Repping 5 People a Day

[---MAD---]

I don't see why the rep system needs to be heavily guarded, it's alot of effort for one thing which doesn't really need it... If people are unhappy about rep, they'll report it. It's unnecessary work for staff. Also, shouldn't the Forum Manager do the rep stuff, considering his job (self-explanatory) is to manage the forum?

Yes but that many focuses on the moderation team aspect of the forum. Forum administrators on the other hand deal more with rep problems etc (ie nick-).

The FM cannot do everything as theres a lot of things that need to be on a daily basis.

[GommeInc]

Yes but that many focuses on the moderation team aspect of the forum. Forum administrators on the other hand deal more with rep problems etc (ie nick-).

The FM cannot do everything as theres a lot of things that need to be on a daily basis.

The first bit I didn't really understand... Do you mean people reporting the rep will target the moderation team as opposed to administrators? It is a wasted effort when people who do have issues can just simply report it, saving admins time and relaxing work load and issues when targets are not met.

Surely the FM should be announcing such changes? It is afterall his department and what are these things that take up alot of time and effort on a daily basis? Because that's what administrators and forum technicians are effectly meant for. To help an owner (or in this case, the Forum Manager) accomplish goals and tasks. That's what happened in the past on Habbox, at least.

[Black_Apalachi]

I don't understand why the rules are so heavy around rep. I understand the rule of not being able to rep the same person twice within a certain amount of time/amount of other rep given (I assume this is to avoid clones repping themselves over and over).

However, the only thing I can see that allowing only 5 reps a day avoids, is mass -rep. In that case, can't you restrict -rep more than +rep? I mean, I know that the rep I do give out consists a lot more of positive rather than negative.

Other than that, at the end of the day, who cares if positive rep is over used? It's not going to do anyone any harm, I mean, it's not like eBay where someone's reputation is extremely important is it?

[-:Undertaker:-]

I don't understand why the rules are so heavy around rep. I understand the rule of not being able to rep the same person twice within a certain amount of time/amount of other rep given (I assume this is to avoid clones repping themselves over and over).

However, the only thing I can see that allowing only 5 reps a day avoids, is mass -rep. In that case, can't you restrict -rep more than +rep? I mean, I know that the rep I do give out consists a lot more of positive rather than negative.

Other than that, at the end of the day, who cares if positive rep is over used? It's not going to do anyone any harm, I mean, it's not like eBay where someone's reputation is extremely important is it?

Agreed, at times it seems the reputation rules are above all other rules. People would rather a system which is not heavily guarded.


+rep even if it's useless.

[Hitman]

why doesn't the amount you can rep tie in with user ranks?

like rank1 can rep 5 people
rank 2 can rep 6..

etc

That's a good idea! I like it.

[jrh2002]

I don't understand why the rules are so heavy around rep. I understand the rule of not being able to rep the same person twice within a certain amount of time/amount of other rep given (I assume this is to avoid clones repping themselves over and over).

However, the only thing I can see that allowing only 5 reps a day avoids, is mass -rep. In that case, can't you restrict -rep more than +rep? I mean, I know that the rep I do give out consists a lot more of positive rather than negative.

Other than that, at the end of the day, who cares if positive rep is over used? It's not going to do anyone any harm, I mean, it's not like eBay where someone's reputation is extremely important is it?

I think the rep system does get more attention than it should and also agree that if a rep is positive and not hurting the member you give it to its no big deal

Agreed, at times it seems the reputation rules are above all other rules. People would rather a system which is not heavily guarded.


+rep even if it's useless.

Getting a nice comment over your post is enough and the points with it should not really bother people. I have had a few reps off people with no rep power and they are just as good as a rep off somebody with 30 rep power.

[---MAD---]

I don't understand why the rules are so heavy around rep. I understand the rule of not being able to rep the same person twice within a certain amount of time/amount of other rep given (I assume this is to avoid clones repping themselves over and over).

However, the only thing I can see that allowing only 5 reps a day avoids, is mass -rep. In that case, can't you restrict -rep more than +rep? I mean, I know that the rep I do give out consists a lot more of positive rather than negative.

Other than that, at the end of the day, who cares if positive rep is over used? It's not going to do anyone any harm, I mean, it's not like eBay where someone's reputation is extremely important is it?

That's true. The only problem is that it caused bullying. People started to use their massive rep power on new members or members they don't like. Thats why we had to monitor pointless +rep so much so it was harder for people to gain a lot of rep power. Now we don't have to worry about +rep monitoring as much but it is still against the rules to pointless rep .

[nvrspk4]

That's true. The only problem is that it caused bullying. People started to use their massive rep power on new members or members they don't like. Thats why we had to monitor pointless +rep so much so it was harder for people to gain a lot of rep power. Now we don't have to worry about +rep monitoring as much but it is still against the rules to pointless rep .

Also it was creating a social order. Rep power = your status in the community. We felt that people should be judged by character and not looked down upon because the number next to their name was bigger. Or at least, if they were, this was a direct reflection of you, as opposed to a reflection of how many friends you have with high rep powers / how many people you can suck up to with a high rep power.

[Black_Apalachi]

I think the rep system does get more attention than it should and also agree that if a rep is positive and not hurting the member you give it to its no big deal



Getting a nice comment over your post is enough and the points with it should not really bother people. I have had a few reps off people with no rep power and they are just as good as a rep off somebody with 30 rep power.

Certainly. I am very greatful for both Undertaker and Mad's rep .

That's true. The only problem is that it caused bullying. People started to use their massive rep power on new members or members they don't like. Thats why we had to monitor pointless +rep so much so it was harder for people to gain a lot of rep power. Now we don't have to worry about +rep monitoring as much but it is still against the rules to pointless rep .

Hmm... so you were avoiding people collecting the power in the first place and thus avoid masses of pointless rep? I agree with the rule of no pointless rep, but surely restricting all rep is causing inconvenience to more innocent users than those who break the rule?

Also it was creating a social order. Rep power = your status in the community. We felt that people should be judged by character and not looked down upon because the number next to their name was bigger. Or at least, if they were, this was a direct reflection of you, as opposed to a reflection of how many friends you have with high rep powers / how many people you can suck up to with a high rep power.

Ahhh... I see your point about friends with high rep power. I assume someone who regularly hands out pointless rep receives an infraction adventually? Well, perhaps those with very high rep power who give pointless, should have harsher punishment?

For example, someone with 1-5 rep power may get an infraction after 10 pointless reps but someone with 6-10 rep power may get an infraction after just 5 pointless reps (or something like that)?

[GommeInc]

One problem Habbox has with rules, is if one person manages to cause a problem, everyone must suffer as if they helped cause the problem. The foreign language rule is pointless for this very reason. Someone swore in French or something, and for some strange reason, the swearing rule has no effect. 'You are not allowed to swear' pretty much covers any form of swearing, so why make a new rule on it? Let people post in French in any forum, granted it would be pointless but I don't see why you need to make a new rule which existed in different rules...

EDIT: What the snot is a server technician?