Reputations

[Samwise]

...but this whole 'rep' thing dosen't seem the least bit fair, and quite honestly, a bit dumb (though I never liked the old rating system, either.). I've never looked at my 'rep', 'cause I don't really care what people think of my posts. I don't rate other peoples', either. I'm not a Tolkien expert, and I don't ever plan on becoming one. So if people are going to waste their time rating my posts low 'cause I don't know enough about the books or movies or whatever, I really could care less.

I apologize for this sounding like a rant; I guess in a sense it is, but I don't see the importance of one person rating another person's thoughts.

[Lyta_Underhill]

I do enjoying rating posts sometimes, but I understand this system is ripe for abuse. The question though, is, are there any REAL negative consequences of having a "Ted Sandyman" reputation? If Ted Sandyman said something interesting, I would still read it and perhaps comment upon it. I put it down to a fluke when I saw Lush with a "slipping" reputation awhile back, as I always enjoy reading her posts and I've never known her to "slip". Since she is definitely opinionated and uses colorful turns of phrase, I am sure that very characteristic is liable to produce polarized results, thus the smattering of negatives. In a way, that would make the "slipping" 'Downer more interesting to read, as you would wonder what made someone react so strongly as to rate the person 'down.' A 'slipping' 'Downer is often one who has created a controversy. (I noticed Knight of Gondor had slipped during the "Good vs. Evil" movies thread controversy as well). That doesn't make me any less interested in what KoG has to say. In short, I don't see any downside, except a bit of a frowny face beside one's nickname...hardly a handicap at all! That's just my own opinion!

Cheers!
Lyta

P.S. I normally subscribe to the doctrine of only speaking well of someone and keeping mum when the stupid or irritating posts come along...

[The Saucepan Man]

So if people are going to waste their time rating my posts low 'cause I don't know enough about the books or movies or whatever, I really could care less.

As far as I'm concerned, it's not about how well you know the books or the films. It's about how well-expressed, thoughtful, witty, insightful, informative etc your posts are. In other words, how much your post contributes to the particular thread that you post on (whether that be in the Books, the Quiz Room, an RPG or whatever).

We are all here because we enjoy reading posts made by others and posting ourselves. It seems to me that any system which encourages us to post well, and therefore makes us think more and elicits more interesting or funny material for us all to read, is something which is worthwhile.

That said, I agree to some degree with Lyta. Reputation is an interesting feature, and should be meted out (whether positively or negatively) with care. But people shouldn't take their personal Reputation ratings as the be all and end all.

[Durelin]

I'm fine with the reputation system. I wouldn't say I like it, but it is a good way to recognize someone as a good poster. Hopefully the giving of reputation through good comments, as well as the taking away of through bad comments, is deserved. It is hard to tell. I too only give good comments, as I find there is little sense in taking giving them a bad reputation for a post I have some minor problem with. And I have never come across a post that I had a major problem with. Plus, I don't think my giving of a good comment even gives much reputation at all... I guess it does give some posters more motivation to think through posts, check spelling, etc. And it rewards many posters who deserve to be.

Concerning signing you comments: I thought I remembered something you could set to make your comments signed or not, but now I think I was dreaming. Do you need to literally sign your comments, or am I not losing my mind? (I seriously doubt the latter).

Thanks.

-Durelin

[Amanaduial the archer]

Durelin, the idea of signing was mentioned: if you wish, you can 'sign' your rating comment, but it isn't mandatory on the system.

[Lush]

Lyta,

Actually, someone with what must have a lot of weight, rated down a post of mine for being "too long." not for any of my so-called opinions. Maybe.

I pouted at first, but if they got a kick of wielding the power, then who am I to take that pleasure away from them?

Like Pio, I prefer to compliment others and leave the negative stuff to someone else.

[Son of Númenor]

I tend to side with others like Lush & Piosenniel in being skeptical of negative ratings. If I have a major problem with someone else's post, I will Private Message the person or, if my criticism is content-specific & appropriate for the theme of the thread, I will state my criticism kindly in a reply. I personally would not want the content of one of my posts to be subject to skepticism because an anonymous B-Der rated me down on another of my replies. My humbly submitted suggestion would be to disallow anonymity by reputation-givers & make commentary mandatory along with the basic 'I approve' or 'I disapprove'.