Vote to keep or lose the User Reputation system

[lemansnsx]

If everyone on this site used reputation in the manner that Ken advocates, the vote would be overwhelmingly in favor of keeping the system.

Unfortunately, there is no criteria for an award of a reputation point, and I doubt very much that it is used by many people as conscientiously as Ken describes.

As long as it is anonymous (which we know is a system limitation) people are going to use it in an arbitrary and capricious manner - which makes it worthless in my opinion. As Ken has said using reputation points to agree or disagree with an opinion is pretty silly - which has been one of my points throughout the whole discussion. I've now been "dinged" twice for expressing myself in this thread - which is part of a discussion forum after all - by cowards who hid behind their keyboards to negatively impact MY good name (reputation) while leaving themselves exposed to nothing. They're not accountable in any way for what they did and I think that stinks - and proves the harm caused by the reputation system - at least to my satisfaction.

Don't like my opinion? Discuss it here, counter it with well-thought out arguments, bring out all the points in favor of the rep system - but don't be a freaking coward and "ding" someone else for giving voice to their thoughts and feelings. This is America, damn it.

 

[Sig]

As long as it is anonymous (which we know is a system limitation) people are going to use it in an arbitrary and capricious manner - which makes it worthless in my opinion. As Ken has said using reputation points to agree or disagree with an opinion is pretty silly - which has been one of my points throughout the whole discussion.

The one red mark I have in my portfolio was an anonymous ding for mistakenly referring to "The New York Times" as the largest newspaper in the United States.

In the end regardless of which way the poll goes, if there is to be long-term credibility for the reputation system, it is critical that there be a reasonable standard in place to leave a ding..... and not just because you mistakenly call the New York Times the biggest US newspaper.

 

[nsxtasy]

I've now been "dinged" twice for expressing myself in this thread

I don't want to speak for someone else, but the comments imply that both "dings" seem to be for repetitive posting (or, using Lud's and Sig's word, "campaigning"), not for stating your opinion the first time...

 

[NsXMas]

In case the reputation system is going to stay, we need to discuss the punishment for abuse of the system, in cases like this:

http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showpost.php?p=382297&postcount=32

 

[NetViper]

In case the reputation system is going to stay, we need to discuss the punishment for abuse of the system, in cases like this:

http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showpost.php?p=382297&postcount=32

So now we are going to red mark people who need help with their PC??

 

[KGP]

In case the reputation system is going to stay, we need to discuss the punishment for abuse of the system, in cases like this:

http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showpost.php?p=382297&postcount=32

Uh, I give up. Exactly what did Hrant do wrong?

 

[nsxtasy]

If, as now seems likely, this vote turns out to be very close to 50-50, my suggestion to Lud would be to do whatever he thinks is best, taking into account all the comments that have been made as well as his own personal insight and experience and preference. I'm sure he'll balance all the points made in this topic, as well as his own perspective on whether the system is overall better or worse for NSXprime (and for his own workload). I'll respect his decision either way.

He also deserves props for asking our opinion; he could have just made a decision without consulting us.

 

[lemansnsx]

Uh, I give up. Exactly what did Hrant do wrong?

Never mind what did he do wrong - who has the right to say he did anything wrong at all? Who the heck does the coward who dinged Hrant think he is to do something like that? Who the heck does the coward who dinged someone else for not knowing the largest newspaper think he is? Is he so perfect that he feels comfortable leaving a negative for the minor (!) mistake of another member? He apparently thinks that he is. Step forward cowards so we can put YOUR posts under the microscope! This whole thing is beyond ridiculous - people "judging" other people's posts, opinions, random thoughts... negative points because you don't care for someone's tone... unbelievable.
Bottom line is that this system is just plain wrong.

 

[nsxtasy]

< post deleted >

So you're saying that you don't like the reputation system?

 

[docjohn]

does the software allow for points to be awarded or taken away only if there is an explanation?This might help out with those puzzling blank columns.

 

[Ponyboy]

I say keep it. I'm gotten a few random negative points and I couldn't care less. It's not like I care what some anonymous dude thinks about me anyway or like I post inflammatory commentary with frequency. I've received some positive points too but one was after I told a newb to "Go away." Go figure.

Keep it. It makes things interesting.

 

[NSX Prime]

No. I wasn't going to go into this publically - since Lud is the only one with the ability to remove reputation points - but a positive point was left for me AFTER I posted about the cowardly negative. That positive has apparently been removed - as has the similar positive that I left to indicate my approval of NetViper's contributions to this thread.

Do not sign your reputation comments, as explained in the message introducing the system. Signing them is basically an attempt to circumvent the anonymous design of the system, is open to abuse (since it is anonymous, you could easily leave a negative comment and "sign" it with someone else's name - even if I fix it later damage has been done), and leads to more serious abuse of "pumping" each other up with reciprocol positive feedbacks, which I pretty clearly hinted was a good way to get suspended in the message introducing the system. You guys both signed them and left reciprocol feedbacks, the comment on the second one being something along the lines of "right back at ya".

 

[KGP]

I reserve my vote until 12/26. :biggrin:

 

[Sig]

I reserve my vote until 12/26. :biggrin:

Ahhhh...... a swing voter in our midst.

 

[Doc C]

It's funny there are negative and positive reputation points being handed out while discussing whether or not it should be done. I can't believe the incredible amount of knowlege that people have on this site!! The information I have received has been incredible. In a perfect world the system would not be abused and would be fair to everybody. However, it ain't a perfect world and so I think I liked the site a LOT more before this system came into play. The question we should ask is, "Is the site better now than it was before this system was implemented??" IMO, I don't think so.
I'm but a neophyte to this site and if you look at my user reputation it is only nominal, so you may want to stop reading any further. However, most newspapers will not accept an editorial without a signature. They usually don't allow anonymous posts, because it makes you put your name to whatever you stated in your editorial. It's like your credit rating, or your feedback on Ebay, you have to have justification and identify yourself while handing out "demerits". I don't think it has improved the site at all and don't think it would even without the anonymity. I can't give any points to lemansnsx to show my support, so I'll do it the old fashioned way by just saying I agree with his statements. This is my one statement on the subject and so I won't say anymore (don't want any bad reputation points) about it. I feel like every post now should have a disclaimer or something.


Disclaimer: This post could offend people and make them angry. If any sexual side effects, diarrhea, uncontrollable bowel movements, urge to leave negative reputation points occur, please stop reading said post immediately and grow up. Try to be as classy as the car you are discussing!!!

 

[NSX Prime]

The one red mark I have in my portfolio was an anonymous ding for mistakenly referring to "The New York Times" as the largest newspaper in the United States.

Sig - That reputation comment has been removed at the request of the person who left it.

 

[Andrie Hartanto]

FWIW,
I don't really care about the reputation thing. In fact I didn't even noticed it until recently. I wasn't interested in using it until this thread came up and I thought I gave one a try.

And I personally don't like it. Love it the way they were. Currently, it is more civil because some people afraid in getting negative reputation. The old way is easy to identify who are not worth listening to.

Edit: spelling

 

[nsxtasy]

most newspapers will not accept an editorial without a signature. They usually don't allow anonymous posts, because it makes you put your name to whatever you stated in your editorial.

These claims that the system is totally anonymous, and that feedback points are left without accountability, are simply not true. The system is not entirely anonymous. Unless comments are copied and posted in the public forums, only three people read them: the author, the recipient, and the forum moderator, Lud. The only person of these three who does not know who sent the comment is the recipient. While the author is not accountable to the recipient, he or she is accountable to the forum moderator. The moderator knows exactly who submitted the comment (just as a newspaper knows who wrote a letter to the editor, even though it might be printed with only the author's initials or the name withheld). Based on his quick deletion of the two feedbacks noted above, I'm willing to bet that Lud reads every feedback comment and rating that is entered, even without being requested to do so. He also acts as a recourse for those who feel that feedback is given unfairly. I'm quite confident that he reads and considers all such protests carefully. He has the ability to delete feedback if he agrees that it is unfair. He has the ability to let the feedback stand if he disagrees. He has the ability to contact a feedback author to ask why feedback was given. If he feels that abuse has taken place, he has the full range of administrative measures available, including everything from warning a feedback author to suspending NSXprime privileges, and he has already stated that he is ready and willing to use these measures if he deems it appropriate. So those who give feedback cannot do so with impunity; far from it.

I also find it interesting that people are apparently so very quick to complain about any and every negative feedback rating they ever receive. I have already stated that I have received some negative comments that I consider totally valid, and others that I don't. The ones that I consider valid have helped me realize how I might have unintentionally caused offense with certain comments, and how I might avoid doing so in the future. (And yes, the ones that I consider invalid are as frustrating to receive as some of the examples that have been posted here.) I must be unique, because no one else on NSXprime has ever stated here, "I received a negative feedback with a comment, and you know, I can understand why they saw a need to object". Ever. Am I really the only person here who can admit that? Do people here really consider themselves so perfect that they can't admit that they might have deserved negative feedback on one or two occasions?

One more reason I find it interesting to hear all these complaints about every negative feedback rating is that almost everyone here has received lots more positive feedback than negative feedback. There are 7,782 members of NSXprime. 7,777 of us have green blocks under our names and have our reputations unsullied. That's right; only five NSXprime members have a red or gray block, and none of those five have posted in this topic. So when you look at it this way, I really don't think that this reputation system merits all the angst that has been expressed here by a handful of individuals, all of whom have a green block under their names. If there are things about it that are objectionable, they can be fixed (or, the system can be disabled, if that's the ultimate decision). There's certainly no need to get so worked up about it. It's just a feature of the boards, and according to that feature, almost everyone here is doing pretty well.

I'm looking forward to seeing how this vote turns out, and what Lud decides to do about the reputation system. If it goes away, fine; if it stays, that's fine too. Regardless of whether it stays or goes, it doesn't prevent us from continuing to have engaging discussions that provide good information and help other people and make this an enjoyable place to visit - and that is what NSXprime is for.

So... can I buy the next round?

 

[Casper91]

I've been here something like 4 years - and, believe me, it didn't take long to figure out who was worth listening to, who was irritating, who was funny, who was a know-it-all, who was pedantic, who was a bit immature...I was able to figure that out without the "benefit" of little green or red boxes next to the names!

I've been here less than a year, and have been able to figure out who is worth listening to.

Green light:biggrin:, Red light. Stay, Go, I'm not going to lose sleep over it one way or another. Lud - do what you feel is best for the community and you have my support.
:smile:

 

[NSXWIND]

I can understand why people care about this system so much, since green light or red light pretty much allows a member to stereotyping another member without knowing him/her at all. After reputation system had been introduced to Prime, I think more than twice before posting, I need to make sure my post isn’t anyway close being negative or hostile, so sometimes I end posting only half of what I want to say. I am not a Prime veteran, but I did have a chance to experience prime without the reputation system, which was fine. The only change that was induced by reputation system was thread regarding the negative point that member had received, and of course less immature behavior.

I first agree we should keep the reputation point system, only to use it as an indicator to honor members that had contributed to the community, but the trade off for having reputation system (assuming we keep it after the poll), is that there will always be people out there that are abusing the system.

Unless we have a small committee such as marketplace moderator, instead we have reputation moderator, to filter positive/negative point. This way we may be able to stop abusive/immature act displayed in reputation system. But in a way, this kind of goes against freedom of speech, since I can’t express my opinion unless the reputation moderator agrees on what I have to say about another member.

 

[effer]

If I had to choose between losing the user rep system or keeping it while creating around 50% of dissatisfaction ( or only around 50% of non dissatisfaction; which doesn't necessarily mean only satisfaction but also indifference or indecision ) , I wouldn't hesitate to flush it.

IMO only with a score over than 90% shall I consider to begin to think about thinking about maybe keeping it.

When we used to live without it, remember a few years ago, there was nearly a 100% of satisfaction!

I also believe when someone has to say something that could lead to affect some other's reputation, at least he should have the courage to say it directly, not anonymously.


My 0,000000000000000000000000000002 cents.



What's in a name?

What's in a score?

We are more than that...

Peace every body.

 

[D'Ecosse]

If I had to choose between losing the user rep system or keeping it while creating around 50% of dissatisfaction ( or only around 50% of non dissatisfaction; which doesn't necessarily mean only satisfaction but also indifference or indecision ) , I wouldn't hesitate to flush it.

IMO only with a score over than 90% shall I consider to begin to think about thinking about maybe keeping it.......

Statistics - interesting subject
Having the ratio expressed as % of the "for" vs "against" doesn't really mean a whole lot vs the entire NSXPrime population. Currently less than 1.5% of the membership has actually voted.
Now if you're in the "for" camp, you can argue that less than 1% of the total membership actually wants to change the current system. The "against" camp could attempt to use the same arguement, but I don't believe it's valid when there is something already in place - abstention from voting could be implied as accepting of the current condition. (of course it could just be apathy! )
I agree with nsxtasy's comments re the negative comments being overblown in the grand scope of things - in this case the statistics are quite convincing that negative comments play a hugely insignificant role vs the positives.

 

[NetViper]

Seems like the issue is pretty divided down the middle, but why would we want a system that divides us???

 

[nsxtasy]

Seems like the issue is pretty divided down the middle, but why would we want a system that divides us???

Well, 40 percent of NSX owners have red cars, 30 percent have black cars, and 30 percent have other color cars. And some percent have stock cars, and some other percent have modded cars. Maybe we shouldn't talk about colors or mods, because they divide us, too...

P.S. So you're saying that you don't like the reputation system? Really? I never would have guessed...

 

[effer]

Statistics - interesting subject
Having the ratio expressed as % of the "for" vs "against" doesn't really mean a whole lot vs the entire NSXPrime population. Currently less than 1.5% of the membership has actually voted.
...

- abstention from voting could be implied as accepting of the current condition. (of course it could just be apathy! )

Hi D'Ecosse!

I understand that a hundred votes is a small percentage in certain conditions but as in democracy, those who remain silent are wrong, only a fraction of population still elect the president.

You will certainly answer that the president isn't elected by less than 1% !

Let's talk about that interesting less than 1% statistic!

In our case this hundred vote isn't small at all because I am sure that they are statistically representative considering the fact that it is a significant percentage of the number of actual active members.

Simple to prove, you have to count the number of different active members posting this month and even this last year!

Your 1,5 % will kind of skyjump to more than 50 %... if not 80 %!

And this is truly a false debate because whatever is this percentage the real question is: is poll result representative?

And my pretention is to say: YES.

Abstention from voting is abstention to show opinion or abstention to take decision or abstention of simply knowing its existence and/or simply considering existence of this thread.

Regards,

Effer

P.S. Your avatar NSX looks great!