Reputation....

[PattayaParent]

I used to like using the greens. Don't think I ever got to dish out a red. I didn't even realise there were daily limits (unless that was a joke )

I guess it did make it easier to show approval without having to think of something to say. For some that was probably a blessing. But obviously it turned into a curse...

'Ditto'

fullfils that.

or

'what he said'

[neverdie]

BRING BACK THE GREENS PLEASE GEORGE! :jap:

Edited October 7, 2010 by neverdie

[onnut]

BRING BACK THE GREENS PLEASE GEORGE! :jap:

I 2nd that!

[Jingthing]

BRING BACK THE GREENS PLEASE GEORGE! :jap:

Well, the greens without the reds would be better than the greens with the reds. I would also drop the word REPUTATION from naming the feature and would also drop showing green totals on profiles, or anywhere, certainly not on all posts, as was suggested by someone. Then it could be a pure, yes me too, and really popular POSTS rather than so called popular PEOPLE could be benignly highlighted. Takes away the idiotic game of people playing the system for the purpose of high green points only, that cannot be a good thing overall for the culture of the forum. If the reds are kept bullying and shaming some members with the description like BAD REPUTATION is offensive and seems out of place for a board management whose stated ideal is CIVILITY. Again, keeping the reds wouldn't be so bad if the reddening was shown only on the POST level only without branding/shaming members with reds on their permanent profile

Edited October 7, 2010 by Jingthing

[neverdie]

I'd like a function that could direct electric shocks through to other peoples keyboards......i wonder if George can swing that one

[Jingthing]

I'd like a function that could direct electric shocks through to other peoples keyboards......i wonder if George can swing that one

Good idea. Or in SBK's case ... A WHIP.

[Jingthing]

The more I think about the more I like the idea of bringing back greens and reds to be used only at the POST level, so that popular and unpopular POSTS can be visually highlighted (and when you don't have anything original to write you won't need to post only to say, YES!, or NO! to express simple approval or disapproval) while KILLING the juvenile and potentially destructive/abrasive game of having people collect and compete for total points. I realize that this compromise may displease people who love the personal game of competing for big point totals, but other than that, I can't imagine there would be very much strong objection to the facility of upping or downing POSTS (rather than PEOPLE). This new idea serves a function, it doesn't hurt or bully anyone, and it eliminates the gamesmanship of the point collectors. In other words, with this idea you could approve or disapprove of POSTS, but the red/green point totals and labels on personal profiles (and certainly posts which was being considered) would stay disabled.

A small minority of people who amassed big green totals in the old game may feel wronged by a change such as I have proposed. How about sending all of them a bag of brownies as a consolation prize?

Edited October 7, 2010 by Jingthing

[neverdie]

The more I think about the more I like the idea of bringing back greens and reds to be used only at the POST level, so that popular and unpopular POSTS can be visually highlighted (and people don't have anything original to write don't need to post only to say, YES!, or NO!) while KILLING the juvenile and potentially destructive/abrasive game of having people collect and compete for total points. I realize that this compromise may displease people who love the personal game of competing for big point totals, but other than that, I can't imagine very much strong objection to the facility of upping or downing POSTS (rather than PEOPLE). It serves a function, it doesn't hurt or bully anyone, and it eliminates the gamesmanship of the point collectors. In other words, with this idea you could approve or disapprove of POSTS, but the red/green point totals and labels on personal profiles (and certainly posts which was being considered) would stay disabled.

Just when George thought he was done with this annoying topic .......but wait George, theres more - this is the sort of stuff that nightmares are made from.

So JT, what do you do now, another song and dance?

[Jingthing]

The more I think about the more I like the idea of bringing back greens and reds to be used only at the POST level, so that popular and unpopular POSTS can be visually highlighted (and people don't have anything original to write don't need to post only to say, YES!, or NO!) while KILLING the juvenile and potentially destructive/abrasive game of having people collect and compete for total points. I realize that this compromise may displease people who love the personal game of competing for big point totals, but other than that, I can't imagine very much strong objection to the facility of upping or downing POSTS (rather than PEOPLE). It serves a function, it doesn't hurt or bully anyone, and it eliminates the gamesmanship of the point collectors. In other words, with this idea you could approve or disapprove of POSTS, but the red/green point totals and labels on personal profiles (and certainly posts which was being considered) would stay disabled.

Just when George thought he was done with this annoying topic .......but wait George, theres more - this is the sort of stuff that nightmares are made from.

So JT, what do you do now, another song and dance?

ND, of course I am OK with the rep thing being disabled totally globally, but lots of people like at least parts of the old feature, and I am certain the board management hasn't given it up for good. I reckon they are considering ideas of ways to bring it back that would be less problematical than the original try. I truly think I have come up with one compromise solution that would work for giving approval/disapproval with much much less abuse potential. Sure there are some people who hate a particular poster that may red ALL of that poster's posts just to be a meanie, but even that wouldn't permanently stigmatize any posters, only posts.

[neverdie]

Now its you that came up with the idea?

What about if they introduced other colours into the mix. For example, Green, blue, yellow, orange, red? That could really add some colour to the threads

edit to add: They could call the new rating system the 'neverdie rating' as opposed to reputation

Edited October 7, 2010 by neverdie

[Jingthing]

Now its you that came up with the idea?

What about if they introduced other colours into the mix. For example, Green, blue, yellow, orange, red? That could really add some colour to the threads

edit to add: They could call the new rating system the 'neverdie rating' as opposed to reputation

I don't really care about credit but I don't recall anyone else suggesting exactly what I just suggested --

Allow giving greens and reds to posts (probably still limited in daily number, that's a detail tweak that could be played with over time).

Don't tally green or red poster totals on profiles OR posts. (That mix is the original part, I think. Correct me if I am wrong and someone else has suggested this mix of changes.)

Drop calling the feature REPUTATION. There is no totals tally so there is no reputation. What's left is the simple facility to approve or disapprove POSTS. Nothing PERSONAL.

In simple terms, a move of focus to individual POSTS and their CONTENT only, and completely killing the personal point collecting game.

Edited October 7, 2010 by Jingthing

[neverdie]

What about a poll?

[Jingthing]

What about a poll?

I am considering it but I think this may be too complex for a coherent poll. I also doubt whether majority rule is the answer here. The management needs to balance user desires with their needs and goals, and I am also assuming they don't want to encourage personality wars (which the old system did encourage).

[tijnebijn]

What about a poll?

yes good idea , only if George is backing the outcome , I know he is

lurging somewhere on these threads , he is probably considering it right now .

The suggestion of Jingting for only to give greens and reds in the posts only ,

to agree or disagree with something said is a plausable idea , why ? I think its truly

helping perhaps even only slightly for posters to instead of giving a response give a red instead , so there might be no childish dicussion after .

Some who do abuse , whatever they troll anyway , who cares , we do know anyway who to take serious or not , or don't you ......

[Jingthing]

The specifics of any decision on this red/green thing is not going to please everyone. I recognize many are not happy with the total disable in effect now. Surely, whatever the specific details, there is a COMPROMISE policy that is possible that preserves some of the old feature while softening the abuse potential. The old system did prove to be a red herring, so that's not a compromise, totally disabling it is also not a compromise.

Frankly, if the system had ORIGINALLY been implemented on the lines of my suggestion, I don't think there would have been any problems with it! It's kind of like DIGG, you vote on the POST CONTENT MERIT (not the poster!).

Edited October 7, 2010 by Jingthing

[neverdie]

yes good idea , only if George is backing the outcome , I know he is

lurging somewhere on these threads , he is probably considering it right now .

Well perhaps someone needs to start sucking up to George then to get this moving......JT, rumour goes that your pretty good with this sort of thing > bringing people around that is .

I don't personally care about this GREEN thing but I have been asking for considerable time now that our Emoticons are updated with something a little more interesting.

The current ones are just so LAME!

Obviously, in the grand scale of things, I'm not that important (You see I need a quivering lip emoticon right now)

[Boater]

i have ust noticed they are gone !!! , bring them back !!

[neverdie]

i have ust noticed they are gone !!! , bring them back !!

Please bring back dancing avatar

[elkangorito]

Well, the greens without the reds would be better than the greens with the reds. I would also drop the word REPUTATION from naming the feature and would also drop showing green totals on profiles, or anywhere, certainly not on all posts, as was suggested by someone. Then it could be a pure, yes me too, and really popular POSTS rather than so called popular PEOPLE could be benignly highlighted. Takes away the idiotic game of people playing the system for the purpose of high green points only, that cannot be a good thing overall for the culture of the forum. If the reds are kept bullying and shaming some members with the description like BAD REPUTATION is offensive and seems out of place for a board management whose stated ideal is CIVILITY. Again, keeping the reds wouldn't be so bad if the reddening was shown only on the POST level only without branding/shaming members with reds on their permanent profile

I fully agree.

The more I think about the more I like the idea of bringing back greens and reds to be used only at the POST level, so that popular and unpopular POSTS can be visually highlighted (and when you don't have anything original to write you won't need to post only to say, YES!, or NO! to express simple approval or disapproval) while KILLING the juvenile and potentially destructive/abrasive game of having people collect and compete for total points. I realize that this compromise may displease people who love the personal game of competing for big point totals, but other than that, I can't imagine there would be very much strong objection to the facility of upping or downing POSTS (rather than PEOPLE). This new idea serves a function, it doesn't hurt or bully anyone, and it eliminates the gamesmanship of the point collectors. In other words, with this idea you could approve or disapprove of POSTS, but the red/green point totals and labels on personal profiles (and certainly posts which was being considered) would stay disabled.

A small minority of people who amassed big green totals in the old game may feel wronged by a change such as I have proposed. How about sending all of them a bag of brownies as a consolation prize?

I fully agree again.

The specifics of any decision on this red/green thing is not going to please everyone. I recognize many are not happy with the total disable in effect now. Surely, whatever the specific details, there is a COMPROMISE policy that is possible that preserves some of the old feature while softening the abuse potential. The old system did prove to be a red herring, so that's not a compromise, totally disabling it is also not a compromise.

Frankly, if the system had ORIGINALLY been implemented on the lines of my suggestion, I don't think there would have been any problems with it! It's kind of like DIGG, you vote on the POST CONTENT MERIT (not the poster!).

Yet again, I fully agree.

If a ratings system is to be implemented, it most certainly be at 'post level' only & not at user level.

[neverdie]

I fully agree.

I fully agree again.

Yet again, I fully agree.

In Agreement with JT, 3 Strikes and your out.

This is a very serious condition, please report IMMEDIATELY to the nearest health clinic for a mental health check up.

[Jingthing]

I fully agree.

I fully agree again.

Yet again, I fully agree.

In Agreement with JT, 3 Strikes and your out.

This is a very serious condition, please report IMMEDIATELY to the nearest health clinic for a mental health check up.

Funny but it amplifies my point. Ideally, members should focus on CONTENT, rather than personalities. Numerous times people who thought they disliked me personally or thought they would never agree with me on anything, have posted, well on this point I agree with what you said. Labeling people with numbers and silly monikers "Excellent reputation"/"Bad reputation" goes against such an ideal of more thoughtful, balanced actual communication on the specific matters at hand.

[neverdie]

Funny but it amplifies my point. Ideally, members should focus on CONTENT, rather than personalities.

AGREED JT, Play the ball not the man. I'm just stirring you up. So have you annoyed George yet?

[geriatrickid]

I believe that the red/green option was open to abuse. Most people didn't care about the option so they didn't use it. Other people like me made the mistake of misinterpreting and in the case of one guy, I gave him 6 reds. When I realized what I had done, I had to go and find 6 entries and gve him greens to offset my stupidity.

However, there were some people intent on abusing the option. It basically was harassment. From time to time, I was looking at who was getting redcarded and it was always going back to the same handful of unhappy people. Don't bother trying to rework the option because as long as vindictive stalkers are about, the option will be misused.

[dantilley]

The feature has been disabled, yet still we have a 4 page thread discussing it?!

[Boater]

i have ust noticed they are gone !!! , bring them back !!

Please bring back dancing avatar

Yeh, is a bit unsettling B.

you will be happy to know i have changed to the dancing avatar ,

please bring back the greenies, as this is worth at least 2 ! , oh and i just checked, i never was given a reddy

[Jingthing]

The feature has been disabled, yet still we have a 4 page thread discussing it?!

Yeah, it's like trails from a bad LSD trip ...

or a chicken after you chop it's head off ...

Somewhat more seriously, the feature is disabled but there hasn't been any announcement that it is PERMANENTLY disabled. Which means it may come back at some time, in the same or altered form, and some of us want to talk about that and make suggestions IF that is going to happen.

Edited October 8, 2010 by Jingthing

[Boater]

i have ust noticed they are gone !!! , bring them back !!

Please bring back dancing avatar

Yeh, is a bit unsettling B.

you will be happy to know i have changed to the dancing avatar ,

please bring back the greenies, as this is worth at least 2 ! , oh and i just checked, i never was given a reddy

i have changed my Avatar, why is it still showing the old one????

[neverdie]

Because you fekked up, thats why. I was busy hitting my cache key & trying to figure out what was wrong with my pc .

I found liquid paper helps

[thequick7]

is there any reason why TV hasnt posted an update to why the red/greens hav been removed? they seems to be pretty quick off the mark to delete comments and giving us poorly written news articles but when it comes to informing users of anything to do with this site they seem to be a bit lazy (or dont care)?

[dantilley]

is there any reason why TV hasnt posted an update to why the red/greens hav been removed? they seems to be pretty quick off the mark to delete comments and giving us poorly written news articles but when it comes to informing users of anything to do with this site they seem to be a bit lazy (or dont care)?

There have been a few explanations given by George and others in various threads but no official announcement posted anywhere.