Rep displays on posts

[lawrawrrr]

If a post hasn't been removed that's because the moderator a) hasn't seen it or b) has deemed it not rude. But that's not the point here.


The point is that many posts that get rep don't get just one, but it's a snowball effect. I've done it before, not wanting to be the first one to rep, and also been waiting for rep on a good post, once one comes in a bunch do.

Having known what some people on this forum have acted like, being able to watch the number go down will be a power trip, and yes, I do believe some people will be watching a post to see how the number changes up and down. Just psychology.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lawrawrrr]

When it comes to targeting posts, I agreeeeeeee with you and they should be removed (including the ones tom just linked to) and all the +reps too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MKR&*42]

I agree with having it decrease the number if someone -reps, but not displaying a '-1' '-2' etc counter. I know people wlil jump on the bandwagon and -rep a post that already has displayed a few -reps.... just as many people have already stated the EXACT same thing happens for +reps lol

yes to reducing number, no to negative values.

[Kardan]

If we're going to pretend that the forum doesn't show anything 'negative' then why do we have:

-repping at all, 'X is no longer Habbox Staff' posts and the Feedback forum?

[dbgtz]

I don't get why people are against showing a negative number. If all you're given is praise then you never learn.

[FlyingJesus]

If a post hasn't been removed that's because the moderator a) hasn't seen it or b) has deemed it not rude. But that's not the point here.

It is the point when that was part of your reasoning for the change not being necessary

The point is that many posts that get rep don't get just one, but it's a snowball effect. I've done it before, not wanting to be the first one to rep, and also been waiting for rep on a good post, once one comes in a bunch do.

Yes but you won't be able to see the negatives... unlike how despite there definitely being people who do not agree with Chris' attack on Scott it can currently be seen that such behaviour is respected. The whole point is what's visible, and with the system as limited as it currently is what's visible is often very negative mob mentality

I don't get why people are against showing a negative number. If all you're given is praise then you never learn.

Yeah I'd have both if it was down to my decision since rep is a form of user moderation, but I do think that the compromise is fair

[Kyle]

Are we honestly suggesting that people are going to monitor the decrease of rep on certain posts? Don't be ridiculous please. lol. It is already apparent that aggregated opinions that are highly repped are taken as gospel from some of the more easily influenced individuals here so why is there no mechanism in place to combat that effect? There is research (most notably by Lev Muchnik if you want something to read) to suggest that social influence in voting systems is rife when it comes to "positive effect" but when there is a cap on reducing weight of argument (see sites like hackernews who cap at -4) there is nothing of the sort.

I'm sure lots of us are guilty of either manipulating the rep system at the expense of other members or falling prey to said manipulation. Some ways to get rep are as follows:

- Make a helpful or well-structured opinion post (1/2/3/4)
- Make a funny post
- Make a tongue in cheek but ultimately rude post aimed at somebody else (1/2/3)

The list is obviously no exhaustive and would also include things like posting widely shared opinions and posting art or room design that is deemed good. All of the above though are at risk of manipulation but the latter in the list provided has the largest negative impact and seems to be the form most frequently adopted for quick and cheap rep gathering. If a rude post gets one rep it is immediately highlighted as a 'good' post and whether you like it or not, your opinion on it is altered without even reading it. If somebody (usually those targeted within the post but often those that objectively feel that it's rude) -reps that post after it received the +rep then the new system would allow them to remove that highlight and reduce influence. Cronyism is a huge factor in these types of posts, where friends will rep friends for sharing a joke at another's expense and, in turn, others will blindly bandwagon onto the rep train and inflate the opinion far beyond its intended purpose and effectively make whoever is the butt of the joke a laughing stock among the group.

Nothing promotes negativity in this way more than the current system, least of all something that offers a counterbalance without any visible influence towards the more negative end of the spectrum. I suggest at least trialing the system first before any speculation about how watching rep drop from 5 to 3 on certain posts is going to promote negativity in any way.

[-:Undertaker:-]

One thing I always have noticed with reputation, and I suspect showing it may spread/make it worse, is that whenever somebody is new/has low rep count or isn't VIP/Staff (so they can't see who has -repped them) in my experience all the forum loudmouths and the ones who act all cocky will -rep, but strangely won't -rep whenever that person can see who has or who hasn't -repped them. Now isn't that strange, especially for people who pretend not to be bothered in the slightest about reputation.

So i'd be open to showing -reps as long as seeing who has -repped you can be seen by non-staff/non-VIP users.

[e5]

It is the point when that was part of your reasoning for the change not being necessary



Yes but you won't be able to see the negatives... unlike how despite there definitely being people who do not agree with Chris' attack on Scott it can currently be seen that such behaviour is respected. The whole point is what's visible, and with the system as limited as it currently is what's visible is often very negative mob mentality



Yeah I'd have both if it was down to my decision since rep is a form of user moderation, but I do think that the compromise is fair

my point is still valid. I don't think anything to do with -rep should be displayed. This included it minus'ing of any +rep reps you may have received.

[scottish]

One thing I always have noticed with reputation, and I suspect showing it may spread/make it worse, is that whenever somebody is new/has low rep count or isn't VIP/Staff (so they can't see who has -repped them) in my experience all the forum loudmouths and the ones who act all cocky will -rep, but strangely won't -rep whenever that person can see who has or who hasn't -repped them. Now isn't that strange, especially for people who pretend not to be bothered in the slightest about reputation.

So i'd be open to showing -reps as long as seeing who has -repped you can be seen by non-staff/non-VIP users.

that's like 90% of the reason most people have vip lol

i'm sure most people don't care, i'm probably classed as one of your loudmouths and i -rep people without checking if they're VIP etc