Make Reputation More Balance

[GS]

What do I mean by Make Reputation More balanced. Well, for example Jonny has 25 rep and Devil has -11 rep and negs johnny that takes jonny down -1 I believe MCM should give rep power to who deserves it if you have so many negs your rep is not as powerful as someone with full positive.

 

[Zyger]

I agree but I don't want to have 19.02039029398988 as my reputation lul

Maybe they could have tiers, e.g. 0 - 49 rep = 1 rep, 50 - 100 rep = 2, etc to prevent that, but I reckon it'd be best to keep it how it is, as it may be misleading because people usually base the rep off of the amount of successful deals someone has done.

 

[Justis]

Firstly, most users with -11 feedback tend to end up banned sooner rather than later.
Secondly, if their feedback is unjustified or untruthful, you can dispute it and get it removed. If it is justified then that’s on you. Which leads us to my third point:
Feedback is about the user being given the feedback, not about the user leaving it. All policy compliant feedback is equal.
This isn’t a “balance”, this is an unbalance, and will shift far too much power into the hands of those who farm reviews, and create tangible demand for their feedback, because it’s “worth” more. Users will refuse to deal with new users because they stand more to gain by dealing with highly reputable users who can give them a more “valuable” review. Which runs contradictory to the rule forbidding the use of feedback as a currency or reward.

 

[GS]

Firstly, most users with -11 feedback tend to end up banned sooner rather than later.
Secondly, if their feedback on you is unjustified or untruthful, you can dispute it and get it removed. If it is justified then that’s on you. Which leads us to my third point:
Feedback is about the user being given the feedback, not about the user leaving it. All policy compliant feedback is equal.
Lastly, this isn’t a “balance”, this is an unbalance, and will shift far too much power into the hands of those who farm reviews, and create tangible demand for their feedback, because it’s “worth” more. Users will refuse to deal with new users because they stand more to gain by dealing with highly reputable users who can give them a more “valuable” review. Which runs contradictory to the rule forbidding the use of feedback as a currency or reward.

But reputation disputes are backuped to the point I dont think any get answered

 

[1337]

A pretty good rule of thumb is that if somebody goes into the deep negatives (or negatives at all, for that matter), it's usually best to avoid them/dealing with them as a whole. As Justis said, they're likely to be banned soon anyhow and you'd have to do a fair bit to get yourself down so low.

Edit: On second thought, some sort of weighing system may be an interesting concept as it's a pretty well-established fact that a single negative reputation hurts more than a single positive reputation contributes to a user's overall image. Maybe some system where instead of just subtracting 1 point, a negative reputation would weigh down your total reputation count based on how many total -reps are present/maybe even the reputability of the issuing user. Not too sure about that last bit though.

 

[Mick]

Firstly, most users with -11 feedback tend to end up banned sooner rather than later.
Secondly, if their feedback is unjustified or untruthful, you can dispute it and get it removed. If it is justified then that’s on you. Which leads us to my third point:
Feedback is about the user being given the feedback, not about the user leaving it. All policy compliant feedback is equal.
This isn’t a “balance”, this is an unbalance, and will shift far too much power into the hands of those who farm reviews, and create tangible demand for their feedback, because it’s “worth” more. Users will refuse to deal with new users because they stand more to gain by dealing with highly reputable users who can give them a more “valuable” review. Which runs contradictory to the rule forbidding the use of feedback as a currency or reward.

Denied, thanks for the suggestion.