"View new content" feature

[J.A.W.]

Jim activated that feature back on Dec 20th (see here).

I'm not sure what purpose it really serves though.

It can be easily manipulated; by voting on different posts by the same member you can vote that member's reputation "up" or "down" multiple times, so if you don't like a certain member, you know what to do...

Just noticed that my reputation has suddenly leapt from -4 to 0

But because of that ability, the meaning of the votes are lost. I'm not sure there's really a good reason for voting on another poster in the first place.

I can see where a person who doesn't like another person would simply vote against them for real reason. Especially some of the more controversial, outspoken members.

That's exactly what I meant, and I think the feature should be disabled because of what can be done with it - but hey, that's just me

Jim told me he had enabled it at the request of a few members.

This system is totally meaningless and worthless in my view. For instance, I've seen posts without value judgements that don't seem to warrant a vote, such as questions about something (even in the "Offering & Looking For..." forum), get negative votes.

I kept an eye on my own score the last few days; it stayed at 0 until a couple of days ago, then it went to -4 within just a few hours, yesterday it suddenly went up to +2 and now it's down to -1 again... Funny, and it illustrates what I'm trying to say.

Edited December 30, 2009 by J.A.W.

[Aggie87]

In addition to the +/- scoring system, we also rate each other on a 5 star basis, if you haven't noticed. That one has been around for a while, but also doesn't really seem to serve much purpose. It's only noticeable on your profile page though, unlike the +/- scoring.

[J.A.W.]

In addition to the +/- scoring system, we also rate each other on a 5 star basis, if you haven't noticed. That one has been around for a while, but also doesn't really seem to serve much purpose. It's only noticeable on your profile page though, unlike the +/- scoring.

Yep, I've noticed the star-based rating system. I don't see the purpose of it either.

[AllenLowe]

"This system is totally meaningless and worthless in my view."

that's why I like it - I vote we keep it - no one will DARE disagree with me now -

Edited December 30, 2009 by AllenLowe

[Use3D]

Note to self: Get rid of the silly rating system.

[Van Basten II]

Just gave you a thumbs up for this idea, which proves that the silly system actually works

On a serious note, i've been on boards where they used the system , it was a way to figure out easily the troublemakers since they'd earn negative points rather quickly and it made for a relatively free problem board since it incited members to make the extra mile to behave themselves, plus they used the positive points to play gambling games.

Don't think it's necessary here though, despite the few run-ins we had, gotta say i've been on way way way worse places than here in terms of behaviour.

[AllenLowe]

hmmmm......I could give you a negative for saying that.....or I could give you a break -

you feelin' lucky today?

[J.A.W.]

Note to self: Get rid of the silly rating system.

I hope you - or Jim - will, at the moment it's still active.

[Van Basten II]

Hey, who gave me a thumbs down

Oh yeah forgot to mention, on boards where they used the system, you knew who was giving you positive or negative points and you knew which post made you receive a reward. It also kept everyone in check.

Edited December 31, 2009 by Van Basten II

[AllenLowe]

hey, if I could, I'd give myself a negative - you know what they say about self hate.

[Van Basten II]

Geez Allen you're at -7 and your reputation is still neutral, how much does it take to change it, before we ditch out the system, can we know how the ratings are changing ?

[J.A.W.]

Geez Allen you're at -7 and your reputation is still neutral, how much does it take to change it, before we ditch out the system, can we know how the ratings are changing ?

I've seen a member with a -10 rating and his reputation was "poor". Another member who had 10 positives was rated "good" or something like that.

[Noj]

On another forum the rating system involved not only a point system, but those with more points more substantially impacted those with less. And, with each rating, the user could post a small comment just below each post but still contained in it and not an actual reply to the thread. High "rep" levels permitted one to see different parts of the forum those with lower rep could not. It was really ugly, a flame fest.