Rule question

[Geek]

So you're allowed to create false reputation on people?

 

[Geek]

9.1 Do not give reputation which is not relevant and informative. Example: “User is dumb” or “Vouch. Cool guy”.

Thats what I thought, so then why was my request denied?

 

[Cal]

Thats what I thought, so then why was my request denied?

Because staff determined via a set of guidelines that that reputation is valid.

 

[Innings]

Thats what I thought, so then why was my request denied?

Which one are you referring to?

 

[Geek]

Which one are you referring to?

The one about the broken config.

 

[Innings]

The one about the broken config.

That is a valid report, if you are selling broken configs then you deserve a negative reputation.

 

[Geek]

That is a valid report, if you are selling broken configs then you deserve a negative reputation.

It wasn't broken though, and I did "fix it" and give it back.

 

[Innings]

It wasn't broken though, and I did "fix it" and give it back.

If you had to fix it then it was obviously broke. You did sell a broken config and so that user has every right to give you a negative reputation as they were not satisfied with your services. Considering you did not take the time to test the config before selling it then quite frankly that was poor service.

 

[Geek]

If you had to fix it then it was obviously broke. You did sell a broken config and so that user has every right to give you a negative reputation as they were not satisfied with your services. Considering you did not take the time to test the config before selling it then quite frankly that was poor service.

IT wasn’t broken when I️ sent it tho