Remove Reputation Image Restriction

[Pink]

Hello, My suggestion is quite useful. I believe we should be able to post positive reputation without needing to upload at least 1 image to post said reputation.

More Detail:
I believe if a user has purchased supreme or ultimate they shouldn’t need proof to post Positive Reputation. Or you could set it if you have been here for 3+ months you wouldn’t need the limitation too.

 

[SSH]

Hello, My suggestion is quite useful. I believe we should be able to post reputation without needing to upload at least 1 image to post said reputation.

Are you wanting rule 9.1.1 removed or just to allow imgur links etc in the rep?

 

[Pink]

Are you wanting rule 9.1.1 removed or just to allow imgur links etc in the rep?

No just to remove It for positive reputation, I believe rule 9.1.1 is perfect because people post negative reputation without any evidence. So I believe if you are posting a positive reputation you should not need to upload an image, if you are posting a negative reputation you should need at least 1 image.

 

[SSH]

No just to remove It for positive reputation, I believe rule 9.1.1 is perfect because people post negative reputation without any evidence. So I believe if you are posting a positive reputation you should not need to upload an image, if you are posting a negative reputation you should need at least 1 image.

Yea, no. ALL rep should have some form of evidence. I just think that the better way would be to allow imgur links.

 

[Pink]

REDACTED

Read my messages before trashing my thread.

 

[Sullybash12]

There's a reason proof is required to say the least

 

[Pink]

REDACTED

True, but it’s quite annoying when you’ve actually made a deal. Or at least remove it for ranked users or users who’s been here for a certain time.

hard to trash a thread thats already trash lmao

Reported for trashing, I don’t deal with kids such as these.[DOUBLEPOST=1595291005][/DOUBLEPOST]Updated post.

 

[Ally]

Yea, no. ALL rep should have some form of evidence. I just think that the better way would be to allow imgur links.

IIRC the reason they don't allow imgur links is because it points to an external server where the evidence is not guaranteed to remain. I do think they should offer some form of integration which would result in the saving of images from uploads (i.e. ShareX) to the pre-existing CDN here. I don't remember though because they've said something on this in the past several times so my reasoning might be off.

 

[Jaii]

Seeing as you're new here, I'll put it into some decent light for you.

There are already limitations on placing reputation on users. Before, back about a year ago people could place reputation without the usage of file uploads. This lead to users receiving upwards of 300+ reputation, some of which I had remove on my own profile for just "oh wow awesome guy love him". There were a lot of big users that inevitably left the forums once this update came, due to the sole fact that there was some misunderstanding as to why this new system was being put in place.

Understandable, there has to be a way to provide evidence of reputation between deals. Now, I see you're mentioning adding more restrictions to reputation but how exactly does that help keep what MC-Market attempted to move away from in the first place, away from the system you're suggesting here today.

Opinionated statement.
I don't believe this a good idea and I most certainly wouldn't vote on it. I believe the system is fair, fine and setup correctly to provide potential customers/clients of people attempting to do sales or make business choices with, with the information and evidence to provide their opposing dealer with the validity that is sought to be found.

 

[Pink]

If Justin r disagrees just remove the post.

 

[Justis]

Our goal is to serve our community with resources that will enable them to be well informed and engage in safe deals with the people they choose to contact on our platform.

Doing as you suggest would do several things:
1. Allows certain users to pay their way into being given immunity to our rules (rules requiring feedback have evidence)
2. Allows those certain users the ability to farm feedback much more readily, and engage in "rep-for-rep" groups/interactions.
3. Allows those certain users the ability to lie in their feedback, without barriers, in order to mislead others into trusting them

None of these results align with our goal of implementing changes that will better keep our community safe.
I’m sure plenty of people would love the opportunity to pay their way into looking more reputable and being able to abuse the reputation system for their own benefit, but the evidence requirements were put in place for the good of the community as a whole, and it is for that reason that they need to stay.

 

[Yohhan]

If Justin r disagrees just remove the post.

It will be moved on Declined Suggestions

 

[Mick]

Back about a year ago we introduced some pretty radical changes to the way that we handle reputation. We made all reputation left by banned members be marked as uncounted in your reputation totals and disabled the reporting functionality to reduce abuse and targeted. The changes that we made were certainly controversial at the time, but looking back I'm a firm believer that the changes we made back then were the best that we could have made.

Our reputation system is very far from being perfect in its current state, and we fully recognise that. Since it's introduction we've changed many policies and spent countless hours developing new custom systems, such as disputing feedback.

At the moment we aren't planning to do any more development for our site until we can migrate to XF2. We're also not going to be making any changes to our policies surrounding reputation. Our system is stable at the moment, and making a change now when we're going to be redeveloping everything shortly isn't beneficial. Perhaps once we move to XF2 and have fixed all the bugs that come with that and have more time for some new development and to consider the impact that instituting new policies will result in.

Until then, I'll move this to denied. Once we migrate to XF2 if you feel that this is still relevant please create a new suggestion thread and we can look into it once again. Thank you to everyone for your support and criticism of our systems, it is definitely the best way for us to improve.

Thank you,