Would you like reputation to change?

Well it's great that Sammeth. is on board with some of the changes and he's the new main man so hopefully we'll see some progress asap :)

Not fussed, if it was scrapped I wouldn't particularly care. Just having the comments, or a like/dislike feature would be useful. Rep got destroyed when they offered it out to VIPs and it didn't help that the system got pointlessly edited.

Needs a new system, its unfair as it stands

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alkaz

Maybe people with INSANE reputations should have their entire reputations picked at, like I said in the other thread, Nick- did it to me and removed 600/4200 rep and that wasn't going through all of it. Some people with like 8000/10000 rep would have alot of pointless rep.

---

Personally I don't think any reputation at all should be considered pointless, whether positive or negative. The word itself clearly refers to how others view you, so someone simply having a distaste for the person is still really as valid a reason to -rep them as any other, because it's indicative of that person's reputation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshimitsui

Can you propose a better way of doing it? Lets put it this way, most people on the forum will have some form of rep comments that are not really for doing anything in particular but because they have been repped for who they are.

---

The "better way" would be not at all. I know you're an intelligent guy but I think you've really tripped up here - as you said yourself people have been repped for who they are, and that is quite clearly the single most valid reason for reputation to be given. Reputation is how a person is viewed as I've said above, and saying this can't be the case is like saying I'm not allowed to show my high opinion of someone because they're my friend. It truly defies logic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshimitsui

People are repped for all sorts of reasons and that is fair enough, however in the past there was a crew of people who repped one another constantly with the limit per day being low and the user spread count also being low.

---

To be fair we only did that for like 2 days lol I think we gained maybe 1 rep power apiece from it :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Immenseman

Nope, I'm not even remotely concerned. I just believe it's a criminal waste of time for Administrators to do that when they're moaning about how busy they are (note your sig and a post you made last week). However, if you feel it's constructive then that's up to you, you're the admin ;)

The group of people are the KKK who all repped each other, they're not going to kill you for saying it btw, lol. Like Jin said a few months back all changes have to make sure old members are happy because they are the spine of this site but ensure it's welcoming for new users. If you believe it's the best way to treat your old members and they're going to be happy with it then that's entirely up to you.

---

tbh I was thinking of getting Smiddy out of hibernation for an assassination attempt. But yeah I quite openly admit that it happened, albeit not to the extent some people seem to think it did, and I've stated my reasons as to why I don't feel it's a bad thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Special

Needs a new system, its unfair as it stands

---

Would you care to explain why? I don't wish to say that you can't hold such an opinion but in the interests of the thread it might be an idea to actually give reasons so that your opinion can be assessed.

This thread clearly shows at the moment that people would like to get rep points more often for posts and the amount of reputation they have.

Keep it going a little longer :)

I think the way it used to be was fine. Either change it back or introduce the "Thanks" system is my suggestions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Demala

This thread clearly shows at the moment that people would like to get rep points more often for posts and the amount of reputation they have.

Keep it going a little longer :)

---

To me that says *Bump*

Again no replies from anyone in a position to do anything about it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Professor

To me that says *Bump*

Again no replies from anyone in a position to do anything about it!

---

No need to bump it is still/was still pretty high on the list :P

Would be interesting to see AGM's thoughts on the general users votes.

I've only read the first page so if its been posted my bad,
I don't think post count should influence your rep beacuse it has nothing to do with it. I think 5000 is fine even though its high it still shoulndt affect you getting rep because i could just spam. You shouldn't have a high rep because you have alot of posts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arch

I've only read the first page so if its been posted my bad,
I don't think post count should influence your rep beacuse it has nothing to do with it. I think 5000 is fine even though its high it still shoulndt affect you getting rep because i could just spam. You shouldn't have a high rep because you have alot of posts

---

Although I agree with what you are saying, currently the forum is not getting as many posts as it was, so a influence to post more often would help. Also moderators are there to stop any spammers :)

I think a change in the system is needed, but its just striking a balance to giving it a kick that it needs rather than just rendering it pointless thats proving difficult. I think its the post count which is making it especially difficult, as if we put it too low people with high post counts would end up with stupidly high rep power. It might be worth just reducing the other limits and keeping the post count one the same or not changing it too much.

I think the ideas you posted are great, but anything stupid and too easy to earn rep points will be just ridiculous.

I agree to an extent but I think post is the biggest thing putting people off. When you start 5000 posts is a long long way away. I mean you're GM and don't even have 5K, it's far too daunting for new members. I don't see why older users who have high posts counts should stop you from altering it - you should be rewarding people for their activity. I know it's fine for me to say this when I have one of the highest post counts on the board but that's just my opinion. If you change the amount of reputation points it's exactly the same as changing the amount of posts anyway? The people with high reputation points will go up loads. In fact, I think it'll be worse if points change too much and posts not at all because there are huge differences in some rep points but no big difference between the higher post counts. It'd just be a very select few if there were dramatic changes to rep points because there are thousands of points separating the top few.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Immenseman

I agree to an extent but I think post is the biggest thing putting people off. When you start 5000 posts is a long long way away. I mean you're GM and don't even have 5K, it's far too daunting for new members. I don't see why older users who have high posts counts should scrap you from altering it because you should be rewarding people for their activity. I know it's fine for me to say this with one of the highest post counts on the board but that's just my opinion. If you change the amount of reputation points it's exactly the same? The people with high points will go up loads. In fact, I think it'll be worse if points change too much and posts not at all because there are huge differences in some rep points but no big difference between the higher post counts.

---

I agree I don't think it would be fair to just scrap it, but I don't want people to get rep points for stupid things if you get me?

yeah it's too hard to get a rep point.

Cheers Leah we wouldn't have known if you hadn't mentioned it.

On the topic of whether post count or rep points should be lowered, I think rep points needs to be the main reason to have higher rep power as it's obviously a reward of the system itself and how people rate you rather than just general use of the forum which *coughkylecough* can be stacked up far too easily sometimes and isn't a real indicator of how much you're actually respected. 5000 is a very large amount but I think halving it would be too far really. Perhaps lower post count requirement to 4000 per, as that's still a fairly large percentage cut.

My answer to the question; 'Would you like reputation to change?' is yes, but that poll is shockingly one-sided so my answer to the thread is no. I'm quite happy having to earn my reputation. If changes were made to make it a lot easier so that everyone had really high rep powers, my answer to this poll would become 'scrap reputation altogether'.

The only change I would like to see regarding reputation is the amount that has to be spread before you can rep someone again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sergio

The only change I would like to see regarding reputation is the amount that has to be spread before you can rep someone again.

---

I agree. I hate having to spread rep to 50 different people before I can rep the same person again. Maybe have it, if you don't rep enough people in a month (or so) then you can re-rep that person?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sammeth.

I think a change in the system is needed, but its just striking a balance to giving it a kick that it needs rather than just rendering it pointless thats proving difficult. I think its the post count which is making it especially difficult, as if we put it too low people with high post counts would end up with stupidly high rep power. It might be worth just reducing the other limits and keeping the post count one the same or not changing it too much.

---

To be honest though say I had 15,000 posts in 11 months and let's say 50 rep (this would mean only posts affect my points).

15,000 posts atm = 3 rep points.
15,000 if changed to 3,000 = 5 rep points.

Not much of a difference.

---

As a new member if they see they have no rep points and then find out they will only get one/two in about a year because of the ridiculously high factors you need, they will give up trying to get it.

Yeah, I agree with Tom, change post count and points but only posts to something which isn't so daunting but isn't too low, 3500 or something.

The changes have been implemented and I don't envisage them changing again to anything lower any time in the future, so we'll see how this goes.

Yay, thanks for the changes! :D

I still think it should be this though...

• 400 points is too low, it should be 500.
• 4000 posts is too high, it should be 2500.
• 30 people to spread is still too high, should be 20.
• 1 year is fine.

Thanks though, better than the way it was! :8

EDIT; Just read the above post, ah well, still good!

Cool, link anybody or what are they?

It's 400 points per
4000 posts per
1 year per

+30 people before you can rep the same people

I think they're all pretty suitable, maybe posts is slightly too high, but other than that, fine :). Glad they got implemented fast.

Yeah, it's much better. Well done to Sam for acting on it quickly also. Refreshing to see somebody who listens and doesn't discuss it for at least 8 months.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Immenseman

Yes, I want it to change. However, I genuinely want it to change to aid newer members but still consider the older members who have built their reputation up. By this I mean, don't scrap the system but make it easier for newer members to get higher rep power which as if explained before gives them more of an identity which will hopefully make them stay around the forum for longer than they are doing.

---

I agree, if say for example me, I wouldn't expect me to have tonnes of Rep, but I would expect someone who had been on the forum for 3 years to have a reasonable ammount of rep, and I think it should change, but not dramatically, by that I mean, I don't want it to be, 1 rep = 10 posts it would be pointless, I think there should be a reward for startin threads, like 100 threads started, = 1 rep, because I think thread starters are harder to write, and therefore should have more of a reward. But I think it should be 500 posts = 1 rep, or maybe a tiny bit higher, I don't think it should be like 1,000 posts because, some people leave a forum or get bored before they do that many posts and I think, we should run on a points system, well people add to your rep, you should get 10 points and 200 poins = 1 rep, but I don't think Rep, should go up loads. But also I think people should stop givin rep for nothing. Just my opinion

YES NOW TO TAKE OVER THE FORUM WITH REP POWER.

Or something like that. Anyway good show people putting across good arguments and of course that gaylord who put it in place

Who has the highest and what is it? They are in my sights ;l Still Neversoft?

Chris has 38, Shane has 31, but they both buy rep

kk just have to work on overtaking you first then

8k rep irl

Ben has 30 power but he sold his account to Kyle for a bit so prob also has rep that was bought on it so I'm still claiming king ;|

*only just gone past 7k* :(

what about marc

Dunno is he banned or something he's not on the list

http://www.habboxforum.com/memberlis...putation&pp=30

oh he has disabled his rep

Fit.

Didn't impact my rep at all, although v soon it will. :)

Why is mine so low, I have a lot of rep and have been a member for over 4 years now. :(

It's not low, 15 is pretty good. How many points do you have? Also you only have 1 power for your posts some people have 3/4. Some even 5 :O!

Im guessing you have around 4,000 rep as your posts and registration would give you 5 rep power. 15 isnt low at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Immenseman

It's not low, 15 is pretty good. How many points do you have? Also you only have 1 power for your posts some people have 3/4. Some even 5 :O!

---

4000, well, 3937. And yeah, this is 4 years worth of posts, it should be brought down to at LEAST 2500!

EDIT; Yeah, but compared with people like Neversoft with 38 rep power... xD

2500 would give spammers like me too much power. Although it would encourage people to post but then they're not posting for the right reason and would spam. It was decided although it may keep people it's not worth all the spam which is fair enough. I think 3500 is more appropriate but then it's not a nice round number :(