Recently it has come to my attention that people have the wrong idea of how reputation should be given out. People seem to think "It's an opinion right? That means I can -rep anyone over any tiny thing that annoys me." This is incorrect. You're still expected to use good judgement when deciding what reputation should be given for. A user offering $1 as a ""vouch copy"" isn't a reason to +rep someone and already is against the rules. A user saying a word you don't like, not doing something they were considering or other such small things are not reasons to -rep someone. This is a marketplace and if you're going to leave reputation, it should be about a deal you've done or something that can possibly affect you if you want to do a deal with them. Bitter relations/drama have no place in the rep system.
Here are a few recent examples of reputation system abuse I have seen:
A user said she'd post a selfie in chat, but didn't get around to doing it, so 3 desperate lonely guys decide to -rep her.
A user says something mildly rude to someone else, so they get their friends to team up and -rep them.
A user says a word that someone else doesn't like, so they -rep them.
A ban evader joins, buys supreme/premium, then hosts a "$1 giveaway" and asks each person to +rep them, thus "buying rep".
There are many more, but these are what I instantly thought of.
Things like this only make the rep system taken less seriously and can make one look bad if they want to do a deal. All for little things which have nothing to do with how trustworthy a user is.
So my idea is to add a "Complainant" category (best word I could find) and also require proof in the form of a thread link or screenshot of the deal/complaint.
One of the most common reputation reports I see regarding -rep is claims of it being "false". The person who handed it out never provided any proof, so how can we tell if it's real or not? We can't go after every single user asking and having them inevitably argue with each other. They should have to provide proof and if the person who received it has an objection (such as it being fake) they can report it and we ask the rep giver more information regarding it. If forged evidence is found, the rep giver will be permanently banned from the rep system, only appealable after one year.
As for the Complainant category: this is the only reputation type that should be allowed to be given out if you haven't dealt with the user. One being toxic constantly, DDoSing others, ripping off other services and lying about it etc. are all things you'd want to know about someone before dealing with them. In order to leave rep on this, it must be a severe offense that is stated in our rules. A screenshot or thread link of the offense would be required as well.
Requiring proof will not only prevent the massive moderation headaches rep reports cause, but will also ensure that users are actually repping based on deals and for complaints that they aren't little things that don't matter.
Here's a quick inspect element mock up of what it could look like:
Please discuss and share your thoughts on this including anything to improve this suggestion or fix any flaw you might find in it.
Here are a few recent examples of reputation system abuse I have seen:
A user said she'd post a selfie in chat, but didn't get around to doing it, so 3 desperate lonely guys decide to -rep her.
A user says something mildly rude to someone else, so they get their friends to team up and -rep them.
A user says a word that someone else doesn't like, so they -rep them.
A ban evader joins, buys supreme/premium, then hosts a "$1 giveaway" and asks each person to +rep them, thus "buying rep".
There are many more, but these are what I instantly thought of.
Things like this only make the rep system taken less seriously and can make one look bad if they want to do a deal. All for little things which have nothing to do with how trustworthy a user is.
So my idea is to add a "Complainant" category (best word I could find) and also require proof in the form of a thread link or screenshot of the deal/complaint.
One of the most common reputation reports I see regarding -rep is claims of it being "false". The person who handed it out never provided any proof, so how can we tell if it's real or not? We can't go after every single user asking and having them inevitably argue with each other. They should have to provide proof and if the person who received it has an objection (such as it being fake) they can report it and we ask the rep giver more information regarding it. If forged evidence is found, the rep giver will be permanently banned from the rep system, only appealable after one year.
As for the Complainant category: this is the only reputation type that should be allowed to be given out if you haven't dealt with the user. One being toxic constantly, DDoSing others, ripping off other services and lying about it etc. are all things you'd want to know about someone before dealing with them. In order to leave rep on this, it must be a severe offense that is stated in our rules. A screenshot or thread link of the offense would be required as well.
Requiring proof will not only prevent the massive moderation headaches rep reports cause, but will also ensure that users are actually repping based on deals and for complaints that they aren't little things that don't matter.
Here's a quick inspect element mock up of what it could look like:
Please discuss and share your thoughts on this including anything to improve this suggestion or fix any flaw you might find in it.
- Type
- Suggestion
- Status
- Denied
Last edited:
? haha.
