Disapprove feedback function

[Lightning McQueen]

I wouldn't dream of it :innocent:.

(Maybe this calls for some serious boot-licking :idea:.)

.....Paul/Sharky really gives me the impression of being an impeccable human being. Clever, creative, innovative, strong work ethic, yet seemingly so modest & humble. Perhaps we could all learn somethign from him.

It didn't work did it ...no gold star

 

[fibonelli]

very bad idea re disapprove button. a godsend for any imbecile.

 

[Sharky]

I've added a poll to the top of this thread. So you can now (anonymously) vote on whether or not we should allow members to disapprove of other members posts. Please do indicate your preference.

ps. Yes I have incredible power! But I have never wielded it.... YET! Muhhahaha

 

[JTrader]

I agree.

It only serves to give Little Miss Moffat something else to complain about.

Who is she ? i don't see her in the member list .

 

[dbphoenix]

I've added a poll to the top of this thread. So you can now (anonymously) vote on whether or not we should allow members to disapprove of other members posts. Please do indicate your preference.

ps. Yes I have incredible power! But I have never wielded it.... YET! Muhhahaha

Given all of the changes back and forth, how exactly does all of this work right now as far as green dots, red dots, single lines, separate lines, subtracting points, and so on?

 

[Crap Buddist]

what about the actual posts just displaying something like this post has 78 positive reps.(like a small counter visible) people can still see who posted it (obviously) but its just on the post. so instead of member x is xxx points the posts are ? more focus on the posts/discussion & not so directly the members...

 

[JTrader]

what about the actual posts just displaying something like this post has 78 positive reps.(like a small counter visible) people can still see who posted it (obviously) but its just on the post. so instead of member x is xxx points the posts are ? more focus on the posts/discussion & not so directly the members...

A bit like baby pips.

I prefer T2W how it is now - approve & disapprove - a true democratic reputational process. Only those with something to hide dislike the disapprove function .

 

[dbphoenix]

what about the actual posts just displaying something like this post has 78 positive reps.(like a small counter visible) people can still see who posted it (obviously) but its just on the post. so instead of member x is xxx points the posts are ? more focus on the posts/discussion & not so directly the members...

This is the way The Motley Fool used to do it (they still might; I'm no longer a member). A given post showed how many members recommended it, if any, and there was a daily summary on the front page of most recommended posts (along with most popular threads and most popular "boards"). Members did get labels of some sort, crowns, if I remember correctly, but I forget what the basis was.

As for the whole dot thing, why not just provide the number of points, particularly since they don't seem to be working properly?

 

[Sharky]

Let me shed some light on it, as it's confusing and isn't properly explained anywhere:

The updated system works as follows.

1 Dark Green Dot = 150 rep points (max 5)
1 Light Green Dot = 250 rep points (max 5)
1 Gold Dot = 800 rep points (max 10)
Once you max the dots out you get a big gold star and the dots start again, and so forth, for as many stars and dots as you can acquire.

So DBP, we can work out your rep is at least (5x150 + 5x250 + 1x800 = 750 + 1250 + 800 = 2800), but not yet 3600 (otherwise you'd have an extra gold dot).

I'll need to check regarding the negative rep, as it may work differently.

The number of reputation points a member gives or deducts from another memeber for a particular post then increases with:

1. the member’s post count.
2. the member’s length of membership.
3. the member’s current reputation score.

If it helps we can make all the forumulae public and publish the actual rep score of members when you rollover the dots, along with their rep giving/deducting strength.

 

[dbphoenix]

A bit like baby pips.

I prefer T2W how it is now - approve & disapprove - a true democratic reputational process. Only those with something to hide dislike the disapprove function .

I don't dislike it. But it ought to be a separate line. A given member ought not to have the power to "subtract" from someone else's reputation. If one disapproves of someone's post, then say so in public, on the board. Using a disapprove function is itself a means of "hiding", like an anonymous phone call, or anonymous gossip. On the other hand, if the post is in actual violation of the TOS, then report it as always, to a moderator. No need to express disapproval in some additional way (Americans are very big on disapproval; it bothers me that so many members want to go there).

 

[Sharky]

The problem with the old system which is still doumented in the FAQ here: T2W Trading Forums - FAQ was that after 1500 rep points, the display of dots never changed. This way the viusal representation of your rep points can keep increasing evermore. NB it's just a visual representiation of your rep score #, that's all that changed when we updated it - the way the score is calculated and the number of points etc all remained the same.

 

[JTrader]

A bit like baby pips.

I prefer T2W how it is now - approve & disapprove - a true democratic reputational process. Only those with something to hide dislike the disapprove function .

rols has given me disapprove rep for the above post .

Disapprove feedback... 07-01-2008 04:10 PM rols You said it mate!

I just don't get some folk .

 

[rols]

I don't dislike it. But it ought to be a separate line. A given member ought not to have the power to "subtract" from someone else's reputation. If one disapproves of someone's post, then say so in public, on the board. Using a disapprove function is itself a means of "hiding", like an anonymous phone call, or anonymous gossip. On the other hand, if the post is in actual violation of the TOS, then report it as always, to a moderator. No need to express disapproval in some additional way (Americans are very big on disapproval; it bothers me that so many members want to go there).

I don't care about approval either way but it could lead to bullying and ganging up by the bigger hitters on the minnows...

.....nothing worse then being a one red dot wonder

 

[dbphoenix]

Let me shed some light on it, as it's confusing and isn't properly explained anywhere:

The updated system works as follows.

1 Dark Green Dot = 150 rep points (max 5)
1 Light Green Dot = 250 rep points (max 5)
1 Gold Dot = 800 rep points (max 10)

So DBP, we can work out your rep is at least (5x150 + 5x250 + 1x800 = 750 + 1250 + 800 = 2800), but not yet 3600 (otherwise you'd have an extra gold dot).

I'll need to check regarding the negative rep, as it may work differently.

The number of reputation points a member gives or deducts from another memeber for a particular post then increases with:

1. the member’s post count.
2. the member’s length of membership.
3. the member’s current reputation score.

If it helps we can make all the forumulae public and publish the actual rep score of members when you rollover the dots, along with their rep giving/deducting strength.

Making them public doesn't address the issue. Again, if I disapprove of someone's post, I'll say so in public. If it's a violation of TOS, I'll report it. But for someone's reputation to be diminished just because I personally don't like what was said is a bit too Orwellian, and I don't think that's what you want this site to become (there's already been some hint of what happens when a "revenge battle" takes place).

Quite frankly, I don't understand why so much time and so many posts are being devoted to this. Cutting someone's public reputation in a secretive manner is incompatible with the transparency which this site has sought to achieve with all of its disclosure efforts, repudiation of nicks, etc.

 

[rols]

rols has given me disapprove rep for the above post .



I just don't get some folk .

It was a joke, irony...geddit

I will reimburse you shortly....

...still love ya, don't worry.

 

[JTrader]

It was a joke, irony...geddit

I will reimburse you shortly....

...still love ya, don't worry.

BUT WILL YOU? HOW DO I KNOW YOU WILL? I HAVE NO GUARANTEE THAT U WILL? I ALREADY HAVE ABANDONMENT ISSUES .

 

[Sharky]

Personally I think:

1) We only have positive approvals
2) We list the names of the users, like a thank you, next to each post that recieves them
3) When you rollover their rep you get the members actual rep score AND their rep giving power.
4) We update the FAQ with a detailed description of how the system works.

 

[JTrader]

Personally I think:

1) We only have positive approvals
2) We list the names of the users, like a thank you, next to each post that recieves them
3) When you rollover their rep you get the members actual rep score AND their rep giving power.
4) We update the FAQ with a detailed description of how the system works.

Sounds good enough. You de boss!

 

[peto]

Personally I think:

1) We only have positive approvals
2) We list the names of the users, like a thank you, next to each post that recieves them
3) When you rollover their rep you get the members actual rep score AND their rep giving power.
4) We update the FAQ with a detailed description of how the system works.

Excellent, i agree with DB and regarding neg rep and your embellishments above.

 

[firewalker99]

I don't dislike it. But it ought to be a separate line. A given member ought not to have the power to "subtract" from someone else's reputation. If one disapproves of someone's post, then say so in public, on the board. Using a disapprove function is itself a means of "hiding", like an anonymous phone call, or anonymous gossip. On the other hand, if the post is in actual violation of the TOS, then report it as always, to a moderator. No need to express disapproval in some additional way (Americans are very big on disapproval; it bothers me that so many members want to go there).

I agree with the above statement. Personally, I've never used the "disapprove post" function. I prefer to discuss things in public as the moderators will have seen me cause trouble from time to time

I think we should keep the "report bad post" option, as that's a tool for letting moderators know the thread is getting derailed by insults, flames, or any other behaviour that's not according to the T2W guidelines.