Staff negative rep
- Thread starter BrianGrug
- Start date
- Status
PebbleHost
High performance, consistent uptime and fast support. Minecraft hosting that just works.
Yeah, that is true but I mean, it is still unfair to staff members
Bluntly put, staff can't really do much with their own rep. If they do, it just gives more material for the certain individual who neg repped them to whine and point abuse at the system. In the end, it doesn't really matter. The moderator badge is by far more reputable than any other form of reputation. They are the trusted individuals to take care of the site. We're on a kids forum, people whine, no stopping it. Start altering records, and the whiners will focus on the topic of abuse.
It comes with the job. Some staff members not to mention some names have a really "bombastic" attitude towards members and some extremly childish to say the very least.
And staff still do dealings on site which contribute to why the reputation system was put in place, regardless of they get negative reputation regarding their dealings or staffing duties.
In the great words of Justis in one of my old reputation reports.
In short.
"Reputation given to you regarding a users opinion is valid."
Love you don't ban me staff
Last edited:
That seems too poorly phrased to have been quoted by me; also you misspelt regardless.
It also seems you used this suggestion thread as a means to unnecessarily call out a user for being childish. Uncouth.
Actually didn't use this, to point out anything.
Just wanted to explain why I feel like staff should not be immune towards negative reputation within their duties. If it is a fraudulent reputation it will eventually be reviewed and removed.
Sorta, until you think some staff have been banned for scamming before...[DOUBLEPOST=1531352745][/DOUBLEPOST]Along with that just had a horrible experience with DiabloTurtle. Even though he is staff he is acting like a 12-year-old. So I don't really know how much it shows. Granted there are some staff on here that are 10/10
I completely agree with this. I do not want to worry about receiving negative rep for every warning or punishment I hand out.
I'll gladly give up all the positive rep I received for being a mod in return.
In fact, after being made aware just now that receiving negative rep because some salty kid disagrees with my modding decisions is considered valid, I think I might need to break my promise to Mick and quit NOW, because I cannot function as a mod if every warning I hand out can result in negrep from the salty user.[DOUBLEPOST=1531585691][/DOUBLEPOST]
Now, the first negrep I received as a staff-member was theoretically valid except for the different circumstances, as I made a user wait an unreasonable amount of time. That is the sort of neg-rep I'd grudgingly accept.
My current one, however, is because a user disagreed with a decision I made as a staff-member. If they disagree, they should appeal, not neg-rep me.
The only reason most staff members don't have 50 neg-rep yet is because a surprising amount of people on this site are too decent for that.
For a final illustration, I'll compare the 2 neg-reps I received for my actions as staff.
The first one was given to me by flipora, for leaving them waiting for a month for a trivial support request. This resulted in me feeling guilty despite the circumstances beyond my control that led to me being inactive for most of june, because I could still have taken action to prevent their long wait (handed it off to another member).
Fortunately, the user willingly removed it.
Now, the current neg-rep has as result that I'm pissed at the user and have to actively stop myself from abusing my mod powers to remove it or otherwise teach the user a lesson, and above all has me regretful I agreed to be a mod again.
Not exactly a good emotion to experience in a time when MCM is already short on staff.
Nor do I have any reasonable chance of talking it out with the user.
I guess I've now finally felt the frustration users experience when a shitty neg-rep is technically valid and the user that gave it is unreasonable.
I'll be doing some serious reconsideration of how I deal with reported neg-rep once I can safely return to my duties without fear of being blackmailed.
TLDR: If it's allowed to neg-rep staff members simply because you disagree with their decision, staff-members will be discouraged from ever taking action because they might get "valid" neg-rep for it.
If a staff-member misbehaves/abuses their power, that should be taken up with the admins, and too much misbehaviour should result in demotion.
If a member disagrees with a staff decision, that should be an appeal, not a negrep.
Otherwise, staff members that actually give a shit about their reputation are susceptible to blackmail by users (I'll remove the rep if you remove the warning, etc).
Of course, at that point you might as well abuse your staff powers to remove it yourself, but it's still a worsening of the situation.
I'll gladly give up all the positive rep I received for being a mod in return.
In fact, after being made aware just now that receiving negative rep because some salty kid disagrees with my modding decisions is considered valid, I think I might need to break my promise to Mick and quit NOW, because I cannot function as a mod if every warning I hand out can result in negrep from the salty user.[DOUBLEPOST=1531585691][/DOUBLEPOST]
The thing is that with the current system, every possible action I take as a mod could result in negative reputation because the user disagrees. Nothing more than that.
Now, the first negrep I received as a staff-member was theoretically valid except for the different circumstances, as I made a user wait an unreasonable amount of time. That is the sort of neg-rep I'd grudgingly accept.
My current one, however, is because a user disagreed with a decision I made as a staff-member. If they disagree, they should appeal, not neg-rep me.
The only reason most staff members don't have 50 neg-rep yet is because a surprising amount of people on this site are too decent for that.
For a final illustration, I'll compare the 2 neg-reps I received for my actions as staff.
The first one was given to me by flipora, for leaving them waiting for a month for a trivial support request. This resulted in me feeling guilty despite the circumstances beyond my control that led to me being inactive for most of june, because I could still have taken action to prevent their long wait (handed it off to another member).
Fortunately, the user willingly removed it.
Now, the current neg-rep has as result that I'm pissed at the user and have to actively stop myself from abusing my mod powers to remove it or otherwise teach the user a lesson, and above all has me regretful I agreed to be a mod again.
Not exactly a good emotion to experience in a time when MCM is already short on staff.
Nor do I have any reasonable chance of talking it out with the user.
I guess I've now finally felt the frustration users experience when a shitty neg-rep is technically valid and the user that gave it is unreasonable.
I'll be doing some serious reconsideration of how I deal with reported neg-rep once I can safely return to my duties without fear of being blackmailed.
TLDR: If it's allowed to neg-rep staff members simply because you disagree with their decision, staff-members will be discouraged from ever taking action because they might get "valid" neg-rep for it.
If a staff-member misbehaves/abuses their power, that should be taken up with the admins, and too much misbehaviour should result in demotion.
If a member disagrees with a staff decision, that should be an appeal, not a negrep.
Otherwise, staff members that actually give a shit about their reputation are susceptible to blackmail by users (I'll remove the rep if you remove the warning, etc).
Of course, at that point you might as well abuse your staff powers to remove it yourself, but it's still a worsening of the situation.
Last edited:
I think that staff should be able to have their rep removed by Mick if they strictly followed the rules and got a neg rep. I think if a member of staff didn't quite follow the rules, they should be open to neg rep for bad discretion/judgment.
In case you need more evidence, take a look at the latest 2 I have received. 1 of them is because I gave a user 2 warnings for 2 different things, and is complete bullshit because every warning automatically comes with a message that tells you why you received the warning, so "for no reason" is nonsense.
The other is because I removed the rep from one person and not for the other.
Both of these should have been appeals, if the users really thought I was wrong. Instead, they chose to neg-rep me because the previous one has shown them they can get away with it.
I've been a staff member for over 2 months and made hundreds of similar calls, but I didnt receive anything of the likes. Nor did I in the months when I previously held this position.
Now that apparently it's tolerated to give staff members neg-rep instead of appealing the decision, I suddenly receive 3 negreps in as many days.
If this trend continues I'll have 50 negreps by the end of the week because every user I warn for breaking our rules takes revenge by giving me negrep. And I can't even remove them all for breaking the rules, because that'd be bad practice and I still have my honor, so I have to wait on Justis, who has WAY too many things on his mind to bother with salty kids.
The worst part? This is not even accomplishing anything. If these 3 users had made an appeal for the decision and/or filed a complaint to Mick or Justis, they might've actually changed something, and/or had their warnings re-examined. Hell, if Hell froze over and all 3 of them were in the right, which they aren't, they might've even gotten me demoted. Now they've already made clear that their complaints are trivial, so it won't happen.
The other is because I removed the rep from one person and not for the other.
Both of these should have been appeals, if the users really thought I was wrong. Instead, they chose to neg-rep me because the previous one has shown them they can get away with it.
I've been a staff member for over 2 months and made hundreds of similar calls, but I didnt receive anything of the likes. Nor did I in the months when I previously held this position.
Now that apparently it's tolerated to give staff members neg-rep instead of appealing the decision, I suddenly receive 3 negreps in as many days.
If this trend continues I'll have 50 negreps by the end of the week because every user I warn for breaking our rules takes revenge by giving me negrep. And I can't even remove them all for breaking the rules, because that'd be bad practice and I still have my honor, so I have to wait on Justis, who has WAY too many things on his mind to bother with salty kids.
The worst part? This is not even accomplishing anything. If these 3 users had made an appeal for the decision and/or filed a complaint to Mick or Justis, they might've actually changed something, and/or had their warnings re-examined. Hell, if Hell froze over and all 3 of them were in the right, which they aren't, they might've even gotten me demoted. Now they've already made clear that their complaints are trivial, so it won't happen.
Last edited:
Imo I always thought reputation should be given in relation to a transaction of a product/service (at least that’s how I use it)
You shouldn’t be able to +rep or -rep someone based on whether you like/agree with them or not. You should only be able to +rep or -rep someone if you bought something from them.
It’d get rid of a lot of useless rep such as “+1 he’s my friend”
After all, this is a marketplace
The system should be re-evaluated
You shouldn’t be able to +rep or -rep someone based on whether you like/agree with them or not. You should only be able to +rep or -rep someone if you bought something from them.
It’d get rid of a lot of useless rep such as “+1 he’s my friend”
After all, this is a marketplace
The system should be re-evaluated
If you've been warned and respond to the message sent and the staff member responds childishly and you feel abused or mistreated, then you should be able to give a neg rep because you had a bad experience with them. If you're simply retaliating because you broke the rules, that is not grounds for a neg rep but instead you should have your reputation permissions removed.
Revenge rep should be against the rules
Revenge rep should be against the rules
- Status
