Reputations

[HerenIstarion]

However, I think that going back to old discussions just to be able to rate a current favourite member

But I rather think aforesaid does not imply that old discussion which gets rated does so only for the sake of new favourite. It has its own merits, even if re-reading began as the way to give reputation to some other and newer post.

One minor point, however - everybody having two squares is not such a bad thing. For one thing, reputation, whatever number of squares, after all, is just another thing. For another, with so many wise Gandalfs around, anyone prone to 'slipping' and 'behaving like sandyman' would think twice before each post, as being red-coloured on the background of load of Gandalfs would be more, (what was the word ?) - silly.

It only creates possibility of someone (and, no offense meant, possibly someone young) taking pride in being 'slipped' and, thence, 'sandymaning' on purpose. But possibility is one thing, and probability another, if you follow my meaning.

And even then it would be hard to do, as the greatest part of members does not give out bad reputation, unless very much provoked. Hence so many 'no fools' and people 'getting hang of' things.

We are, after all, what C.S. Lewis called 'mutual admiration society', in a way. We admire each other, so what so surprising in having so many people praised?

And, finally, as an experienced intriguer, I may add up the question of older threads yet again - that is, if, to use your own expression, any 'budding corpse' is inspired to write in a way to win some good fame, why not pay tribute to older skeletons, which, probably, haven't showed their nose (do skulls have noses?) in in a while, but have been mightily creating mighty threads in the mighty days of, hehe, mighty ancestors?

Ancestor worship? Nay, merely fair play, I believe

But!

All of the above is written for the look of the thing, mainly. The real stress of the post falls here:

You explanation, is, of course, accepted. I think we have the gist of it seized firmly now


cheers

[Evisse the Blue]

Old threads are not bad. However, I think that going back to old discussions just to be able to rate a current favourite member (which is the impression I received from Evisse's post) is just...silly.

Oh God, am I that bad at expressing myself. Yes I am. Ok, let me try again: I meant that I was at that moment engrossed in a thread which I haven't checked out in a long while, which meant I had a lot of catching up to do, and into which a limited number of people participated in, and made wonderful posts. So as I was reading, I was giving reputation, and as they posted more than once - damn their brains overflowing with ideas - I found that soon enough I could give no more reputation for the posts on that particular thread, given the (relatively) limited number of participants. Which meant I had to go in search of other discussions and spend reputation on other members, before I could go back and try to rate again - something, that I really didn't feel like doing. But now that I restated my whole point, I see that my pseudo problem is probably due to laziness. And of course, Imladris, you're right in saying that reputations aren't what this forum is really all about. Although I stick to my earlier comment about the magical number 10.

*sigh* Leave it to HI to turn such an argument into an opportunity to meditate upon such matters as 'ancestor worship.'

[Araréiel]

I'm going to toss in my two cents. We should be required to write a comment, yet have the option to remain annonymous. I understand the point it to allow members to see which of their posts are liked, but the point seems defeated when there is a positive AND negative on the same post, as happened to one of mine. Actually, there are two positives, which say what they like, and a negative. As the post was fairly long, I would appreciate knowing which aspect(s) the person didn't like, even if I don't know the person's name.

Annonymity would remain a must to encourage people to be honest, even if it means telling a friend that s/he posted a bad post. But to require a comment is what will help.

[The Barrow-Wight]

We had been considering changing the reputation 'spread' from 20 to 10 since implementing the reputation system several months ago, but there was always the concern that people would misuse the system if we did so. The 'spread' is the number of different people that you must give reputation to before rating the same person again. This limitation is set so people aren't tempted to hurry back to a friend (or enemy) to unfairly enhance (or destroy) their reputation. But, since there is already a limit of giving only 10 repuations a day, it would take a very dedicated person to abuse the system if we set the spread to 10. So, we have done so.

You can now give reputation to someone a second time after giving reputation to only 10 different people. Since there are so many good members on the Downs, I'm sure everyone will find this change beneficial.

Remember:
(1) Always give comments!
(2) Be positive instead of negative unless someone is really misbehaving. No reputation at all is usually better than negative (and says just as much to the poster).
(3) See what our members with the highest reputations are doing and use them as an example.
(4) Don't mess around with the system. There's a whole world outside of your computer to bother people, so you don't need to be a nuisance here.

Thanks!

[Lalaith]

I'm such an addled old thing, I can't remember who I've already given Reputation to...I wish the system let us keep track.

[Bêthberry]

I'm not sure it really matters if you give rep to the same person, over time, because the actualy rep is given for the post. Some people can write many excellent posts and so deserve multiple reps.

So, unless you start looking back over old threads to give rep to people, you won't be "double repping" the same post accidentally. Stay with new threads. The 'system' keeps track of how many reps you give and if you try to rep someone before repping 10 other people, the system won't allow it. The system also will allow you to give out only 10 reps every 24 hours.

It's the post that counts!

[Lalaith]

I see, thanks for that Bethberry.

But I'm a bit worried that I might accidentally freak someone out by giving them multiple reps, they might think I was stalking them!