Shoutbox

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
So... someone who spams a lot gets a negative vote... then the post is plitted to T&T... votes don't count there you say.... So, his negative votes are lost... what's the point in voting then?

---

Once u voted, whatever we do with the thread, it wont change the votes. he would still have a bad/good reputation


------------

Guido's idea is great
I like it even more than the reputation dodgy system

Guido: good idea, but I think if this were to be implemented, no one would leave positive comments, so there should be an OPTION to leave a comment. Apart from that, I see no flaw in this, except maybe server space.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chrono
Once u voted, whatever we do with the thread, it wont change the votes. he would still have a bad/good reputation

---

Yes I know (because of your previous post)... I was replying to billywoods' idea that votes don't count in T&T....

quote:

---

Originally posted by billywoods1
Guido: good idea, but I think if this were to be implemented, no one would leave positive comments, so there should be an OPTION to leave a comment.

---

I don't think i understand what you mean here, but still, people would leave positive comments if they really think the other one deserves it. I would, at least, and I'm sure many other responsible users would too .

quote:

---

Apart from that, I see no flaw in this, except maybe server space.

---

Server space is not a problem (anyway not much would be used compared to the posts table ), and the additional query is equal to the one that would be used if the RC1 reputation system was added, so... no negative point there.

Well yes, but I mean people can complain by saying 'spammer' or 'links to trojans' or something, not many people are gonna leave a comment saying 'I like this post'. Comments should be optional really, I'm happy to add one if necessary but mostly I would vote if people had been helpful and informative, etc., and I'm not gonna bother typing out that they were each time.

Edit/off-topic: 3333 posts, guido

Maybe to implement the reputation system we talked about in this thread and the choice to leave a message about the user..

quote:

---

Edit/off-topic: 3333 posts, guido

---

thx for noticing

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chrono
Maybe to implement the reputation system we talked about in this thread and the choice to leave a message about the user..

---

Urhhhh that's partly what I'm suggesting... but... people must have a reason to vote in reputations, so its reasonable not to allow reputations without text. I agree it could be optional... but still, I think reputations would be better in numbers and not in images.

quote:

---

Well yes, but I mean people can complain by saying 'spammer' or 'links to trojans' or something, not many people are gonna leave a comment saying 'I like this post'.  Comments should be optional really, I'm happy to add one if necessary but mostly I would vote if people had been helpful and informative, etc., and I'm not gonna bother typing out that they were each time.

---

I don't think you guys understand the point of my suggestion. When leaving a comment, you are not commenting on a post, but on the user itself. When you change your comment, your positive/negative/neutral rating about that user changes. So you won't put in your comment "I like this post", but you will put (positive) "This user has been repeatedly helpful and nice to other users in several posts. Keep it up!". Then, if it... urh... posts a trojan, you can update it with a neutral rating, and the following opinion: "Has always been helpful to users, but lately has been disregarding the forum rules."

I see...

Well, I thought the post idea was better, because that way there was a chance to vote very badly for a lot of unhelpful/abusive posts and very well for a lot of helpful etc. posts. However, if you voted for a user, I agree, you should leave a comment, but it does make it very hard to change your vote... I still like the posts idea more, though, sorry.

quote:

---

Originally posted by billywoods1
I see...

Well, I thought the post idea was better, because that way there was a chance to vote very badly for a lot of unhelpful/abusive posts and very well for a lot of helpful etc. posts. However, if you voted for a user, I agree, you should leave a comment, but it does make it very hard to change your vote... I still like the posts idea more, though, sorry.

---

Problem is, if you vote per post, we must have another group of moderators being sure someone isn't voting against every post of a user -- which is impossible and very subjective.

Having only one point to give to one user, the reputations would be more equitative and fear. No mass-reputation-spamming possibilities there.

quote:

---

but it does make it very hard to change your vote

---

Not really... you would be surprised how my opinions of some of the members of the forum have changed since I joined.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Guido
Not really... you would be surprised how my opinions of some of the members of the forum have changed since I joined.

---

  It's true and people who are allowed to vote should be allowed to vote as many times as they like for that person as opinions do change , quite rapidly in fact