Yes, I noticed that too, but I quite liked the comments - they were more important than the points, but then I only had nice things, it might be a bit tough getting negative comments.Originally Posted by Dianas
I've found how to find your rep points! It's really easy!!
Select a message that you authored
Click on the "add to your reputation" button
and a pop up will give you your rep points.
I currently have the same number that I had before we crashed so don't know if new points are being added or substracted,
SO give me some rep positive or negative and I'll see if it has an affect
You know it makes sense
Diana
Yes, I noticed that too, but I quite liked the comments - they were more important than the points, but then I only had nice things, it might be a bit tough getting negative comments.Originally Posted by Dianas
It depends what they say. Sometimes neg rep is a way of saying "I really hear you and really disagree with you", or sometimes quite humourous "stop flirting with my best dance!" It's a covert way of saying "right on! GaL" So negative house points rule okay!Originally Posted by Lynn
I've only had one unpleasant neg rep and it was signed by a total no hope-r so who cares? In logical operations a negative plus a negative equals a positive. So whom your rep comes from is as significant as the kind of rep. Does this make sense Dr Smurf?
D
Last edited by DianaS; 16th-August-2004 at 10:16 PM.
We are mystfied and confused. Although the Edinburgh fringe is on do not desert us. We need you and the positive or negative reps in our lives. Remember negative attention is better than no attention at all...
and for many of us we cling onto that olive branch of humanity that is extended to us through this online forum,
We are lost without some sort of indication as whether we are on the path to rightous fame or infamousy.. Do not desert us in our hour of need, tell us what we need to do and we will do it... Because we are that sad...
I would like to think that this is a BB test, and we have all failed, and won't be danced with for at least a month, by any one who know what is what, and who is who...but I fantasize too much ...you have server problems I guess, and have had a **** up and lost all our reps and don't know how to tell us...
But we still love you and we still care
even though your lost in (Edinburgh fringe) happiness, and we are in despair
Love,
Diana
xxxx
PS Talk to me! - we love you
Hi all,
I was hoping that Franck would comment on this topic but people's posts suggest that he is away at the moment. In the meantime I would like to redress the balance of this thread.
I am afraid that there are a number of forumites (especially on this thread) who are in the enviable position of being in blissful ignorance of some of the nastier things that can happen here. This isn't a criticism - I just mean that they haven’t encountered anything of the darker side.
In the past, there have been two very good mechanisms for giving feedback on this forum - either publicly by posting on the thread or privately by PM. Both of these mechanisms allow the sender of the message to be identified. When the software was upgraded a third, anonymous, mechanism became available - giving rep. The majority of forumites have had lots of fun using the rep system - I have too!
Unfortunately the anonymity of the rep system meant that it was open to abuse.
The fact that abuse happened is not just forum legend – I’ve experienced it myself
In response to this post I received the following:
I would be the first to admit that alluding to Amir's comment was childish - hence the devil smiley. However, this forum is hardly a stranger to the occasional childish remark, and I and others felt that the comment was out of all proportion to the post.Originally Posted by anonymous repper
Bearing in mind that the comment was anonymous I had no idea if someone had a real grudge against me or not - or who they were. As a consequence I have deleted as much of the personal information on my profile as possible.
Whilst receiving positive rep and reading the associated comments was lovely, the system as it stood was unfortunately open to abuse, and it seems that anonymity just allows those who care little for the feelings of others to indulge in nastiness.
I hope that knowing the flip side of the coin might change some opinions on the rep system.
J
No, I haven't changed my opinion of the rep system. I think that Jayne received that negative rep because someone really, really didn't like what she posted. And, until now, nobody else knew what had been saidOriginally Posted by Jayne
Being able to anonymously and privately post your disagreement with something that's been posted on the open forum is, IMHO, healthy as it keeps emotional agument off the public thread. Also, it feeds back to the person receiving the negative rep that, at least one person, didn't like what they'd said or the way they'd said it. The person receiving that negative rep can then decide what to do about it; if anything.
I've been on the receiving end of a fair bit of negative rep (luckily a lot more positive rep - thank you everyone ). I have read the negative comments and always found them useful and informative. In some cases I've actually had a re-think and modified my behavior, in others I've just been annoyed at some people's ignorance of the way the forum works. But it's useful to know that some people don't understand what goes on here too
The above quote is the one that, I think, stimulated the negative repper. Speaking personally, on first reading, I found that particular posting mildly upsetting, it was referring to a group of people which included me (those who weren't there) and being derogatory about our dancing. And, to make matters worse, it was saying that Amir, a teacher who I respect enormously, didn't think much of the quality of my dancing - how else was I expected to feel?Originally Posted by Jayne
However, I know Amir and I know he must have been speaking in a toungue in cheek manner (I hope ) and I also know Jayne, who IMHO, wouldn't say anything nasty about anyone. So, in the light of that knowledge I posted a light hearted response. HOWEVER, not everyone on here knows Amir as well as I do: neither have they all met Jayne. Therefore, some people might have misunderstood Jayne's post. The message Jayne should have received from the negative rep, IMHO, is that at least one person didn't get the joke and felt very strongly about it. And maybe others would have misunderstood her too.
Finally, as I said at the start of this post, the rep comments, especially the negative ones, are IMHO, a great addition to the Forum. They act as a pressure valve to keep conflict off the public forum and they do allow us to know when at least one person doesn't like what we've said and give the reasons why they don't like it. I really don't think knowing who gave you that negative rep would add to the benefits gained and might even cause great upset - how would you feel if you knew it was Amir that had told you you couldn't dance?
.. hang on, isn't that what Jayne implied Amir had said about me?
p.s. Please note use of
p.p.s. The p.s. means I was only kidding in the final comment
but surely if its upseting Franck will tell you who it was anyway ? the anonymity is fake the moderators know who you are!
and as has been pointed out with the rep system as it was, you could try different people on ignore until you found out who sent you the rep when it failed to show up. I assume thats why Franck has removed the comments on USERCP ? Dont take it to heart Jayne, "constructive" comments like that should be treated with utmost disdain.
Well, I have no objection to emotional argument on public threads – like my earlier pub analogy, some debates will trigger emotion, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing.Originally Posted by Andy McGregor
But there’s already a perfectly good mechanism for keeping emotional argument off the public thread – private messages – and I see no reason whatsoever for an anonymous version of the private messaging system.
I would like this forum to be a place where decent people can get on. Where they can heatedly if necessary, but still politely, express disagreement without having to resort to anonymous flaming for which IMO there is no excuse. Comments such as the one Jayne quotes are nothing except evidence of an utter disregard for the feelings of others – and not being prepared to communicate in an attributable fashion – either publicly or privately – is evidence of cowardice and is quite shameful in my opinion.
Anonymous flame wars are the refuge of emotionally dysfunctional teenagers who don’t have the social skills to interact competently with real human beings, and anonymous nasty comments using the rep system are the thin end of that wedge.
Personally I think there is no place for such behaviour on a dance forum.
This is true, of course. There are lots of ways of inferring things from the available evidence. And I’m not saying that it isn’t possible to take something constructive out of even the nastiest of things that people say.Also, it feeds back to the person receiving the negative rep that, at least one person, didn't like what they'd said or the way they'd said it. The person receiving that negative rep can then decide what to do about it; if anything.
But that’s not the point I’m making, which is that this should be a civilised place, with civilised people behaving in a manner that demonstrates a certain level of care. None of which precludes the sort of larking about that we get here which can often be great fun, and which, as people know, I can be just as easily sucked into as anyone else.
Well I’ve changed my view on this now.Finally, as I said at the start of this post, the rep comments, especially the negative ones, are IMHO, a great addition to the Forum.
The potential for abuse is too great, and much to my disappointment it seems that there are people only too ready to indulge in such abuse.
So I think the whole rep system should be abolished. And if not, then either the comments facility that goes with it should be removed, or comments should not be anonymous.
Chris
Originally Posted by ChrisA
Personally, I don't understand why people feel the need for anonymous reps (positive or negative). If you feel that strongly about something to make a comment, surely you would want your name associated with the comment ?Originally Posted by ChrisA
I think the Rep system is great fun and it would be a shame to do away with it, but on the other hand, leaving it anonymous is only going to cause problems and if Franck decides that adding names back to the comments is not going to be an option, then maybe it would be best to ditch it.
Here's a thought: How about for non-paid-up users, the comments are brought back, either on the UserCP or a seperate page, without the names, but for paid-up users add a configuration option so that we have the choice of seeing who gave the rep ?
I think that anonymity introduces honesty. It's a bit like voting used to be in unions. When there was a show of hands people would look to see whose hand they disagreed with - those people bacame your enemyOriginally Posted by ChrisA
In the current rep system you can express your true opinion about a post without worrying about making enemies.
However, there could be abuse of the rep system, just like there could be abuse of anything else on a public forum. And that is what the moderators are there for: to police and remove abuse. So, just like on the public threads, there is nothing to stop someone receiving anonymous negative rep from reporting it to the moderators and asking for it to be removed.
There will always be people who abuse a system. And, where there is potential for abuse, there need to be systems and controls in place to detect and manage that abuse. These systems are in place on this forum and they are very effective and fair.Originally Posted by ChrisA
Therefore, I see no reason to abolish the rep system or remove the anonymity from it. You might just as well recommend that we abolish the forum because people have abused it in the past.
Originally Posted by DianasI've just tried this, and discovered that if you do it on a post where someone has given you some rep, then you do get the comment in the pop up (thanks "S" ). If you get multiple reps for a post, I don't know if all the comments will appear, but presumably they will.Originally Posted by Lynn
Greg
I've tried this and it works. The problem is that you will not know automatically which post received positive or negative rep. You will have to trawl through your posts until you find the appropriate one. It was so much easier when you could look them up by clicking on User CP.Originally Posted by Sheepman
So, to sum up, nothing has disappeared since we couldn't see our list of rep comments in User CP - but we do need to work much harder to find them. Maybe one of the benefits of being a GoldMember could be that we have this list in User CP :hint:
The difference being that in a secret ballot you're voting for or against - and not adding "and by the way I think candidate X is a **** for holding his view - maybe I'll just burn down his house if the election goes the wrong way".Originally Posted by Andy McGregor
As I say, I could live with an anonymous rep system that allowed no comments.
But removing it does not remove the hurt that may have been caused.So, just like on the public threads, there is nothing to stop someone receiving anonymous negative rep from reporting it to the moderators and asking for it to be removed.
And in any case, the purpose of removing abuse from the public threads is to take account of the fact that it's public - anyone can come along after the fact and read the archive, maybe forming a view on the basis of something potentially libellous.
This is IMO a facile comparison.Therefore, I see no reason to abolish the rep system or remove the anonymity from it. You might just as well recommend that we abolish the forum because people have abused it in the past.
This debate is about the merits or otherwise of allowing anonymous abuse. Nothing to do with whether it's Ok to have heated public disagreement that's attributable, with which I have no quarrel.
Anyway, we disagree. But at least I'm not in fear as a result... and everyone can see the views we express and form their view based on what they know about us.
Much healthier than the alternative.
er, IMHO
Chris
This can be said equally about any posting that is removed from the public part of the Forum.Originally Posted by ChrisA
This comparison would be facile (although not a word I use, ever) if rep were truly anonymous. It is not anonymous, the identity of the person giving the rep is hidden from the person receiving it. But the identity of the person giving the rep is known to the moderators. The person giving the rep must know this and moderate his/her behavior with that in mind.Originally Posted by ChrisA
I don't have a problem with comments being anonymous, even though apart from early on with this system (or when I have forgotten) I have always added my name. I think the system is fun even if open to abuse. I use it mainly when a post agrees so much with my thoughts/views that I feel there is no point in duplicating what has been said in a new post, or when I've laughed out loud.Originally Posted by RobC
On the negative side, I've adopted the approach that if I don't like what has been said, I'll give it a few hours to see what develops, and reconsider about giving neg rep. Maybe this is just too sycophantic, but I haven't neg repped since adopting this.
The point about Jayne's rep comment is (IMO) that this is abusive. There is an implication that the repper knows her, and I can see why she would be upset by this. Whether or not her original post deserved rep is irrelevant. Maybe it was a comment made with "tongue firmly in cheek" but if so, surely it would be signed? I don't think the rep system should be about being abusive to others, so such comments should be reported to the moderators, and at that point the anonymity ends.
Greg
Yup, they do! (I just checked)Originally Posted by Sheepman
It's a shame Jayne has been upset, but I don't think the whole thing should be scrapped just because someone got a bit of bad rep and got upset about it. This debate isn't about one person's reaction to one piece of rep (or at least it shouldn't be) it should be about how everyone feels about the system as a whole.
IMO reps were a good, fun thing, when we had access to them on the User CP. Any specific problems should be put to the moderators, as I believe this particular query has been from what you've said, Jayne. Otherwise can the rest of us not just go on enjoying things as they were? I'm feeling rather miffed that because someone has had an unfortunate piece of rep everyone is now missing out on a system that was generally good.
Maybe there are more reasons than that, not meaning to blame anyone in particular - but until a moderator explains what's going on I guess we won't know.
Of course it can - which is why I pointed out the actual purpose of removing an abusive post, which is primarily to ensure the abuse doesn't remain present for ever and a day to be seen by people not at all connected with the original dispute. Secondarily, I suppose, it prevents a wound being repeatedly reopened every time the post is seen, which is another benefit.Originally Posted by Andy McGregor
I used the word facile very carefully: my copy of the Concise OED gives "appearing comprehensive only by ignoring the complexities of an issue; superficial."Originally Posted by Andy McGregor
You used the obviously ludicrous idea of abolishing the forum as a reaction to the abuse in its history, in juxtaposition to my suggestion for abolishing the rep system, which is not the same type of thing at all, though I don't suppose I can stop you thinking it is.
Doing this sort of thing in a debate is a crude and superficial attempt at making the proposition you attack look equally ludicrous without needing to actually address the real point; hence my use of the word 'facile'.
Of course it's anonymous - now at any rate - since there is no offer, let alone guarantee, that the moderators will reveal the identity of the perpetrator.Originally Posted by Andy McGregor
The slagging is anonymous to the person being slagged - and that is the important point. Just because someone else might be able to find out who it is seems irrelevant to me, since the abuse potential is not mitigated by that possibility.
Chris
Okay thanks for the test.Originally Posted by Dianas
The rep system is still working so you can check to see whether you are receiving rep by listing your posts and checking each one.
Taking part in this forum is a bit like a contract - you can say what you want, but you agree to sign your name to it. Any responses are similarly signed. But the anonymous reps have changed this 'contract'. Speaking your mind can open you up to abuse, and you have no idea where it came from.
Having said that I like the rep system. I think it provides a quick and simple feedback on what you have posted - whether serious or light-hearted.
For me the best solution would be to have the option on whether you accept anonymous rep comments. You still get signed comments, and you still get rep without comments. But unsigned ones are optional.
However I don't know if the forum software allows this?
I don't either but its a good idea, I sort of think though that signing should be an automatic field which is selected or unselected. People who sign, can at the moment sign any ones name to be naughty!Originally Posted by DavidB
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks