Disallow opinions for negative rep

[21217]

What's come into a major issue is that people live negative rep on profiles as opinions, as for example they have said somethings. I could tell Space (for example) to fuck off. )I love you really ( but he could then leave negative rep. You shouldn't be allowed to do this. Negative rep should be ONLY if a user has trashed your thread MULTIPLE times and/or has scammed you, backed out of a deal or a deal was wrong. Opinions should be NEUTRAL reputation ONLY.

 

[dxn]

What's come into a major issue is that people live negative rep on profiles as opinions, as for example they have said somethings. I could tell Space (for example) to fuck off. )I love you really ( but he could then leave negative rep. You shouldn't be allowed to do this. Negative rep should be ONLY if a user has trashed your thread MULTIPLE times and/or has scammed you, backed out of a deal or a deal was wrong. Opinions should be NEUTRAL reputation ONLY.

look at me for example

 

[Taiga]

This has been brought up before, and staff denies it because reputation is mean to show how the community sees you overall, not just business-wise.
I agree with your suggestion tho, I dont like how people keep giving the same reputation on attitude outside deals as they give to people you have dealt with. Neg rep should mean that the person shouldnt be dealt with in business, not that they said something mean to you on sb.

 

[MyNameIsAres]

look at me for example

Not a great example, eh?

=======
Back to the suggestion. Actually typed ''support'' originally but changed my mind. Sorry bud.

 

[peh]

look at me for example

He's talking about leaving next rep like "neg rep asshole" or something like that all your neg rep is accusing you of scamming

 

[dxn]

He's talking about leaving next rep like "neg rep asshole" or something like that all your neg rep is accusing you of scamming

None of my neg rep is account me of scamming - just because I pulled an acc..

 

[peh]

None of my neg rep is account me of scamming - just because I pulled an acc..

The first neg rep say "Scammed me"

 

[dxn]

The first neg rep say "Scammed me"

Paralyze is a scammer... Look at how many scam reports are on him..

 

[Devon]

look at me for example

None of my neg rep is account me of scamming - just because I pulled an acc..

So you scammed, that's not an opinion. You just admitted to pulling the account, which is scamming.

 

[Donnie Bravo]

look at me for example

lol no you scammed lol

 

[21217]

Guys, stop this isn't a thread to argue who the fuck scammed who nobody gives 2 fucks go open a scam report. I made this threads for a SUGGESTION not for a scam report.

 

[dxn]

So you scammed, that's not an opinion. You just admitted to pulling the account, which is scamming.

No money was scammed, no deal was made. I had the OG email.

lol no you scammed lol

Who even are you?

 

[Dans]

http://prntscr.com/ea106s I see why you made this suggestion

 

[Donnie Bravo]

No money was scammed, no deal was made. I had the OG email.

Who even are you?

oo big man

 

[MTG]

This has been brought up before, and staff denies it because reputation is mean to show how the community sees you overall, not just business-wise.

Oh well they should another tab beside "buyer, seller and trader" then.
I very agree with the OP though.

 

[peh]

Guys, stop this isn't a thread to argue who the fuck scammed who nobody gives 2 fucks go open a scam report. I made this threads for a SUGGESTION not for a scam report.

Sorry :/

 

[Ivain]

The only thing I feel that should be changed is that the defintion of "constructive criticism" be tightened and that it be enforced more tightly. That way, you can't say "this user is a toxic asshole, DNDW", but you can say "This user is sensitive and/or very particular about a subject, take care" (that specific example would be neutral rep in the latter case, but even for negative rep it would be valid).

The way it should be judged is if it is a contribution to the community. Saying someone is an asshole, however eloquently you put it, does not contribute anything to the community. If it's true, most people will notice quickly anyway.


However, telling people not to go in discussion with a person because they will react violently would be a contribution to the community, as it may not be obvious at first sight (there are a very few subjects on which I, for instance, will tend to react more strongly than I otherwise do.).
Or a person has been harassing your threads because you had a discussion about something and they lost. That's not a deal, but it is definitely a valid reason for negative reputation.

I do not agree with how it is currently enforced, but I do understand why they did it.
They wanted to make sure that people who do legitimate deals but otherwise behave like small children throwing a tantrum would not end up with overwhelmingly positive reputation.
The current reputation system is meant to reflect not just your deals but also your behaviour on the site. I just dislike the way it is currently being enforced, and that needs to change. Whether it is because staff are not yet comfortable with the new rules or because they interpret them differently I do not know, but it is something that should happen.