Would You Like The Option To Turn Off The Reputation Feature For You?

[elkangorito]

We have in the main here 2 posters who by their own admission are 'controversial' and 'boundry pushers'..........yet do not have enough steel in their backbones to accept a simple method for forum members to express their disapproval at some of the posts they distribute......... if the disapproval is earned or not does not appear to be part of the objection.......(or is it)...... the simple process of voicing disapproval is apparently childish......why?

Firstly, I have never participated in this childish reputation system. It also appears that I have not been victimised by it (yet). This may be due to my recent decision to reduce posting.

Secondly, I have plenty of steel in my backbone & as such, a simple 'push of a button' does not represent a comment of any description. Any fool can simply choose a green or a red...& for any unknown reason. As Inspector Morse once said, "Allowing the pages of The Sun to pass before your eyes does not amount to reading, Lewis."

It takes effort to truly reply to a comment & this idiot function (reputation) helps to remove this aspect of the conversation/thread.

[taninthai]

We have in the main here 2 posters who by their own admission are 'controversial' and 'boundry pushers'..........yet do not have enough steel in their backbones to accept a simple method for forum members to express their disapproval at some of the posts they distribute......... if the disapproval is earned or not does not appear to be part of the objection.......(or is it)...... the simple process of voicing disapproval is apparently childish......why?

Firstly, I have never participated in this childish reputation system. It also appears that I have not been victimised by it (yet). This may be due to my recent decision to reduce posting.

Secondly, I have plenty of steel in my backbone & as such, a simple 'push of a button' does not represent a comment of any description. Any fool can simply choose a green or a red...& for any unknown reason. As Inspector Morse once said, "Allowing the pages of The Sun to pass before your eyes does not amount to reading, Lewis."

It takes effort to truly reply to a comment & this idiot function (reputation) helps to remove this aspect of the conversation/thread.

giving a greeny out is merely showing that you agree with the post much easier and better than everyone putting a post up to simply point out they agree

i dont think everyone here (MAYBE SOME DO) goes round checking peoples reps its more an a quick way to agree or disagree with comments.............

[StreetCowboy]

....There are some obvious choices for the 'intelligent' people among us;

...

Sorry; I posted the reputation before I properly digested the comment above; I had misinterpreted it as meaning "...obvious choices for us intelligent people..." whereas it should really be read as "..for those intelligent people hidden in our midst..." - I mistook your (quite justified) paranoia an xenophobia for arrogance.

DO you really believe that intelligent posters stalk the earth? and aliens? and catholics?

A frightening thought, but all possible, I suppose

SC

[StreetCowboy]

Got to laugh, never read profiles, just wanted to see who JT's bad guy's are. Unfortunately it doesn't reveal who gives red or greens. So looked at 2 forum members who l think have an attitude problem and had a good laugh. If the mods have looked at these 2 guys it's obvious to most they are <deleted>, one guys occupation, which if it were me l would not reveal tells all. Don't ask me why, just say l have known a few.

JT. In your case you have shown to all from your incredible input to the forum that what comes from these eeeeeer people, sorry can't use the right word cos l was suspended before, has nooooo baring in the thoughts of ' normal ' people here. It's people like yourself that make a forum enjoyable and not those with a big chip on their shoulder problem.

If you click on the word "Reputation" at the TOP RIGHT of their page (not immediately below where the picture should appear) you will get the whole sad and sordid history in reverse chronlogical order (I'm not sure if this link will work, but by way of example I'll show you mine - Oo err that's a bit Frankie Howerd http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/user/60794-streetcowboy/page__tab__reputation)

You need to be careful with your spelling - "baring in the thoughts of normal people" is a revolting and offensive fantasy which I do not believe normal people would entertain - I think (I hope) you meant "bearing on the thoughts" - apologies for the pedantry

SC

PS I have a shoulder problem that makes balancing a chip difficult - no seriously, I do; I've got a doctor's note for it and everything

[basjke]

Got to laugh, never read profiles, just wanted to see who JT's bad guy's are. Unfortunately it doesn't reveal who gives red or greens. So looked at 2 forum members who l think have an attitude problem and had a good laugh. If the mods have looked at these 2 guys it's obvious to most they are <deleted>, one guys occupation, which if it were me l would not reveal tells all. Don't ask me why, just say l have known a few.

JT. In your case you have shown to all from your incredible input to the forum that what comes from these eeeeeer people, sorry can't use the right word cos l was suspended before, has nooooo baring in the thoughts of ' normal ' people here. It's people like yourself that make a forum enjoyable and not those with a big chip on their shoulder problem.

When you go to the tab " reputation " in the profile it reveals every red or green by who it is given and for which post.

[elkangorito]

giving a greeny out is merely showing that you agree with the post much easier and better than everyone putting a post up to simply point out they agree

I'm sure that if you are really serious about 'agreeing' with a post, you would actually write some words.

It brings to my mind the old ravings about "Teenagers have it too easy. Everything in this world is about instant gratification."

Well, now I say that we ADULTS have it too easy & if we are to be any kind of role models for children, we need to NOT take the easy way out.

Child: I don't like <insert persons name> at school.

Parent: No problem. Just express your dislike by clicking on their profile.

Child: The school doesn't have that function on the website.

Parent: Well then, you'll just have to use words with superiors, to express your dislike. Otherwise, you'll just have to wait for the website function to become apparent.

Child: The school is getting this function soon. What should I do?

Parent: Well, you could wait for this function to happen or you could personally go to a teacher.

Child: I think I'll wait. The person I don't like will be dealt with in the same way, whether I appear personally or respond by the internet.

Parent: Great. This way, you & I both avoid responsibility. I love the internet...don't you? By the way dear, I haven't spoken to you like this for 3 weeks. Have you been busy?

[taninthai]

Got to laugh, never read profiles, just wanted to see who JT's bad guy's are. Unfortunately it doesn't reveal who gives red or greens. So looked at 2 forum members who l think have an attitude problem and had a good laugh. If the mods have looked at these 2 guys it's obvious to most they are &lt;deleted&gt;, one guys occupation, which if it were me l would not reveal tells all. Don't ask me why, just say l have known a few.

JT. In your case you have shown to all from your incredible input to the forum that what comes from these eeeeeer people, sorry can't use the right word cos l was suspended before, has nooooo baring in the thoughts of ' normal ' people here. It's people like yourself that make a forum enjoyable and not those with a big chip on their shoulder problem.

When you go to the tab " reputation " in the profile it reveals every red or green by who it is given and for which post.

i too have just looked at certain peoples profile i see jingthing has given someone 18 negatives in 10 days ,seems pot calling kettle black to me at least this person takes them in his stride dont hear no complaining from them that they want the forum changed......

[StreetCowboy]

We have in the main here 2 posters who by their own admission are 'controversial' and 'boundry pushers'..........yet do not have enough steel in their backbones to accept a simple method for forum members to express their disapproval at some of the posts they distribute......... if the disapproval is earned or not does not appear to be part of the objection.......(or is it)...... the simple process of voicing disapproval is apparently childish......why?

Firstly, I have never participated in this childish reputation system. It also appears that I have not been victimised by it (yet). This may be due to my recent decision to reduce posting.

Secondly, I have plenty of steel in my backbone & as such, a simple 'push of a button' does not represent a comment of any description. Any fool can simply choose a green or a red...& for any unknown reason. As Inspector Morse once said, "Allowing the pages of The Sun to pass before your eyes does not amount to reading, Lewis."

It takes effort to truly reply to a comment & this idiot function (reputation) helps to remove this aspect of the conversation/thread.

Remember that we have to write for an audience that includes not only the "intelligent who walk amongst us" but also the living dead and non-native english-speakers and non native-english speakers. In many cases they (we) find it difficult to put into words a compliment that matches the original post, and we don't want t clutter up the thread with pages of "Hear Hear" "Quite Right!" Top Chap!" - while the equivalent, when we were struggling with an expression of condemnation, would probably earn us a brief holiday in communicado, or worse, Coventry.

I think where one of our fellows went wrong was in drawing attention to the tool, and also with suggestions for abuse of some of the other 'social' features of the forum

SC

[Jingthing]

Got to laugh, never read profiles, just wanted to see who JT's bad guy's are. Unfortunately it doesn't reveal who gives red or greens. So looked at 2 forum members who l think have an attitude problem and had a good laugh. If the mods have looked at these 2 guys it's obvious to most they are &lt;deleted&gt;, one guys occupation, which if it were me l would not reveal tells all. Don't ask me why, just say l have known a few.

JT. In your case you have shown to all from your incredible input to the forum that what comes from these eeeeeer people, sorry can't use the right word cos l was suspended before, has nooooo baring in the thoughts of ' normal ' people here. It's people like yourself that make a forum enjoyable and not those with a big chip on their shoulder problem.

When you go to the tab " reputation " in the profile it reveals every red or green by who it is given and for which post.

i too have just looked at certain peoples profile i see jingthing has given someone 18 negatives in 10 days ,seems pot calling kettle black to me at least this person takes them in his stride dont hear no complaining from them that they want the forum changed......

Bull, I have explained many times if we can't opt out, we are in. You will see I gave those reds all or mostly to ONE POSTER, the enemy you know about, who started giving me two a day (while he wasn't suspended), so I retaliated. Believe me, if you knew what I know about him, you would want to do a lot worse than give him reds! Now that I have seen the light and see reds as a POSITIVE, SCARCE gift, that will all stop. Now I want the reds, thank you.

[taninthai]

giving a greeny out is merely showing that you agree with the post much easier and better than everyone putting a post up to simply point out they agree

I'm sure that if you are really serious about 'agreeing' with a post, you would actually write some words.

It brings to my mind the old ravings about "Teenagers have it too easy. Everything in this world is about instant gratification."

Well, now I say that we ADULTS have it too easy & if we are to be any kind of role models for children, we need to NOT take the easy way out.

Child: I don't like <insert persons name> at school.

Parent: No problem. Just express your dislike by clicking on their profile.

Child: The school doesn't have that function on the website.

Parent: Well then, you'll just have to use words with superiors, to express your dislike. Otherwise, you'll just have to wait for the website function to become apparent.

Child: The school is getting this function soon. What should I do?

Parent: Well, you could wait for this function to happen or you could personally go to a teacher.

Child: I think I'll wait. The person I don't like will be dealt with in the same way, whether I appear personally or respond by the internet.

Parent: Great. This way, you & I both avoid responsibility. I love the internet...don't you? By the way dear, I haven't spoken to you like this for 3 weeks. Have you been busy?

yes your right if i had been in same situation as what poster says or it directly related to something that had happened to me i would reply with words and my experience...if however i thought it was a funny comment or well written reply i would find it easier and more appropiate to just show i agree by giving out a positive.

[StreetCowboy]

OK guy's don't know if l want to look now.

oooops, sorry about baring all, spell check is great but doesn't sort out my meaning.

I wasn't sure if you were being deliberately Frankie

SC

[elkangorito]

We have in the main here 2 posters who by their own admission are 'controversial' and 'boundry pushers'..........yet do not have enough steel in their backbones to accept a simple method for forum members to express their disapproval at some of the posts they distribute......... if the disapproval is earned or not does not appear to be part of the objection.......(or is it)...... the simple process of voicing disapproval is apparently childish......why?

Firstly, I have never participated in this childish reputation system. It also appears that I have not been victimised by it (yet). This may be due to my recent decision to reduce posting.

Secondly, I have plenty of steel in my backbone & as such, a simple 'push of a button' does not represent a comment of any description. Any fool can simply choose a green or a red...& for any unknown reason. As Inspector Morse once said, "Allowing the pages of The Sun to pass before your eyes does not amount to reading, Lewis."

It takes effort to truly reply to a comment & this idiot function (reputation) helps to remove this aspect of the conversation/thread.

Remember that we have to write for an audience that includes not only the "intelligent who walk amongst us" but also the living dead and non-native english-speakers and non native-english speakers. In many cases they (we) find it difficult to put into words a compliment that matches the original post, and we don't want t clutter up the thread with pages of "Hear Hear" "Quite Right!" Top Chap!" - while the equivalent, when we were struggling with an expression of condemnation, would probably earn us a brief holiday in communicado, or worse, Coventry.

I think where one of our fellows went wrong was in drawing attention to the tool, and also with suggestions for abuse of some of the other 'social' features of the forum

SC

StreetCowboy, you are one of the few people I respect on this amazing site.

I do not 'write' for any particlular audience, however, a 'particular' audience may respond to my writings. With regard to non native speakers of English, I support them wholeheartedly.

In this case, non native English speakers are generally not part of this proposal, the proposal being that this 'reputation' function be a choice.

If Thaivisa follows the ideal of a western country, it therefore follows the ideal of 'democracy'. If this is the case, this poll will be ignored & 'democracy' will abound by not allowing any negativity to exist if it isn't in the form of a comment.

Allowing such a foolish thing as this reputation rubbish will only attract lazy people. Given a year or two & the 'hit rate' may be amazing...& very saleable.

Again, I say Quality & NOT quantity.

[tigerfish]

wow !

just read through the whole thread after being away for a couple of days and noticed that not one member of admin or the moderation team has passed any comment on the debate in hand.

usually on a subject as hot as this you get someone from either group popping their head in now and again to give their two satangs worth or to pull things into line, but not this one.

i will leave it open to the rest of the forum to decide on their own interpretation of such actions or as the case may be inactions.

[473geo]

giving a greeny out is merely showing that you agree with the post much easier and better than everyone putting a post up to simply point out they agree

I'm sure that if you are really serious about 'agreeing' with a post, you would actually write some words.

It brings to my mind the old ravings about "Teenagers have it too easy. Everything in this world is about instant gratification."

Well, now I say that we ADULTS have it too easy & if we are to be any kind of role models for children, we need to NOT take the easy way out.

Child: I don't like <insert persons name> at school.

Parent: No problem. Just express your dislike by clicking on their profile.

Child: The school doesn't have that function on the website.

Parent: Well then, you'll just have to use words with superiors, to express your dislike. Otherwise, you'll just have to wait for the website function to become apparent.

Child: The school is getting this function soon. What should I do?

Parent: Well, you could wait for this function to happen or you could personally go to a teacher.

Child: I think I'll wait. The person I don't like will be dealt with in the same way, whether I appear personally or respond by the internet.

Parent: Great. This way, you & I both avoid responsibility. I love the internet...don't you? By the way dear, I haven't spoken to you like this for 3 weeks. Have you been busy?

Elk: the users should be able to switch off 'reputation'

Admin: Can't software doesn't allow

Elk: don't believe it but if that is the case can the lot

Members: Why, why don't you just ignore it?

Elk: new members are braindead

Members: disagree - why don't you just ignore it?

Elk: intelligent people, childish blah blah

Members: why don't you just ignore it?

Elk: It removes conversation from the forum

Members: why don't you just ignore it?

Elk: red green, idiot function

Members: why don't....... jesus where's that red button?

[endure]

wow !

just read through the whole thread after being away for a couple of days and noticed that not one member of admin or the moderation team has passed any comment on the debate in hand.

usually on a subject as hot as this you get someone from either group popping their head in now and again to give their two satangs worth or to pull things into line, but not this one.

i will leave it open to the rest of the forum to decide on their own interpretation of such actions or as the case may be inactions.

George has said, probably in another thread on the same subject, that it can't be turned off for individual members. It's either on or off for everyone.

[elkangorito]

My editing is in blue.

Elk: the users should be able to switch off 'reputation'

Admin: Can't software doesn't allow

Elk: don't believe it but if that is the case can the lot

Members: Why, why don't you just ignore it?

Elk: new members are braindead

Members: disagree - why don't you just ignore it?

Elk: intelligent people, childish blah blah

Members: why don't you just ignore it?

Elk: It removes intelligent conversation from the forum

Members: why don't you just ignore it?

Elk: red green, idiot function

Members: why don't....... jesus where's that red button?

BTW, this is one of the reasons why I no longer wish to offer any advice on here...too many 'smart' idiots.

[elkangorito]

wow !

just read through the whole thread after being away for a couple of days and noticed that not one member of admin or the moderation team has passed any comment on the debate in hand.

usually on a subject as hot as this you get someone from either group popping their head in now and again to give their two satangs worth or to pull things into line, but not this one.

i will leave it open to the rest of the forum to decide on their own interpretation of such actions or as the case may be inactions.

George has said, probably in another thread on the same subject, that it can't be turned off for individual members. It's either on or off for everyone.

Then let it be OFF!!!!

[Ulysses G.]

Got to laugh, never read profiles, just wanted to see who JT's bad guy's are. Unfortunately it doesn't reveal who gives red or greens.

Actually it does, but Jingthing has somehow hidden his reputation from the rest of us, but it is there if you look carefully.

[473geo]

wow !

just read through the whole thread after being away for a couple of days and noticed that not one member of admin or the moderation team has passed any comment on the debate in hand.

usually on a subject as hot as this you get someone from either group popping their head in now and again to give their two satangs worth or to pull things into line, but not this one.

i will leave it open to the rest of the forum to decide on their own interpretation of such actions or as the case may be inactions.

George has said, probably in another thread on the same subject, that it can't be turned off for individual members. It's either on or off for everyone.

Then let it be OFF!!!!

Now I have to go to the trouble of telling you what surely everybody has already concluded, you have ceased to push boundries and are becoming predictable and repetitive.......

I could of course have hit the red button...which would among the educated bring about a similar conclusion!

[473geo]

Got to laugh, never read profiles, just wanted to see who JT's bad guy's are. Unfortunately it doesn't reveal who gives red or greens.

Actually it does, but Jingthing has somehow hidden his reputation from the rest of us, but it is there if you look carefully.

I guess the next one will be that the reputation buttons encourage an invasion of privacy regarding your profile!!!.........because surely Jing has done nothing to warrant such attention....

[lannarebirth]

We have in the main here 2 posters who by their own admission are 'controversial' and 'boundry pushers'..........yet do not have enough steel in their backbones to accept a simple method for forum members to express their disapproval at some of the posts they distribute......... if the disapproval is earned or not does not appear to be part of the objection.......(or is it)...... the simple process of voicing disapproval is apparently childish......why?

Firstly, I have never participated in this childish reputation system. It also appears that I have not been victimised by it (yet). This may be due to my recent decision to reduce posting.

Secondly, I have plenty of steel in my backbone & as such, a simple 'push of a button' does not represent a comment of any description. Any fool can simply choose a green or a red...& for any unknown reason. As Inspector Morse once said, "Allowing the pages of The Sun to pass before your eyes does not amount to reading, Lewis."

It takes effort to truly reply to a comment & this idiot function (reputation) helps to remove this aspect of the conversation/thread.

giving a greeny out is merely showing that you agree with the post much easier and better than everyone putting a post up to simply point out they agree

i dont think everyone here (MAYBE SOME DO) goes round checking peoples reps its more an a quick way to agree or disagree with comments.............

I have to agree with you, with but one caveat. That being that your suggestion implies everyone is very very stupid; and you may be right.

[lannarebirth]

giving a greeny out is merely showing that you agree with the post much easier and better than everyone putting a post up to simply point out they agree

I'm sure that if you are really serious about 'agreeing' with a post, you would actually write some words.

It brings to my mind the old ravings about "Teenagers have it too easy. Everything in this world is about instant gratification."

Well, now I say that we ADULTS have it too easy & if we are to be any kind of role models for children, we need to NOT take the easy way out.

Child: I don't like <insert persons name> at school.

Parent: No problem. Just express your dislike by clicking on their profile.

Child: The school doesn't have that function on the website.

Parent: Well then, you'll just have to use words with superiors, to express your dislike. Otherwise, you'll just have to wait for the website function to become apparent.

Child: The school is getting this function soon. What should I do?

Parent: Well, you could wait for this function to happen or you could personally go to a teacher.

Child: I think I'll wait. The person I don't like will be dealt with in the same way, whether I appear personally or respond by the internet.

Parent: Great. This way, you & I both avoid responsibility. I love the internet...don't you? By the way dear, I haven't spoken to you like this for 3 weeks. Have you been busy?

yes your right if i had been in same situation as what poster says or it directly related to something that had happened to me i would reply with words and my experience...if however i thought it was a funny comment or well written reply i would find it easier and more appropiate to just show i agree by giving out a positive.

OK, you make my point. That's why they give out IQ scores of less than 100. People used to be embarassed to disclose they were amongst that group, but times change I see.

[Jingthing]

Probably a lot of people's IQ have been lowered just reading this thread. Safer to gulp a bottle of Thai whiskey.

[473geo]

Ah yes guys but you also forget - the negative mark may be nothing to do with the intelligence of the responder and his ability to respond

The negative mark may well be attributed for the ignorant manner the information is delivered rather than not agreeing with the content.

In which case I would say justified.

[StreetCowboy]

...Again, I say Quality & NOT quantity.

I'm with you on that, but I'm an alcoholic. The CAMRA buffs and wine-tasting cheeseaters can stuff their real ale and their vintages, its no substitute for quantity.

I must express my thanks for the "intelligent among us" quip; in fact, there could be all kinds of minorities stalking the earth unknown to us naive and innocent normal people - I feel that almost warrants a thread of its own' I'll race you to the pub...

I think the reputation system could be improved - I also think it would be worth counting positives and negatives separately, so that the fact that a poster was the subject of a hate campaign would not impact on his reputation-based priveliges - some of the fora I subscribe to make certain content available only to members over a certain reputation, to encourage constructive posting of information - admittedly, those are slightly more specialist fora, with less banter - less bantic fora, you might say

SC

PS Thanks for the flattery; whenever I try to say something like that, I always feel it sounds obsequious, but luckliy I'm so arrogant that I think it sounds respectful when you say it; anyway, so normally I make do with a nod and a polite smile, which does not come over well on the internet. So I use the GREENBUTTON instead. And similarly, the Red, instead of posting a "TWIT" comment when the person is clearly a rhyming top hat.

IN fact, when this Reputation was first introduced, I thought it was a recipe for puerile bickering, but, following the recent debates, and having seen how it can be abused, I am minded more and more to say it is a good thing, and it is up to the user to abstain if he suffers from abuse. As I said above, I know about these things...

As our long-suffering friend will have to learn (he likes to suffer, anyway....) its not what you've got that's important, but the spirit in which it is given, and regardless of his balance, he can still see who has appreciated his posts. I do check that,, to try and see which posts have been appreciated, and which have been too obscure and obtuse...

I see you still have the avatar of the Whiteboard that talks to you? I think that could be misinterpreted as being impolite and provocative - offensive even, Abusive to the gentle reader; not everyone devotes as much effort to finding subtle humour and humility in others' posts...

SC

[Jingthing]

Ah yes guys but you also forget - the negative mark may be nothing to do with the intelligence of the responder and his ability to respond

The negative mark may well be attributed for the ignorant manner the information is delivered rather than not agreeing with the content.

In which case I would say justified.

Or it could be they are playing in the 1000 red mark contest! Really, it could ANYTHING. Bad gas? Brain fart? Keyboard slippage? The walkies? Asimov Syndrome? Hare Krishna elbow?

[lannarebirth]

Ah yes guys but you also forget - the negative mark may be nothing to do with the intelligence of the responder and his ability to respond

The negative mark may well be attributed for the ignorant manner the information is delivered rather than not agreeing with the content.

In which case I would say justified.

And how exactly would one determine what the intent was?

[473geo]

Ah yes guys but you also forget - the negative mark may be nothing to do with the intelligence of the responder and his ability to respond

The negative mark may well be attributed for the ignorant manner the information is delivered rather than not agreeing with the content.

In which case I would say justified.

And how exactly would one determine what the intent was?

I would suggest by the level of personal insult contained in the post?

[lannarebirth]

Ah yes guys but you also forget - the negative mark may be nothing to do with the intelligence of the responder and his ability to respond

The negative mark may well be attributed for the ignorant manner the information is delivered rather than not agreeing with the content.

In which case I would say justified.

And how exactly would one determine what the intent was?

I would suggest by the level of personal insult contained in the post?

So the reputation system is strictly about manners and not content then?

[473geo]

Ah yes guys but you also forget - the negative mark may be nothing to do with the intelligence of the responder and his ability to respond

The negative mark may well be attributed for the ignorant manner the information is delivered rather than not agreeing with the content.

In which case I would say justified.

And how exactly would one determine what the intent was?

I would suggest by the level of personal insult contained in the post?

So the reputation system is strictly about manners and not content then?

A mix of the two perhaps?