt to report reputation unless it violates the above rules. Reputation is otherwise handled by the community, and is there to gauge the community’s opinion of you. 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.

 

[Robert]

You might not find it fair when another user has a negative opinion of you.
You might not feel that it's based of logic or factual reasoning.
Opinions aren't always fair.
Your reputation isn't always what you think you deserve; but it is an accurate representation of the way people feel about you.

If someone has an opinion of you that you feel is unjustified, and you contact them in a positive and compassionate manner, it should only be that much easier for you to work towards an understanding which will result in it's natural removal.

There will always be bias in any attempt to determine what reputation is "deserved" or not; and trying will, by definition lead to the perversion of what we call reputation. It would not be reputation at all.
If we're going to have a reputation system, it needs to be based off of everyone's opinions.

Otherwise, the only other functional option would be to remove reputation and just go with a "Vouches" tab, and only allow positive things to be said about everyone. However, then we silence the voices of those who have been wronged or know of and wish to make other people aware of the evils held within other members.
Ultimately leading to trashing in other areas of the forums, as well as bad people getting a lot of great attention because they are protected by their numbers and the bias-ness of not allowing negativity to be properly expressed.

I've covered this multiple times in several other duplicate suggestions.

9.5 Do not abuse the reputation report system. This means you shall not attempt to report reputation unless it violates the above rules. Reputation is otherwise handled by the community, and is there to gauge the community’s opinion of you. 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.

What I said was that you should have factual information to prove your reputation, as most people can't handle posting correct information within a reputation. I also don't see why you quoted the rules, as this is a suggestion to change that. Although reputation is just an opinion, it really does affect you when doing a deal. When that information isn't correct that could harm a user from dealing with someone or something in that context.

 

[Justis]

What I said was that you should have factual information to prove your reputation, as most people can't handle posting correct information within a reputation. I also don't see why you quoted the rules, as this is a suggestion to change that. Although reputation is just an opinion, it really does affect you when doing a deal. When that information isn't correct that could harm a user from dealing with someone or something in that context.

I'll quote the rules again:

9.1 Do not give reputation which is not constructive and informative. Example: “User is dumb” or “Vouch. Cool guy”.

Misinformation is a violation of our rules.
If someone gives information which you can prove is false, then report it and prove that it is false, and it will be removed for not being informative and they'll likely be warned for abusing the reputation system.

However, if someone says "I think this person is 12" or whatever, then that's factual. That they think you are twelve, and it is your responsibility to go and prove to them that you are not twelve.

I had a guy negative rep me and call me a terrible resource mod and all sorts of distasteful names because he thought I rejected his resource, and then removed him from the conversation about it.
Turns out it was a misunderstanding, and he was confusing me for another mod.
However, it was still my responsibility to inform him of that, because until I had informed him of that, HIS opinion of me, was that I was a terrible resource mod.
Removing that reputation would not have improved his opinion of me, and my actual reputation in the community would not have been accurately reflected in my points, because his opinion would have been ignored due to me not thinking I deserved it.
After a week, I did manage to inform him of what had really happened, and his opinion of me improved, and so did my reputation, then he removed the point, and my points reflected my actual reputation.

 

[Robert]

I would also like to mention as contacting them about that reputation wouldn't work with half the people on this forum are toxic, immature, underage, salty 13 year olds, salty teenagers that have mental ages of 10, etc..

If someone cannot co-operate with you, which most of that time you will encounter these types of people, then there really is no solving that potentially false reputation that could impact your marketing greatly. A perfect example of this is Hasan.

 

[Landon]

mixed opinions//

I feel as reputation shouldn't be 100% fact, as reputation is how people feel about you. So if someone feels as if you are immature, then they should be able to -rep you with their opinion.

But, shit reps should be removed. For instance, -repping someone because "autistic" or something along that manner. All that is doing is leaving users with -rep for absolutely no reason.

Reputation is meant to be your "overview" you could say. If you remove the opinionated part of reputation, then reputation would have no personality in it, which is kind of lame.

 

[Zeiyon]

Personally, I believe that you should only be able to give rep if you have dealt with the person.

 

[Mick]

You might not find it fair when another user has a negative opinion of you.
You might not feel that it's based of logic or factual reasoning.
Opinions aren't always fair.
Your reputation isn't always what you think you deserve; but it is an accurate representation of the way people feel about you.

If someone has an opinion of you that you feel is unjustified, and you contact them in a positive and compassionate manner, it should only be that much easier for you to work towards an understanding which will result in it's natural removal.
Which is the best thing about community managed reputation, is that it encourages members to try and communicate with each other, and be understanding; because it returns.

There will always be bias in any attempt to determine what reputation is "deserved" or not; and trying will, by definition lead to the perversion of what we call reputation. It would not be reputation at all.
If we're going to have a reputation system, it needs to be based off of everyone's opinions.

Otherwise, the only other functional option would be to remove reputation and just go with a "Vouches" tab, and only allow positive things to be said about everyone. However, then we silence the voices of those who have been wronged or know of and wish to make other people aware of the evils held within other members.
Ultimately leading to trashing in other areas of the forums, as well as bad people getting a lot of great attention because they are protected by their numbers and the bias-ness of not allowing negativity to be properly expressed.

I've covered this multiple times in several other duplicate suggestions.

Just remember:

Thanks Justis.

Denied. Thanks for the suggestion.