Awaiting Feedback Why Rep Should Return: Our Posts Are Worth More Than a Like

No, but



That is the link to the Reputation add on that was being looked at. It's the same thread url as the one in the images in the opening post.

 

Just as another information point, I feel I'm one of the only members who's ever been "harassed" with consistent likes by one person in a sort of act of passive aggression, which is a downside to the like system, that there is no limit to it.

Images removed due to indirectly calling out a member

EDIT: Apologies for that, couldn't think of any other way to show my point.

There's a bit cut off on the top and bottom and a couple on each side of the pages but everything labelled July 14th happened all in the space of maybe 9 minutes. It's a flaw to the current system that at the very least I think should be addressed.

 

That it is... Can we get one of the admins in here to verify claims? There's absolutely no reason this shouldn't work.[DOUBLEPOST=1375136295][/DOUBLEPOST]

Oh.... my..... god..... So rep just got approved... right?

But really, that's where the value of rep comes from- its limits. You can't rep everything. You can only rep certain things that you really felt were worth it.

 

Then what say we switch to the one that gives us some options, hm? That argument doesn't defeat the proposition, it just makes the benefit more obvious.

Given the spread so far, it seems more are in favor. If those against won't speak, it's their loss. I agree that it needs time, but that doesn't mean those interested can't fill the time by hashing it out.

Something that would be acceptable and substantial for a rep comment might be considered spam for the relevant thread. All of the other options carry degrees of personal privacy that many users would prefer not be abused, even for the purposes of praise, particularly praise at that frequency. Rep slots neatly into place between all these other methods of communication in a way that is both simple and noteworthy, without being overbearing or taking up space.

I never called any of that into question. I'm just saying that, if all runs smoothly, the trade of likes for rep wouldn't affect the stability of the site that much. Anyone who was going to bicker inanely over stupid s██t will probably still find a way, and anyone who was going to be peaceable and friendly will likely stay the course. Fiascos will still occur over the abuse of forum features, and at roughly the same volume, I'd wager. My only aim was to rebut the point on the table.

My experience trumps your speculation. Roughly 80% of my reps had comments attached. But I also got rep a lot less often. The reason, I imagine, is because lazy people don't give rep with no comment; they just plain don't give rep. Whereas a lazy person will gladly offer a like. I've been here for what, half my probation? and I've already accrued 700 likes. I'm not so arrogant as to believe I've earned every single one with the grace and thoughtfulness (or lack thereof :L) that earned me my rep back in the day. Maybe it seems silly to suggest that two clicks is notably more strenuous than one, but the evidence is there. If others would care to disprove it, that's up to them.

And yet Facebook continues to allow comments. Must be doing something for them.

 

As I said I wasn't for or against. You can twist what I say to mean whatever it is you want, but I've never said I was against the idea.

Two people who share the same indifference =/= all staff sharing the belief. As I've already pointed out, there are staff members that are fond of the idea. You cannot make sweeping generalizations like that.

 

In fairness, though, alerts for likes can be disabled in your Alert Preferences.

Maybe something more like this simply for professionalism:

• User has given your post positive reputation in the thread Thread. "Comment here."
• User has given your post negative reputation in the thread Thread. "Comment here."

 

I'm trying to put the perspective that this isn't affecting a handful of people, but a lot of members you don't know, I don't know, in sections like Roleplay, Playground, Discussion, Gaming, Literature, Forum Families. There are A LOT of people both current, returning and future members this will affect. I'm keeping in mind more than the people in this thread.

That's under the pretence that everyone openly complained about the negative rep they were given. I never thought of approaching staff back then when I got neg rep that was hurtful because the Staff didn't seem approachable. And I had friends who would contact me about rep they received and would confide in me about how bad they felt and wanted to leave and so on. I don't know if there were a minority o us, but it was a distressing thing to feel and see friends experience and not being able to do a thing about it. Not all of it was as 'happy' as people made it out to be, as much as 2007 wasn't a good time on KHV for a lot of members too.

And thinking that Staff should make decisions on a whim to please a few members seems a bit abusive of our powers on the site. As far as i'm aware, we run primarily as a democratic base, meaning we take all views into consideration and the majority making decisions. Less than 10 people agree to this suggestion so far, that doesn't constitute that most like it, only that most people have posted liked it. That's not a majority, you'd need 25,000 members posting agreeing to that, empirically speaking. In reality, i'm not sure how many, but more than a single group that isn't representative of the whole of the active community.

 

All those people that frequent other sections have just as much right and opportunity to come in here and speak up as we do. And as for returning and future members, returning members will most definitely be more affected by keeping a like system since we had a rep system for so long and everyone liked it. Future members probably won't care if they never knew we had a like system in the first place.

 

I don't mind likes conceptually, but their abuse is something I can't stand. Rep would fix this "like every post for no reason" fad that I've made clear I don't like.


But yeah, I don't have much to say that hasn't already been said. The system has gotten out of hand and should be changed to one that doesn't facilitate abuse.

 

Uh... I'm not trying to twist anything, bro. :v I was just pointing out that the statement favors the side of restoring rep, since you were presenting it as a neutral statement.

 

Prove to me how many members we get coming on in a month here. Regular ones, too. Then we'll talk perspective. Your 54k argument doesn't hold water because it's infactual.

Well, we know why 2007 wasn't a good time for you. That said, if you're doing your job, you will be approachable. We have a public skype chat, we have private messaging, and a bar on the side letting people know which rainbow is online. There's no reason to throw a personal intimidation into this. Because honestly, we've been told numerous times we play too hard with users in the spamzone and users come to you. Which is it, that they can't approach you or approach you too much?

Of course we should give it time... That said every one here is a regular. Why don't you ask more regulars like I spent last night doing? It's not very democratic when we're seeing a landslide and we have to keep talking about this UNREPRESENTED USERBASE that really doesn't exist. Even then, this thread wasn't just for one user group. I even explained rep in full. Why would I do that if I were appealing to just some fictional rebel group of users?

 

What about now? 11 (Ohoho) people have voted that they're for Rep returning. Does this STILL not constitute as enough people/the majority liking the idea?

 

I wouldn't say we have enough, but you and James have both made a valid point in the fact that ACTUAL DAILY TRAFFIC is a lot less than the total number of registered users. We get a much smaller number than 54,000 different members logging and actually contributing on a regular basis.

 

I'd say just the general fact that no one has said no yet is a sign that this idea has a more positive than negative reception.

 

Never thought I'd be one to agree with Vivi, but he's SO right in this case. Nobody has said no, it's pretty evident that people would like Rep to return.

 

Not reporting what, to you, was wrongfully done is no one's fault but your own and your 'friends'. If they had approached staff with their complaints and problems, it would have been dealt with in a proper fashion, which leads straight into a contradiction you've made against yourself. If the staff today is as approachable and efficient as you're insinuating them to be, then the slight problems that could arise from abuse of the reputation system can be resolved with ease and the pros of the reputation would far outweigh the cons. Just because something can't be done perfectly without a hitch does not mean that it should not be done, or at the very least attempted. As a side note that doesn't need to impact the discussion, I will confirm that you and your 'friends' were a minority.

I don't think a single person said this needed to be done immediately, or with only a few votes from a few members. I think everyone here is more than willing to wait for a larger percentage of the forum to express their thoughts. That being said, if only a few people vote in this thread and it's not enough to warrant action but the overall siding of the vote is in agreement, then it should be up to you (the staff in general), in a position of power, to find a way to get the opinions of other members who might not think to look in this section expressed. Put a vote up on the front page. Send out an automated PM informing the members. Something to make sure another suggestion from your dedicated userbase is not ignored or killed off without second thought. If only 10 people play the lottery and the pot only hits $1,000, they don't just call it off. They draw a winner and one man or woman wins $1,000.

Finally, to be blunt, I'm not sure what forum you're browsing, but there are probably less than 150 active members here. A fraction of that logs in daily and contributes to discussions and threads. I wouldn't say this amount of people is insignificant by any means.

 

It's like I said to Libre earlier, people either want it or don't care either way. So why not bring it back?[DOUBLEPOST=1375137793][/DOUBLEPOST]

Quoting to restate everything in this post because I agree with it and it's worth much more than a stupid like.

 

Ok, even though I'm 100% in support of this:

Guys, cool it a little.

The idea has been live for less than twelve hours. Yes, support in the poll is nigh unanimous thus far, but that's been live for less than two hours. We could easily be observing a bottleneck. Let's at least let a few day and night cycles go 'round before we hammer the "Everyone wants it" argument again. If you have some other way to defend the proposition, exhaust that first.

That said let's not wait until the 54,000th member has weighed in because that guy's username is something like AkuRokuSlash2002 and he probably hasn't signed on in several years

 

Personally, before I share my opinion on it I'd like admin confirmation of this being possible [ + why it wasn't working ] and to know for sure if everyone would have to start over from zero with their 'reputation'. Until then ...

 

Seriously though, what does this even do for me?