Too hard to become established on the forum?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garion

In regard to reputation I would like to take a far more lenient stance.

Currently:

- 5000 posts
- 600 reputation points
- 365 days (1 year) registered on the forum

for each rep power. You have to rep 50 people before you rep the same person again, quite frankly that's ridiculous.

My Suggestion:

- 1500 posts
- 500 reputation points
- 365 days registered

Reputation spread would be reduced to 20 members. 50, and even 30 is ridiculously high.

---

I don't have a clue what to suggest for the figures but I was thinking the bold as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sergio

I don't have a clue what to suggest for the figures but I was thinking the bold as well.

---

Same, it's hard to find anyone in the technology section who I can give rep to at the moment.

I honestly don't think the reputation points are your biggest problem here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garion

In regard to reputation I would like to take a far more lenient stance.

Currently:

- 5000 posts
- 600 reputation points
- 365 days (1 year) registered on the forum

for each rep power. You have to rep 50 people before you rep the same person again, quite frankly that's ridiculous.

My Suggestion:

- 1500 posts
- 400 reputation points
- 365 days registered

Reputation spread would be reduced to 20 members. 50, and even 30 is ridiculously high.

---

I like your suggestion, the current one does seem a bit high. 50 members before repping the same person again, jesus!

I changed amount of rep points needed to 400, too (in my post, not properly on the forum... again I don't have the necessary permissions). 20 is definitely better, maybe even 15. I mean people don't even rep that often...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheEclipse

I honestly don't think the reputation points are your biggest problem here.

---

It's one of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garion

I changed amount of rep points needed to 400, too (in my post, not properly on the forum... again I don't have the necessary permissions). 20 is definitely better, maybe even 15. I mean people don't even rep that often...

---

Exactly, there's so few rep being given and then there's even fewer people that you want to give rep to. And in my case at least, it's always the same people who deserve the rep.

I think the high restriction is the cause for lack of repping because people used to give pointless reps to spread, with a comment like 'random rep' but now people don't even bother doing that (I haven't had one for probably a year). They've just given up repping very much at all.

Actually, in regards to amount of rep needed per rep power and posts needed per rep power should not be changed, otherwise we end up with the problem before.

They used to rep a lot a few years ago so 30 wasnt too bad then. Now I have tried to rep so many people for good posts but it says I need to spread "/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 00chips

Actually, in regards to amount of rep needed per rep power and posts needed per rep power should not be changed, otherwise we end up with the problem before.

---

The problem we had is that we went from one extreme to the other - people had like 30 rep power or something ridiculous (more than that I am sure) and it was far too easy to get rep. It then went to virtually impossible. I think somewhere in between is the best bet, the changes that have been suggested are quite realistic - they are not at all easy to gain lots of reputation as it was before but it doesn't make it possible whereas now it's basically a pointless system. The changes before merely reinforced the gap between those members of a high reputation and those with a lower reputation.

I just checked and the only people in this thread whom I can actually +rep are the bronze members (Woo I'm 'Rankist') and MattGarner (Because I obviously despise him :P)