Reputation

[Alex3213]

Newer users may respond, however the older users should have just as big a say, or maybe an even bigger say in this particular feedback thread imo.

Also, the fact hardly any new users HAVE responded to this date suggests it isn't making them too sad!

Yeah I agree with this really- both points. Also I think "new users" is far too vague. Like Josh, I count him as a new user. 8 to 9 months- that's not a long time considering some people have been here for over 6. Personally anyone who has joined less than a year ago is a new user in this scenario. This means new users have posted or at least that's what is being implied and all in all: it's just reputation- it doesn't need changing imho.

[AgnesIO]

Yeah I agree with this really- both points. Also I think "new users" is far too vague. Like Josh, I count him as a new user. 8 to 9 months- that's not a long time considering some people have been here for over 6. Personally anyone who has joined less than a year ago is a new user in this scenario. This means new users have posted or at least that's what is being implied and all in all: it's just reputation- it doesn't need changing imho.

In actual fact, I feel it is appropriate to use Josh as an example here.

He has only been here for 8-9 months - yet if his join date was not here he could have been here for 6 years (and in actual fact, I hadn't noticed his join date before hand). Giving new users more rep etc doesn't mean they will be any different or stay longer.

[GommeInc]

Newer users may respond, however the older users should have just as big a say, or maybe an even bigger say in this particular feedback thread imo.

Also, the fact hardly any new users HAVE responded to this date suggests it isn't making them too sad!

Because they obviously will not care. Users don't join a forum because of bonus features like a rep system - how they would even know there is one is beyond me, especially how it works and the criteria involved to rise through it. If new members leave, it's probably because of the mediocre and trivial points of discussion which apparently affect them, but obviously don't