Reputation System

[Vice]

My reps get removed, even though most if not all have done a deal with me.

And thats not even a requirement for reputation, the requirement is to simply state your opinion.

Mick posting rep for others: https://gyazo.com/94f2ec49d1669e84f731db2787a8f344
Really, "can confirm he is cool". So that is a valid one but the nearly 20 reputation of mine you have removed is not valid?

Countless other people you constantly purge reputation of. Just because you created a shitty system doesn't mean you abuse to "fix" it. Reputations and ONLY positive ones are being removed in bulk from people. Though when it comes to any negative, they might be quick enough to remove a false one in say 2 weeks? Oh last time I brought this up to Mick, he did not acknowledge it. He merely said you will be notified next time. 20 rep down later and no notifications. Including 4 that were removed today. People act in such childish manners when it comes to negative rep, hell even I get butthurt when I get one. Thats the nature of everyone here. You're only adding venom to the bite everyone has been struck by. The actions arent going by unnoticed and shows a great lack of integrity on the staff team of this market.

Even better, when I brought it up in a support request like normal users should. It was ignored , then closed without a reply.
https://gyazo.com/1e3a1231f761ef9bb715d95e5ead6e10



Remove the system completely or actually think of reasonable fixes.

EDIT: Staff have locked my account at 71 positive reputation. I am not allowed to have more.

I was at 74/75 before this thread. I am now at 71. Lets see how low it goes.
Went from 70 to 64.
Went from 67 to 63.
Went back up to 72, the removed it down to 71.
Went back up to 72 AGAIN, the removed it down to 71.
Went back up to 73, then AGAIN it was removed down to 71.

 

[Taiga]

http://www.mc-market.org/threads/177921/#post-1822325
"I understand what reputation is. It is the collective feeling of a community towards a person." - Justis

The reputation system is being handled like a bastard atm. Is it meant to be deals-only? is it meant to be based on opinion? Who knows, each staff member seem to have different opinion on how to handle it. The only clue we have to how the community should approach the rep system is what is in the rules (http://www.mc-market.org/policies/rules/), so if any staff team removes a rep it should be notified to both the giver and the given on what specific rule it breaks.
So yeah, I guess I agree that the staff team needs to figure something out betwhen themself on how to treat the ridiculous rep system we have or make it better.

 

[Aekalix]

Sigh, another thread. I agree mostly however, reputation should be removed if it's not good I guess but the boundaries are off by miles. Nobody really knows them. I recently checked reputation left and received by staff and quite a few of those rep broke the obvious boundaries (vouch cool dude whatever) but staffs do not remove their own rep. They do however, remove yours. Currently the system feels a bit bias but it has been abused by almost everyone.
But everyone abuses everything on McM.

TL;DR
We just need a good set of rules for the reputation system which should probably solve a lot of problems.

 

[MisfitNerd]

I have quite a lot to say on this issue myself. I've lost over 20+ rep myself. The reasons for nearly all of them were because they were unclear (basically saying something stupid), and that they didn't describe a deal done.

Since when do we have to describe a deal in the reps we leave each other?

Here is a current layout of the reputation system rules. As of now, there's no rule stating reputation has to explain a deal. As long as it isn't something stupid like "User is dumb" or "Vouch. Cool guy", it's considered acceptable.

Yet somehow, reputation left for me stating things like my trustworthiness, helpfulness, reliability, etc. were all deleted because of the lack of description of a deal.

And yeah I like how Vice pointed out the rep's that Mick leaves out. Barely any of his are that descriptive but they're valid, but my ACTUAL valid rep isn't???

The problem with the system isn't how people use it anymore. It's that nobody is on the same page. No two people here seem to have a clear understanding of the system. None of the staff are on the same page about it's requirements and how to go about using it. Currently the system is designed to be a place for all collective thoughts on an individual user by the community (quoted from Justis), and Mick has agreed to this a thousand times. Yet now it's business related.

My thoughts: An official staff meeting needs to be had and they need to thoroughly discuss how the system will work. Currently everyone has different ideas of it and nobody knows anymore. I feel the community would have a way better idea of how to use it if the staff actually did too.

 

[Jam]

Finally someone notices the reputation one leaves for another.

 

[Cal]

I agree, the reputation system is completely destroyed. For new members, it is extremely difficult to get trusted, for more experienced members, one negative reputation and your whole shop is done. There is no clarity in the system either, the rules are unclear and the whole system is just fucked.

Don't just sit on your hands waiting for it to boil over, we need to do something about it. I think it should be removed entirely as right now it is almost impossible to fix!

 

[MisfitNerd]

I agree, the reputation system is completely destroyed. For new members, it is extremely difficult to get trusted, for more experienced members, one negative reputation and your whole shop is done. There is no clarity in the system either, the rules are unclear and the whole system is just fucked.

Don't just sit on your hands waiting for it to boil over, we need to do something about it. I think it should be removed entirely as right now it is almost impossible to fix!

The thing is it isn't impossible to fix. The rules just need to be reconstructed to make them more clear to everyone. More examples of bad rep should be included. All staff members should be advised on what type of thing to look for when removing a reported rep. Currently some staff look at the rules and if the rep is too vague they delete it, whereas other staff leave anything to play as they believe it's opinion based. No one has the same understanding and it's currently kinda done out of opinions of the staff member. If that is fixed, and perhaps misuse of the system is more heavily enforced, the problems would be solved.

The system just needs an overhaul, not a total removal. It's useful when used properly.

 

[Cal]

The thing is it isn't impossible to fix. The rules just need to be reconstructed to make them more clear to everyone. More examples of bad rep should be included. All staff members should be advised on what type of thing to look for when removing a reported rep. Currently some staff look at the rules and if the rep is too vague they delete it, whereas other staff leave anything to play as they believe it's opinion based. No one has the same understanding and it's currently kinda done out of opinions of the staff member. If that is fixed, and perhaps misuse of the system is more heavily enforced, the problems would be solved.

The system just needs an overhaul, not a total removal. It's useful when used properly.

It's not properly used though, no matter how much enforcement there is people will still abuse the system. Especially with the current incentives to have a good rep score.

 

[MisfitNerd]

It's not properly used though, no matter how much enforcement there is people will still abuse the system. Especially with the current incentives to have a good rep score.

That's where we need increased punishments of misuse of the system. This includes warning users who say irrelevant things like "Vouch. Cool dude." as well as anything clearly false. If users know they'll get punished harsher, they're more likely to stop plus warn their friends. In the end the system is still good. It helps us not be forced to use profile vouches, thread vouches, and winner ratings. It just needs to be changed to be business related instead of what it currently is.

 

[tjrgg]

This is a problem, for sure. I just made a comment about how the reputation system should only be used when you've actually dealt with someone in the marketplace on another suggestion thread. For whatever reason, I thought that was how the system was going to work, but this thread made me realize that is not the case. As such, I see no real value in the reputation system, because it's made up of general opinions and not based on any real feedback about how a transaction went. I agree that the reputation system needs to be revisited and/or modified, but not in the way described in the suggestion.

 

[Projecki]

Remove the system completely

I can agree with you on this part. At this point, I wouldn't mind the entire system being removed.

 

[MaximC]

Nothing needs to be said here.
It's broken, and needs to be examined at ASAP.

Reputation is one of the only modes of verification at MCM, and is critical for all forum posts.

 

[tommy099431]

The only problem is that people use it and they dont even get a service from the user (The users friend) so they need to somehow create a way were they can confirm that the user who is posting the rep had a service from the user, like maybe you have to have an image of the service being done or something[DOUBLEPOST=1500691038][/DOUBLEPOST]Mick be breaking rule 1.8 Do not post content which is extremely low in quality, irrelevant, redundant, unnecessary, or meaningless. (e.g: “Looks nice, GLWS”, “Vouch, bought an {item}”)

 

[Ajdin]

I understand that no system is perfect and that tweaks are expected as time passes but this has been around for fairly long and no official clarifications have been made.

Also this:

Even better, when I brought it up in a support request like normal users should. It was ignored , then closed without a reply.
https://gyazo.com/1e3a1231f761ef9bb715d95e5ead6e10

That's just a joke lol. You can't just disregard an issue.

 

[34010]

lost like 6 rep myself, dont fucking know why

 

[SuperCoolMomo]

I can agree with you on this part. At this point, I wouldn't mind the entire system being removed.

If you remove the system completley, you wont know if the member is trustworthy or not.

 

[SuperCoolMomo]

Wrong, rep doesn't always mean you won't be scammed.
So many users with high rep have scammed.

I trust people more with high rep/vouches

 

[Projecki]

Wrong, rep doesn't always mean you won't be scammed.
So many users with high rep have scammed.

I trust people more with high rep/vouches

Messages, reactions, and especially the age of the account all play a factor. Paypal uses age of account to determine trustworthiness, although people do get bored of mc and exit when Im pretty sure no one gets bored of money ;p