Reputation

[1337]

Hello,

It seems that with every passing day, it becomes even harder to leave a negative reputation on anyone's profile for legitimate reasons due to fear of them, out of rage, turning around and giving one right back. This is an issue as it stops people from being able to truly express their opinions and experiences with another user, putting the entire concept of the reputation system into question. A potential solution would be that if a user has been given a negative reputation by someone, any attempts at adding a negative reputation back must first be reviewed by staff and then later determined if it's a legitimate reputation or if it's a blatant revenge rep. This is a good step forward in fixing an already heavily flawed system of reputation.

EDIT 1: Thanks ZACK for the idea! All negative reputation must have valid proof.

 

[markd]

I don't like the system we have currently. ex. maybe need to show proof or something?

edit: Just thinking about it, the current rep system is like a honors system. You can't trust everybody out there.

time for a change. a big change. (ik this has been discussed a lot, and I know a lot of people like myself who has delt with false rep.)

 

[FearlessOwner]

Another thing I dont like is the limit to repuations you can leave, I see the reason why but 3 is far to low, maybe 5 or 6 would be fine.

I don't like the system we have currently. ex. maybe need to show proof or something?

Yes I agree! Proof so that others can see proof/evidence, and it saves mods and ect more time.

 

[Grady]

I see where you are coming from, but there is one major problem. I think that the negative reputation should stay, but have to be reviewed later by a staff instead of holding off the reputation until staff can review it. This is because an exit scammer could just instantly negative rep the people they scammed and the users will not be able to put a negative reputation on the scammer without waiting a few days for their rep to be reviewed when the scammer would most likely already be banned.

 

[Seas.]

I agree with this, as well as with what Grady mentioned. Something needs to change.

 

[JohnLee]

Hello,

It seems that with every passing day, it becomes even harder to leave a negative reputation on anyone's profile for legitimate reasons due to fear of them, out of rage, turning around and giving one right back. This is an issue as it stops people from being able to truly express their opinions and experiences with another user, putting the entire concept of the reputation system into question. A potential solution would be that if a user has been given a negative reputation by someone, any attempts at adding a negative reputation back must first be reviewed by staff and then later determined if it's a legitimate reputation or if it's a blatant revenge rep. This is a good step forward in fixing an already heavily flawed system of reputation.

The rep system is currently a way for people who don't like you to give you the middle finger. I'm sure you, Fox, have some experience with that. Negative reputation should not be a way for unaffiliated users in business transactions to back up their friends or harm users that they have opposing opinions with.

In my personal opinion, reputation should require the negative "repper" to show proof that the receiver of said reputation violated a standard set of guidelines that should be determined as valid reasons for negative reputation.

Perhaps another system can be implemented for users who simply dislike each other, for example think each other dickheads, trashing threads, being somewhat obnoxious but not harmful, etc., but completely separated from the reputation system which is the experience of a business transaction.

 

[Sentencings]

This whole issue would be resolved if people HAD to provide evidence for leaving a negative reputation. Maybe not at the time of placing it, but at the time a staff member requests to see proof.

Yea, a new system for rep would be quite nice to be implemented, would also be pretty nice if staff had to check and all but I know it wont happen due to the fact that it would take ages for reps to be posted and also it would take a lot of time for staff to review them all. I have been falsely negative repped quite a few times already, and honestly now I just don't care about my reputation since every time I put a valid neg rep on someone I can expect that person to falsely rep me back. I remember a couple months ago I got a neg rep because I didn't want to give someone a vouch copy like what? lol.

 

[Choo]

So you're implying that if a user leaves a neg on you, if you were to give one back, it would not appear and would have to be reviewed by a staff member?

 

[sewonrock]

I hate it when someone gives me a bad rep for not giving them money and them saying stuff about me taking there precious time even tho i talked to them for 10 min :/ Darkness darkness my old friend.....

 

[1337]

So you're implying that if a user leaves a neg on you, if you were to give one back, it would not appear and would have to be reviewed by a staff member?

Pretty much, yes.[DOUBLEPOST=1518100850][/DOUBLEPOST]

Pretty much, yes.

It's not perfect, but it's a good start to eliminate revenge reps.

 

[ZACK]

I agree with the idea, just not how you want to go about doing it.

 

[1337]

I agree with the idea, just not how you want to go about doing it.

What would you suggest as an alternative?

 

[ZACK]

What would you suggest as an alternative?

Make it so if u neg rep someone, the other user has to post some proof of whatever

 

[1337]

Agreed, all negative reputation should require proof.

 

[rekt]

I also think rep blocking needs to be a thing. It's frustrating as fuck that people can report and remove rep then the person adds it back. It's so annoying. Also, if that rep system the OP wants goes through, Mick should find like a good 3 deditcated people to run it because the current level of time it takes for rep reviewed is bothersome. I do understand how Mick can't just go and have people apply, and it's hard to find good help that wont screw him over, but something needs done.

 

[utaninja]

I completely agree. I found someone who I wanted to leave a negative reputation for, he changed his name to something Racist and said Racist things. I didn’t due to the fact that he is reputable and I didn’t want a negative reputation.

 

[1337]

I also think rep blocking needs to be a thing. It's frustrating as fuck that people can report and remove rep then the person adds it back. It's so annoying. Also, if that rep system the OP wants goes through, Mick should find like a good 3 deditcated people to run it because the current level of time it takes for rep reviewed is bothersome. I do understand how Mick can't just go and have people apply, and it's hard to find good help that wont screw him over, but something needs done.

Agree completely, and who knows, maybe at some point Mick might open applications for reputation watchers, but that's probably the least plausible thing on this entire thread.

 

[Zyger]

Agree completely, and who knows, maybe at some point Mick might open applications for reputation watchers, but that's probably the least plausible thing on this entire thread.

You should make a separate thread for this outlining all the details for "reputation watchers", it'd make it easier to understand and read through, meaning it'd be more likely to actually happen in the future,

 

[Team Yoghurt]

This happend to me, but staff still doesn't want to remove it.