'Top' Reputation Givers

[HerenIstarion]

If I see a post which I react favourably to but cannot rep because I have repped the poster recently, then I simply don't rep it.

Maybe it can be stored by bookmarking it? You can go back to it later, when you've 'spread' sufficient amount of reputation 'around'. Than your time is saved - you don't need to rep other ten posts right now on the spot, and quality of reputation-giving is preserved as well, for eagerness to rate what you liked may make you rate what you've barely read. I remember having mere remark of mine positively (and anonimously) rated, and comments read that it was done in a hurry with the goal of rating other post by other user in mind. Better have to-do list, I reckon

Master Architect (I was flattered, really) re: I believe you don't blame me for that?! But, kidding apart, even with high reputing ratio, I don't think it is or ever may be entirely my or any one person's 'doing'. Poetic exaggeration it was rather . It may have been if all but one promised to abstain from reputing at all, but that would not happen.

Roggie re: Maybe he'll reappear in RPG, if I ever get fired from this dratted office and have more time. That's not a promise, mind you

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by HerenIstarion

Maybe it can be stored by bookmarking it? You can go back to it later, when you've 'spread' sufficient amount of reputation 'around'.

You can bookmark posts? How do you do that then? Nevertheless, given the general high quality of posting, it could still become rather time-consuming keeping up. The kinds of posters that I am talking about generate rather a substantial volume of good posts. And I do prefer to spread the rep points that I give around, rather than simply rating the same people again and again (good though their posts generally are).

Originally Posted by HerenIstarion

But, kidding apart, even with high reputing ratio, I don't think it is or ever may be entirely my or any one person's 'doing'.

True. But, when one or a few people are rating at a much higher rate than anyone else, it will "skew" (for want of a better word) the result.

[Imladris]

You can bookmark posts? How do you do that then?

For those of you cursed with a Windows computer and blessed with Firefox, you can right click the post number and push bookmark page. Or you can just click the Post Number link and bookmark just like any other web page.

[Bêthberry]

The Saucepan Man posted:
True. But, when one or a few people are rating at a much higher rate than anyone else, it will "skew" (for want of a better word) the result.

No different, really, than any election in a democracy. Those who choose not to vote lose a chance to influence the results. Rather than skewering the 'skewer' wouldn't it better to prod others to participate? I think it was HerenIstarion's enthusiasm which helped get the system going. Sometimes people are shy of new 'technology' and need to see how it can be used before venturing forth themselves with it.

For my part, I had a very good reason for wanting to rep Esty again so quickly and this was not something which would occur regularly. I had wanted to remember Esty's post which I could not yet rep in particular because of its topic: a reference to her fanfiction about Folco, something that I could not rep any other way. I wanted Esty to know that her 'canonical writing' (as opposed to her 'parodic writing') was being recognised.

posted again by Sauce
And I do prefer to spread the rep points that I give around, rather than simply rating the same people again and again (good though their posts generally are).

As do I, especially with the newer members. Once reason why I sometimes look through older threads, in addition to the good reading material they provide, is to find other Downers who might not be participating in "this week's hot topic" but who nonetheless do contribute substantially to the Downs. Especially when there is now such a big spread in 'points' I think it is well to recognise those deserving members who have just joined or who post less frequently. (Note I say 'deserving.' I don't 'spread it around' indiscriminately.)

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

No different, really, than any election in a democracy. Those who choose not to vote lose a chance to influence the results.

I totally accept your second sentence. Those who choose not to rep have to accept that others will determine the outcome. But in an election, if you choose to vote then your vote counts as much as any other person who chooses to vote. Whereas our system allows for one or more members to make their votes, and thus their opinions, to count for more by virtue of "energetic" repping.

I certainly agree that people should be encouraged to rep a post whenever they feel the inclination to do so. But I have some reservations about people going out of their way (and being encouraged to go out of their way) to do so. Because, for perfectly valid reasons, not everyone has the time or inclination to do so.

Ultimately, though, I do not have any problems with the way in which the Rep table is developing (how could I? ), and I think that it it is generally a very good and worthwhile system. It is, however, as well to acknowledge that, if certain members tend to rep much more than others, then the results will be skewed towards their tastes.

[HerenIstarion]

Whereas our system allows for one or more members to make their votes, and thus their opinions, to count for more by virtue of "energetic" repping

That true as well. But 'energetic' repping brings people to have more reputing/rating power than they originally had. The more I raise somebody's point score, the more points they themselves can give out. After all, each little square counts for one point power (?). Per instance, when the whole system was launched, my power must have been some six or seven, merely cause I've been around for so long, and posted so much. Now it is twelve (?). People who used to rate with 2 points now give 7, 8 or even 9. In addition to one point for each year of membership, one for every thousand of posts and what with that fourth dimension called time, I believe system tends to average, given that participants do not slack too much.

Besides, again, it is not my fault . Do you suggest I or somebody who is equally 'energetic' stop rating cause some anonymous 'shy guys' do not rate as much? I can't issue a bill for them to 'start rating this instant!', but it would not work other way round either

[Lhunardawen]

Has anyone else noticed that most of the top rep givers are also the top rep receivers? Does it help improve your reputation, then, if you keep on giving well-deserved reps with your name signed, ceteris paribus (i.e. keep on posting sensible posts)? Just wondering...ignore me...

[Estelyn Telcontar]

I think the factor of representative voting should be considered as well. Almost every survey is taken to be accurate, though only a fraction of the population is asked for an opinion, since each vote counts for many others. Those who have stayed around here long enough to pack some punch with their rep giving are normally those who are familiar with the spirit of the Downs and have indeed contributed to it substantially - otherwise they wouldn't still be here! I consider their votes representative for others who do not give out points as often. I doubt that there would be much difference if every active member rated every post - but as in every democratic system, those who are dissatisfied need to speak up and be heard!