A timely, reminder,
Mithalwen that the rep system is intended to reflect the quality (or lack of it) in discussion rather than agreement or disagreement. Even people with whom we disagree might still, because of the nature of human conversation, enable us to see something new, something interesting, something well done, something that lifts us out of the mundane and ordinary.
I've always thought that neg reps were to be used in cases where posters have, repeatedly and obstinately, after polite requests and several warnings, refused to follow the Downs' rules about courtesy and respect in online discussion--flames, personal attacks, spam. Maybe add to that overbearing insistence upon stating , restating, and restating again one's position ad infinitum, without ever listening to other points of view, and possibly baiting people with the apparent intent to ridicule. Really,with the option of posting to refute or using PM, what's the point of anonymous negative reps?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by davem
The odd thing is getting a pm from someone thanking you for giving them positive rep - it brings home to you how significant it is: if someone will go to the trouble of writing to thank you for positive rep you get an inkling of how much it must hurt them to get negative rep - the main reason I've always avoided doing so.
|
I suspect people have any number of reasons why they send thank you PMs to people for positive reps. For some, it could simply be a matter of courtesy and politeness, an acknowledge of kindess. For others, it could be a means to open up further areas of discussion. There could be as many possible motivations as there are people. I don't think it's necessarily odd at all.