The limit needs to be lowered, it must be about spread to 50 people at the moment. I know that it helps stop pointless repping, but 50 is just too much. It should be more like 10-20.
Printable View
The limit needs to be lowered, it must be about spread to 50 people at the moment. I know that it helps stop pointless repping, but 50 is just too much. It should be more like 10-20.
I agree, 20 is a decent enough number imo.
Tbh there aren't even close to 50 different members that deserve rep so having insanely high limits would do two things:
1) Make people give up on repping others.
2) Encourage people to pointless rep others just so they can spread and rep the person who deserves the rep again.
I personally have gone for option one as there are posts on here which deserve rep and are quite decent/good but then again I aint able to rep them seeing as I would probably have to spread for repping them several months ago.
Should definitely be lowered to the 10-20 mark.
I voted 5. You should also be able to rep more people.
agreed, really good points there.Quote:
Originally Posted by --ss--
I personally think 30 is more reasonable. If we changed it to 15 then we'd be back to the original problem of some members being intimidated with people who had high rep power. I agree that 50 is a tad too much but lowering it considerably would create problems that we had with the old reputation system.
i think you should be able to rep someone after a certain amount of days instead of the number of other people youve repped. i hardly ever give rep so i found myself wanting to give reputation but it said id already given it to them which i didnt even remember, so it must have been ages ago. i think that would be much better and it wouldnt encourage pointless reputation either
30 like the old plan was. :)
Nope, people stopped caring about rep after the whole points fiasco.Quote:
Originally Posted by Immenseman
If that was the case then nobody would have been warned about asking for reputation and I wouldn't have been receiving reputation. Both of which I can assure you are untrue and are still happening. People do care about reputation still it's just people can't influence the system so dramatically.Quote:
Originally Posted by JackBuddy
No one was ever intimidated becuase someone had a higher rep powere than them and today people still have different rep powers, so i dont see how that makes any differance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Immenseman
In the old rep system there was no problems. The rep system on clubhabbo is fine and they have people with over 250 rep power, theres no need to try and limit it :S
If I'd kept PM's from that long ago with newer users saying that then I'd happily show you. I assure you that some users who had 1-5 rep or whatever were frightened. Of course people have different rep powers still but there isn't a 45 gap between people. With the old system say you were +repped in the same week by 5 of the highest rep holders you'd go up a rep level. You could just jump up the levels so quickly. It was a lot more "pointless" before the changes. I hardly hear anyone moaning about reputation anymore which is a huge plus.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom743
to be honest i preffered the old system but its not gonna get changed. It is just way to hard to get rep powers now.
Ah this reminds me of what the council thought up and got changed, shame the management had to interfere. The council suggested that:
Each year rep power goes up by one.
That you can rep a member again after you've repped another 30 members.
You can rep 10 people a day.
etc etc
For some reason they changed it from 30 to 50 (or something like that). Not sure why, but they just did.
To be honest there was one member that managed to bad rep me twice in a week :rolleyes:
But yeah, it should be lowered, 50 is a bit too high :)
I think it should be lowered, 50 is a bit too high :) I say around 10-20 is right.
I think 30 is good. Who is the one that would have to change it? Because your a manager so isn't that your job or someone elsessQuote:
Originally Posted by Immenseman
Love it when people post things like this in reputation based feedback and although I'm on holiday I couldn't resist posting this.Quote:
Originally Posted by JackBuddy
If no one cares about reputation, there would be no need for the reputation issues thread as no one would post in because no one would have a problem with getting -rep if no one cared. There would also be no need to hire someone to deal with reputation issues because it would be a meaningless position if no one cared. As you can see, this is not the case. ;)
Also, I couldn't help but notice that there's a post in the reputation issues thread made by you about your own reputation issue which also means you care about reputation. :P
+1 internets to Nick!Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick-
I say 30 is a good number. (:
wow its 50?
Thats stupid....
Many members only visit one section of the forum and they wont be able to rep 50 people. Having it so high encourages pointless repping so that people can rep others quicker.
Should be lowered to 30!
20 :):):):)
My point was that generally less people care about reputation after it was harder to gain 1 point. It isn't a big deal anymore to most people. Of course if I do get -rep then I'm going to get it removed...Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick-
25 tbh, go 'alf wai
I was thinking the same thing ^^
I can never rep anyone twice now the limit is so high, unless I just randomly rep people.
Yea, 25 seems reasonable to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by You
That way its not too easy to keep repping the same person, but it's not a ridiculous amount of people to rep before you can give rep to the same person again.
I'd say 25. Seems a fair amount and if you can rep 10 people a day (i think), it'l take less than 3 days to rep them again.
I didn't see problems with the original reputation system tbh!Quote:
Originally Posted by Immenseman
I don't give out much reputation anymore. The problem is that it's usually the same group of peple who make posts that in my mind deserve some rep and with it been 50 it would take me a very long time before I would be able to rep them again. So yeh I agree it should be lowered, 30 seems a limit I could stand for although 20 seems a more realistic number.
i can't really be bothered with 'repuation' anymore, because it isn't what it's called - it's limited too much.
most of mine now is red ahahahah.
10. Most people will go pointless repping if they need to give it to someone. So what if someone has high rep power, it is because they deserve it. If we maintain our current situation, everyone will have high rep which some of them are just mainly pointless rep.
Hmmm, that's quite true when you think about it. With the current way the rep system works, there won't be any bullying because pointless posts would be removed without asking for them to be removed. With a 10 person rep limit, there would be less pointless posts. But then again, it could be used as an excuse to frequently pointless rep. 20/25/30 does seem safer when you think about it, it will just mean people who want to rep others must find more constructive posts to rep and stay clear of pointlessly repping people.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnFTW
Just completetely remove the reputation system, it causes too many fights!
Is anything actualy going to be done about this, everyone who has voted bar 1 has said that the limit should be lowered yet nothing seems to be happening about it?
I dont think there are even 50 members on the forum who I would consider giving rep to and I would say Im quite generous with giving it out :P
Somewhere between 20-30 I think, should be decided on the outcome of this poll :)
I voted 20 (I think) simply because 50 is too high and if it's lower, it encourages people to give reputation where deserved.
i say rise it to 60.
You better be joking :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Serious
no, i am deadly serious. i've got no time for jokes.