Make negative reputation expire in 12-16 months

[deletedusers]

Everyone has made a mistake in one way or another, and we all grow from it. Theres also many people that have negative reps on their profiles that have probably grown, and some perhaps that have not. The ones that don't will continue to have negative reputation on their profile throughout so it only benefits those who want to improve as people. Even if someone messed up 3 years ago that negative reputation in a way still defines them, when it shouldn't

I think this would be a motivating way for people to not get so angered and frustrated by the reputation system, as well as a way to motivate them to improve themselves. its such a strain on mental health as well because even a virtual score to identify your "reliability as a person" can be stressful. As its a marketplace to evaluate a user though to work with, its understandable to some extent. Having it permanent though causes an unnecessary strain for those trying to grow as people, because no matter what they do to improve as people, they may not even be the same person as last year. I think having negative reputation be temporary would be a great feature to implement.

Potential con : Some people want to see others past mistakes, full reputation and such

Rebuttal : Any unreliable person will be consistently getting negative reputation so that isn't an issue. This system is simply more forgiving to those who have changed and want to change

 

[BOOP]

I only came here to say this:
If neg rep should expire, so should pos rep.

(I didn't read any replies, except Usagi's. I know he said, but I wanted to say it lol)

 

[deletedusers]

I only came here to say this:
If neg rep should expire, so should pos rep.

(I didn't read any replies, except Usagi's. I know he said, but I wanted to say it lol)

This makes logical sense as well, but its generally the negative actions about people that people tend to grow/improve over time and that play a negative factor into mental health (ie, virtual score that is stuck with you forever that you can't always change)

 

[Fawks]

I still think the rep system should be removed as "opinions" and "deals" do not go together. They should be seperate, or be one or the other. Like other smaller sites who actually have good management

this is literally why a 3 day old forum has more online users than this site at this rate. lol

 

[deletedusers]

I still think the rep system should be removed as "opinions" and "deals" do not go together. They should be seperate, or be one or the other. Like other smaller sites who actually have good management

this is literally why a 3 day old forum has more online users than this site at this rate. lol

I also sorta agree with the concept that opinions and deals dont go together well, but they also do, but they also don't. Its complicated. if you disagree with my take but I also agree with yours, i'd suggest posting your opinion and see how its received by everyone else(if thats allowed)

edit: essentially with deals you want to know if people are easy to talk to, reliable, etc. But in some cases a negrep doesn't really do much informative info.

 

[Ivain]

With the new dispute system, not needed. Just report it after half a year or so, it'll open a dispute. Good chance the member that gave it won't react fast enough or care enough to actively enter the dispute, and the rep will automatically be removed. It's worked for me once, it might work twice.

 

[deletedusers]

I appreciate more opinions/input being put in, either or! Noticing a few negatives without input. I love having an open and civilized discussion about our opinions here

 

[BOOP]

Maybe after a set time neg rep would still be on your account, but not be shown on your reputation score. Maybe the number could reset every month or so to represent the users current status.

"Oh you did a deal with the user last month? Eh whatever doesn't even matter"
Like rep won't even matter at that point if it just gets reset.

 

[Lotus]

Justis made a similar thread to this - https://www.mc-market.org/threads/348075/

It’s an interesting concept, but clear to have mixed popularity. I would not support negative reputation only. But I can entertain the idea of both positive and negative being affected.

 

[deletedusers]

Justis made a similar thread to this - https://www.mc-market.org/threads/348075/

It’s an interesting concept, but clear to have mixed popularity. I would not support negative reputation only. But I can entertain the idea of both positive and negative being affected.

I'm also open to this as well. I wonder how many people disagree with the idea entirely, or just disagree with it only being negative. It definitely seems to have a mixed response for sure

Someone on this thread said that a good idea would to have a staff member review it after 12 months, and see if they deem the user being better or not based on post history and such.

Justin R's sounds like a great idea as well

 

[Lotus]

Someone on this thread said that a good idea would to have a staff member review it after 12 months, and see if they deem the user being better or not based on post history and such.

As a staff member, our duty is to validate whether reputation placed on a user conforms to our rules.

But I don’t believe we should have the authority to judge people and make decisions on whether a person has improved or not. The reputation system is set in place for community members to gauge other community members. I can only imagine chaos to ensue should staff members become an almighty power who judges ‘whether you are a better person or not’. We’re third party enforcers, not the people who have actually had the personal experience with you.

It’s far too vague, immeasurable, hard to keep consistent and a downright power flip in my eyes.

And it would also put a ridiculous strain on workload for moderators. The amount of reputation to be reviewed would be enormous. Certainly something none of us would be confident in handling.

 

[deletedusers]

As a staff member, our duty is to validate whether reputation placed on a user conforms to our rules.

But I don’t believe we should have the authority to judge people and make decisions on whether a person has improved or not. The reputation system is set in place for community members to gauge other community members. I can only imagine chaos to ensue should staff members become an almighty power who judges ‘whether you are a better person or not’. We’re third party enforcers, not the people who have actually had the personal experience with you.

It’s far too vague, immeasurable, hard to keep consistent and a downright power flip in my eyes.

And it would also put a ridiculous strain on workload for moderators. The amount of reputation to be reviewed would be enormous. Certainly something none of us would be confident in handling.

Ah, alright, i completely agree with you. Definitely great to hear your perspective on this whole topic!

 

[MarkElf]

I'd like warning points to be removed after a period of time but we see how far we got with that implementation. I doubt this will get much further.

 

[BrettPlays]

Some people never change though. :/

 

[deletedusers]

Some people never change though. :/

then their current reputation would reflect that

 

[BrettPlays]

then their current reputation would reflect that

Tru nvm lol
Edit: If they have it so the report gets reviewed by staff.

 

[Mick]

As Lotus has said, a suggestion very similar to this was made by Justis a while ago and denied. If someone's been around for a long time, their reputation should reflect that and it doesn't make sense to remove just negative reps and keep the positive ones.

If I've been on the site for 5 years and done 20 deals a year, I shouldn't be considered as reputable as someone who joined the site 1 year ago and has done 20 deals in total.

Denied, thanks for the suggestion.