If this has been suggested and denied before, my apologies in advance.
So currently we seem to have a HUGE community-wide problem of misuse of the negative side of the reputation system. I'll show a very good example down below currently on Kim's profile for everyone to view.
Reputation Left for Kim:
Reputation Left by Kim:
As you can see, this is all within the last week or so roughly. To me, this looks like a problem. People clearly not knowing the proper way to use this system, which is getting to become worse and worse. Especially when you can't easily get this reputation removed as it may be considered "valid".
So, here's what I propose. Currently people have thought that all reputation posted (positive/neutral/negative) should be all approved by staff before being shown on a person's reputation tab. What I think we need, is only have negative reputation need to be preapproved. Here's how it would work.
To provide negative reputation, you'd have to give the message you'd want shown, provide a short explanation to staff as to why you believe this person should be given the negative reputation, and have a box for them to provide any/all proof of the incident at hand (deal, shoutbox conversation, PM's, etc). This way, users can't just neg rep each other because they may not like each other. Yes, this would be more work to do. But realize this: If we had this currently for all the reputation going in on Kim's profile alone, most would have probably just been instantly denied as it's pretty obviously stupid (on both sides). It shouldn't have to take TOO much time for staff to deal with these, as again, if the proof is really dumb/fake/etc. it could just get denied, whereas if it's actually valid it just gets accepted.
I know I may get some disagrees here, just please give an explanation of why you may not like the idea. I personally believe this could help stop the worst part of the misuse of the reputation system, to where we can still keep it, yet make bad reputation valid and public for the community without having to be spammed with crap like what I provided.
Thanks for reading and please provide explanations/opinions. If you agree, just remember to use the agree button and don't just type "+1" or Mick may kill you.
I'm still noticing users disagreeing but not talking about it. Help me out a bit here guys... explain why you disagree. Don't just disagree and leave... Let this be a community discussion.
So currently we seem to have a HUGE community-wide problem of misuse of the negative side of the reputation system. I'll show a very good example down below currently on Kim's profile for everyone to view.
Reputation Left for Kim:
Reputation Left by Kim:
As you can see, this is all within the last week or so roughly. To me, this looks like a problem. People clearly not knowing the proper way to use this system, which is getting to become worse and worse. Especially when you can't easily get this reputation removed as it may be considered "valid".
So, here's what I propose. Currently people have thought that all reputation posted (positive/neutral/negative) should be all approved by staff before being shown on a person's reputation tab. What I think we need, is only have negative reputation need to be preapproved. Here's how it would work.
To provide negative reputation, you'd have to give the message you'd want shown, provide a short explanation to staff as to why you believe this person should be given the negative reputation, and have a box for them to provide any/all proof of the incident at hand (deal, shoutbox conversation, PM's, etc). This way, users can't just neg rep each other because they may not like each other. Yes, this would be more work to do. But realize this: If we had this currently for all the reputation going in on Kim's profile alone, most would have probably just been instantly denied as it's pretty obviously stupid (on both sides). It shouldn't have to take TOO much time for staff to deal with these, as again, if the proof is really dumb/fake/etc. it could just get denied, whereas if it's actually valid it just gets accepted.
I know I may get some disagrees here, just please give an explanation of why you may not like the idea. I personally believe this could help stop the worst part of the misuse of the reputation system, to where we can still keep it, yet make bad reputation valid and public for the community without having to be spammed with crap like what I provided.
Thanks for reading and please provide explanations/opinions. If you agree, just remember to use the agree button and don't just type "+1" or Mick may kill you.
I'm still noticing users disagreeing but not talking about it. Help me out a bit here guys... explain why you disagree. Don't just disagree and leave... Let this be a community discussion.
- Type
- Suggestion
- Status
- Denied
Last edited:
