All About Reputation

**Rick** · 01-10-2010, 12:19 AM

Already done. I was doing when you posted.

**Sourdough** · 01-10-2010, 12:31 AM

Thank You,

**rwc1969** · 01-10-2010, 01:11 AM

Originally Posted by Rick

I have 112 points if that helps you any.

112 isn't enough. Maybe if you had 115 or so, but then only maybe.

Doesn't really help me, but thanks. I just look at what people post and can pretty much figure out from there if it all sounds reasonable or not.

I just mentioned it for people that used the rep feature to determine a user's reliability. Then it might be helpful.

I'm not too up on the forum features. I only recently figured out how to proplerly view blogs and that there are user groups and such.

**your_comforting_company** · 01-10-2010, 06:16 AM

I have to agree, but I think that the 20 is definately too high... There's lots of posts in the last few days that move me deeply and I can't give the persons rep for it. I think it should be 0 so that we can give rep freely. otherwise it's like limiting the amount of respect we can give other members that are more than wise in their ways and contribute much of the info on the boards.
Can we set up a poll for the cycle count?

**Camp10** · 01-10-2010, 08:09 AM

As I understand it though (from what I think Crash posted earlier) lowering the number also means some jerk can pile the negative rep on you if they dont like you for any reason. I'm not sure that is such a good idea. I dont know if it would be possible to leave the negative the way it is but lower the number for the positive rep....

**Sourdough** · 01-10-2010, 08:32 AM

How I see it, is Chris gets paid for clicks, hits, traffic, viewers coming here. Viewers come for quality content and/or entertainment. It is in Chris's interest to support us, by creating the tools where-by we can support, reward, acknowledge quality, useful, well presented information.

One way is you get to 100 post and your rep-cycle drops to 10 from 20. When you get to 200 post your rep-cycle drops to 5, get to 500 posts there is no constraint. The other thing is Reputation points could be be removed for behavior unbecoming to a member.

**Camp10** · 01-10-2010, 08:44 AM

Originally Posted by Sourdough

The other thing is Reputation points could be be removed for behavior unbecoming to a member.

This is the part about changing it that I am concerned about. I see you have two green boxes now and I believe you deserve them. I would never leave negative rep but others might. If there is no limit to the amount of negative you can leave then one person that is upset with just one of your posts can clean you out. I'm sure the mods could fix this but that is just one more thing they might have to deal with. Just my 2 cents!

**Sourdough** · 01-10-2010, 09:30 AM

No.....I was not clear, the points could only be removed by the Mods. and for good cause. In fact I see no value in having the RED or Negative rep available for members to use against other members.

**Camp10** · 01-10-2010, 09:32 AM

Originally Posted by Sourdough

No.....I was not clear, the points could only be removed by the Mods. and for good cause. Infact I see no value in having the RED or Negative rep ability for members.

Well then I am in full agreement with you on this.

**Rick** · 01-10-2010, 09:47 AM

I've forwarded the concern to Chris. I see some very valid arguments pro and con. Reducing the number or eliminating it all together opens the door for abuse. However, as mods, we've seen posts we'd like to rep and are prevented from doing so because of the settings. We've talked about that very thing. Abuse can be managed assuming it isn't rampant and I don't see that being an issue with this community.

Sourdough, your suggestion of removing reputation points for improper behavior is an intriguing idea. I'll pass that along as well.

**crashdive123** · 01-10-2010, 09:50 AM

I don't know if it is possible in the software to change the number of "reps" that have to be distributed based on the number of posts a member has, but I like the idea.

I tried to give you some rep for that Sourdough, but it would not let me.

**Rick** · 01-10-2010, 09:55 AM

I don't understand the incentive or why you would want the reputation to drop. If someone is providing quality posts why penalize them for doing it?

Assuming the member is concerned about reputation, doesn't setting a target number like 500 provide an incentive to make that many posts, regardless of quality, just to make the target? Looks like a sales incentive to me. But as I said, I don't understand it. Perhaps a bit more explanation would help.

**crashdive123** · 01-10-2010, 09:59 AM

The way I took it was kind of like the system is set up now where longevity and number of posts increases your rep power, so too would the same criteria change the frequency for which you could add rep to an individual.

**Rick** · 01-10-2010, 10:03 AM

So 3 green bars and 10,000 posts let's you place immediate rep, for example, while 1 green bar and 500 posts restrict you to rep'ing 10 other folks before you can rep the same person? I like that idea a lot but I don't think the software is designed to do that. That's a bit like the elders bringing the younger ones along. I like that idea.

**crashdive123** · 01-10-2010, 10:05 AM

Something like that. As you said - don't know that the software would support it or not, but something along those lines.

**Camp10** · 01-10-2010, 10:08 AM

If that was possible, then that would be a great way to do it.

**pocomoonskyeyes** · 01-15-2010, 02:39 AM

Originally Posted by crashdive123

Additionally - yes - you can only view your own. You can click on the reputation box of other members when they post to get an idea (on a distinguished road, will be famous soon enough, has had a little bad behavior, etc)

Originally Posted by rwc1969

Out of all the members here only 5 have two green bars, two have one red bar and all the rest except for Chris have one green bar. Chris has rep disabled. http://www.wilderness-survival.net/f...putation&pp=30

It'd be nice to see the actual rep. points a member has.

Originally Posted by rwc1969

thanks! it'd be nice to see others. Unless you're a fortunate two barrer, ^

, there's no way to tell if a person is more reputable based on the current setup.

I think it'd be nice to lower the 20 limit as well considering there are probably only 20 members who regularly post.

It's no biggee to me. I didn't even use it until I looked at my user cP and saw I had rep. I was surprised! I figure I should start dishing some out as well if justified.

There are 5 Different "Levels" of Reputation so far. May change after someone gets 3 green thingies( or two or more Red

). They are, going from Lowest to highest:
1)"Has had a little Shameless behavior in the past" Represented by one Red bar thingie.

2) This one applies only to Chris, the owner of the forum. He has a Gray box and it says: "Disabled Rep"

The next is for those who have just one green thingie, yet there are two/three different phrases you may see.
3)"Is an unknown quantity at this point"
4)"is on a distinguished road"
both of the above apply to those with just one green box.
The next phrase will apply to those with either just one or with two green boxes. The fifth (so far) phrase is:
5) "Will become famous soon enough"
To see these "levels" just rest your cursor on the reputation box(es) and the phrase will pop up.

Originally Posted by Camp10

As I understand it though (from what I think Crash posted earlier) lowering the number also means some jerk can pile the negative rep on you if they dont like you for any reason. I'm not sure that is such a good idea. I dont know if it would be possible to leave the negative the way it is but lower the number for the positive rep....

OK after doing a little "research" on this reputation thing. The only possible negative Reputations would occur with those who have the phrase(s) 1 & 3 above. I think. I think those with the "unknown qty." phrase started with the Normal 10 rep points and had some detracted.
By far and large the vast majority of members have either the level 4 or 5 phrase applied to them. Those with phrase #3 (unknown qty.phrase) are fewer than 100 members.(I didn't count) Of those I only recognized one person as a regular member that posts. Only two have the lowest Rep rating.and Chris is the only one with Rep disabled. So assuming that my "Guesstimation" is correct, Only 100+/- have the lowest two phrases, and Chris' is disabled. EVERYONE ELSE has positive Rep. SO having said all that it would seem to me that the concern for "Rep abuse" is a poor argument at best.(I think this says a LOT about the maturity level [regardless of age] of the entire membership here)

Yes someone may get a red thingie every now and then. Heck I might get one for this post but it won't change the way I eat breakfast or where I eat it!LOL

{Did someone say breakfast?)

But I think from this limited research that the "Rep" thing is being used in a positive way. In RWC's post that I quoted above there were only 5 with double green, now there are 8 I believe. I think this is proof positive that the Rep system is being used in a positive manner. Just wanted to throw this out there, it's just my 2 cents worth.

**your_comforting_company** · 03-07-2010, 08:25 AM

I've tried for the last 3 days to give rep to at least 10 different people. There's been some good posts lately that I've really enjoyed. I haven't been able to give rep to anyone. Keeps telling me I gotta spread it around.
I'm a little frustrated that I can't tell these folks with rep that their posts were very good. What are we gonna do about this?