Reputation Levels Now Activated

[anthony]

I have activated the community reputation system to see how people interact with it, and whether or not I guess it will stay around.

What is it? The user reputations system allows you to give formal credit to people's posts if it has helped you, inspired you, deserves some sort of credit, etc etc. Saying that, the system also comes with negative reputation, in that if people are just being disruptive or annoying to the community, then you can formally show them through negative reputation, or if you believe what they have said is not very appropriate, biased or offencesive, then this is the way you can also show them.

The system cannot really be tainted much, regardless what some may already be thinking, as the scoring system is based around many features, not just one or two, and the system only allows you to pass so much credit each time, and within periods of time.

When you, or someone makes a post, in the top right corner of that post, you will see the reputation icon, on which if you click it (run your mouse over to see reputation display in text if unsure), you will be taken to the reputation panel in which you can pass or negate credit to a person for their posts.

The system is not there to hurt people, it is not there try and rig any sort of system, it is there to allow everyone to vote as they desire, or not, towards others posts, which lets people know over time, who is providing some good knowledge to others, and not merely who has just been around for a long time, etc etc. It is purely a reward based system to reflect those within the community whom are doing a good job at what they say, letting their own issues out, basically helping themselves and others to get better.

As you see posts that reflect this towards yourself, or others, then it is up to you whether you give them your vote for support or not.

Stats
All members when registered get 10 points of reputation.
New members cannot pass reputation until they have posted 10 posts.
Every member gains one point for every 180 days they are registered.
Every member gains one point for every 100 posts they contribute.
Every member gains one point for every 100 points they have been passed/earnt by other members.
Users are limited to passing 10 clicks of reputation within a given 24hr period.
Users are forced to distribute reputation equally before being allowed to give to the same user twice.
The system will not allow you to give yourself reputation.
etc etc... you get the idea.The system has holes, no doubt, but it is pretty bulletproof overall, and regardless, I can adjust any individuals reputation and power if they are found attempting to deceive the system, and I will zero anyone who is unethical enough to join forces, partnerships or groups for reputation.

[wildfirewildone]

I am AGAINST putting negative feedback points on posts..messages..etc. !!!!!!
I believe that you are aware of the fact that when a person's PTSD symptoms are in a more active stage....there is confusion..various stages of dissasociation..moodiness..irritability..and just plain grumpiness.........That opens the field for someone to inadvertantly place negative points!! Which could cause triggers to "set" symptoms running amok!!??? IMO

[anthony]

This is a good point WF, however; it is not about degrading any person, or inflating any person. It is about allowing community members to give praise where praise is due, and show those who are outright disrespectful off others, that they are doing so.

PTSD is not an excuse for being nasty on this board. I have it, and most others here have it, yet nobody has yet been disrespectful to another upon this board, because it is not what this board is about. This community is not about taking out issues upon another. It allows you to vent, it allows you to get feedback, it allows you to get support, it is not a mechanism for someone to use PTSD as an excuse to come here and believe they are rightfully allowed to abuse another or be disrespectful of others opinions.

If people used negative reputation in that light, then if someone PM'd me about it, I would investigate it on its own merits.

If a sufferer thinks they have the right to come here and abuse another, regardless what stage their PTSD is, they are seriously wrong, and will find out the consequences of such actions upon this community. The community must cater to all, thus everyone here must respect everyone elses opinions.

As the administrator, I am responsible for certain aspects of this community, though definately not responsible for anothers actions. Again, nobody here yet has abused or been disrespectful to another, hence the use of negative reputation should not be used unless someone attempts to give it a spin for the first time, in which they may find themselves banned for a cool off period, depending on the situation.

It is one thing to vent your frustrations upon here, it is another to vent them at other members of the community. I think the reputation should work well, if used correctly. It will allow new members to identify with those who are very active within the community, and who make valuable contributions, insightful posts and arguments, yet not derogatory to another person. This should help all sufferers within themselves, if used correctly, to help them express their true issues, provide true emotions, and move past the worst of what PTSD has to throw at us. It is a small incentive I guess, which has no real materialistic benefit, just personal gain for one self to get better and move past denial, and hopefully remain clear of denial.

If you don't like a post, you don't have to do anything. Because one does not click with, or like what is contained within a post, does not mean that user has to go and give negative reputation, because that is personal opinion then, and not based on the topic and relevancy of comments to the topic.

Good point though WF, and I think we will see how it goes. If it falls down, then I will just turn it back off again.

[wildfirewildone]

I still am OPPOSED to it!!!! In my compassion I feel that the risk of triggering someone with an accidental negative point of [1] is too chancy!! Even a few moments that anyone would suffer is just too much!!! We have all suffered enough!!!!......We do not need to risk any additional suffering and ill will to be created in our forum community....let alone in our human community!!!! I do not like your attitude on this! Please walk gently on this planet! PEACE

WHAT I WAS REFERING TO IN MY REPLY WAS THE NEGATIVE POINTS....I can see that if an accidental posting of a negative point appears on someone's post or reply....it could rapidly trigger PTSD symptoms...to me ANY chance of tripping anyone into more suffering is just too RISKY!!! As I said above WE HAVE ALL SUFFERED ENOUGH!!!

[piglet]

I think it is a good idea, especially to help out new people to the forum. If you are desperate for help, the last thing you need is unhelpful info. Everyone here is pretty damn good anyway. The forum is growing very fast, so it's also important that unhelpful people get the message that they are not wanted. This also adds a democratic aspect, in that Anthony doesn't have to worry about whether his own feelings about a member affects a decision to block them.

I get the drift of the negative effects you are commenting on WFWO. Maybe a compromise could be discussed? How about only giving positive comments. Therefore, helpful posts get positive responses, unhelpful posts get no responses. The trouble with that, is that if the forum is really busy, people might not be bothered to make a comment, and then you get some good posts scoring lower than they should and being valued the same as bad posts.

It a tough one. I think maybe the original version should stand. Maybe it will make people think a little more about what they are saying. That's a good skill to learn when coping with ptsd, whether you live with someone who has it, or if you have it yourself. There are always going to be triggers on this forum, purely because of the topics discussed. If things didn't get triggered off, then maybe a person is not in the right place?

[Nam]

Remember this is a trial. I'm willing to try a trial. And we can make changes if the trial warrants it.

[YoungAndAngry]

I was sooooo curious what that "rep power" catagory was...
thanks for telling us right away (yeah, I don't deal with suspense well)

As long as no one abuses it,
I think it could be helpful in directing people to useful posts and advice.

Besides... if it's not working out,
I'm sure it's not to hard to turn that option off.
Lets give it a shot

[Roerich]

I support allowing all feedback on posts. After all, it is the content of the post that is most important. It's all about the message we send to others, not about the messenger. It is whether we relate to others in a positive way . . . are part of the solution or part of the problem? There is too much lip service being given, and political spin generated by those who would have us believe what they want us to believe. In a black and white emotional world, we are on one side or the other. We choose what to embrace, the negative or the positive in ourselves or others.

We shall know them by their actions. It is how we test reality.

Roerich

[anthony]

Thanks all, and Nam really hit it home to me, in that it is a trial. It takes me one click of the mouse to turn the entire system off, if abused. It takes me only a couple of clicks of the mouse to undo what one member has abused, and one click to ban a member for any duration if abusing a system that is in trial to help identify those who are actively seeking help, support and providing useful content to the community, opposed to those who do little much else than complain about every aspect of the community since arriving, hey wildfire?

Wildfire, I understand your comments, and I take them onboard, however; since arriving here, you have done little else than complain, compared to every other member who comes here for support, without all the attitude and anger to do little else than disrupt the community. It is a community, and the community decided overall factors, not one person. Each person has their opinion, and the majority rules. Each person is entitled to their opinion, however; when only one person is continuously complaining about every little nit picky facet they can find for some purpose to appease themselves, those persons maybe need to have a look at themselves a bit better, and whether they really want help and support, or want nothing more than to cause trouble and disrupt the overall community who just want to use the forum for what it is, a community to discuss PTSD.

If you are offended about aspects that could trigger you, then you may need to take a good long look at whether you even want to be reading here, because lots of things trigger me when I read them, but I read them anyway, and don't complain about it, because it has certainly helped me to now read most things with no side effects what so ever. Instead of complaining, maybe you should do some more self help, and possibly you will no longer be so aggressive towards the very people, especially myself, who are just trying to accept you and help you.

[wildfirewildone]

PEACE ANTHONY.....I do not wish for you to take my replies and posts personally...I will ponder what you have said...I have also learned about myself that I don't deal with "shoulds"....from several related PHP's that I have participated in..."should" is a word that I have used to beat myself down with and it can be used on others for the same reason...I have fairly well banished that word from my vocabulary...I live much more peacefully because of it....again....PEACE ANTHONY wildfirewildone

[anthony]

Thank you wildfire, accepted. As you can see, I can become quite aggressive when rubbed the wrong way, and not something I like to be, but I am a very strong willed person. I know what I want, and how I want it; I call a spade a spade, and accept very little BS in regard to things upon this forum. I really don't like bringing out even the slightest of aggressive nature I have, because its not pretty for myself, my family, and generally the person on the other end. I make no secret I can be the biggest prick on the face of the earth when persisently rubbed the wrong way.

I like your post wildfire, and just want to support you, learn from you, learn from others, and we all just help each other and have a good calm chat. Venting is obviously allowed, and encouraged, just not at others is the only thing I ever make note off. Thank you wildfire....

[carpediem2006]

Hi Anthony, the idea is sound but I might think about amending the category to be less 'offensive' "This was helpful to me/This was not helpful to me"...to appease our sensitive souls :smile: . At the moment we have black or white.

If you really want to you could add a couple that give more than one 'brownie point'.



0 Alert moderator
0 This was not helpful to me
1 This was helpful for me
2 This was very helpful for me
3 This was mindblowing for me
4 Light bulb moment. Carramba!

An idea only, and in case anyone else thinks it is good, then bear in mind the work it probably cause the person organising this and expect it to stay as it is for a while first :smile: . Otherwise feel free to think I am full of stuff and nonsense (aren't we all?) :crazy-eye. There are times when posts are useful and there are some I have read that opened my mind and understanding completely.

My other rambles:

If you average out the score to a monthly one, then the new people will feel more included, approval rating will go down gradually if we disappear off somewhere else, or stop posting anything. Nothing more demotivating than seeing someone on 1500 points and remaining at 20.

You could then also search (most) 5 rated posts, (most) 4 rated posts etc which would make it much easier for new people to find the most relevant info when they come on first. The code for that would be a bit of a pain, though.

Both of the last bits would be a bit of a headache but over time you might find them useful. (I was the annoying voice at the back suggesting to IT what was wanted, while looking for the 'on' button once it was done).

Out of everything I have said I would change the 'nul points' option to something more 'cuddly'. Time to go and hug a tree for me now.

[anthony]

They are some well thought out, and presented ideas carp. I don't have any issues with them, but I will outline what the board is capable of doing as software....

The board has three main types of "systems" that function users, being:

Thread rating,
User ranks, and
Reputation.The first two are both turned off. The reason they are turned off, is because the overall capacity to abuse them, or use them for purposes to outline something as more important, or prominent, opposed to other information, are the two that are most often abuse within forums. I say this, because I have been dealing in forums for nearly 7 years now, out of about 10 years within the online marketing world.

User ranks works off post counts, so one can just make lots of useless posts to gain higher worth to the users eye, though not in actual fact contributed anything worthwhile, or relevant, to the community overall. Thread reputation is to open to interpretation, as within a thread, you can have 10 posts, where one person will give the entire thread a rating of 5, another a rating of 1, etc etc etc. This labels threads incorrectly, as a thread is more or less important to each person individually, and not something that should be judged collectively. So this leaves user reputation levels...

Reputation is given or taken from a user, and not a threads worth individually. A post whether good or bad, jumps out at a person individually, thus can never be examined or rated collectively this way.

If someone grudged another, then I could see it when I look within the reputation statistics, and I see everything in regard to reputation giving and taking, so I can judge whether someone is abusing the system or not. If a person PM'd me that someone was constantly giving them negative reputation, even for posts that are earning lots of positive reputation, then chances are the person is using grudging to influence their reputation passing, thus I can change it, edit, delete, and punish a user if they have outright abused the system. I like honesty, and if users aren't prepared to be honest on this board with themselves and all other users, then I would not really want them here, as this board and the relationship of the community is very trust and honesty orientated for the well being of us all.

Let me just say, that a user cannot influence the software to get higher reputation points for themselves, without being quite proficient within posting, as the software whilst adding at certain points, will also deduct in other aspects if a user goes wrong. I do not mention all these aspects intentionally or all settings I have enabled intentionally, to help reduce any thought of abuse.

If nobody abuses the system, then it should work very well to show who is providing quality of information, or simply honesty within themselves, which ever people want to reward, the system remains constantly changing and unique, never relying upon a set of statisical aspects to further oneself.

As administrator and moderators, those positions automatically obtain one extra point for the role they perform, though everything else is inline with any other user, ie. post counts, reputation factors, length of membership, and many other factors. You can go away and not post, and you can still earn reputation on users reading your previous posts, and if they are useful to them, so nobody will ever miss out.

Obviously the system has common flaws, such as an older user will generally have more reputation, though not necessarily, as it depends on so many factors whether you move up or down. It will be nothing at all, an and no surprise to me, seeing other members have a higher reputation than myself, as being administrator certainly doesn't allow me any favours to receiving positive and negative reputation.

What people must remember, is that when users cast reputation on a post, it is their opinion of how they perceive that post, and not a reflection on you as a person. A person may give you negative rep on one post, a few days later give you positive on another for a well written or topical thought, or just being honest about things.

Like everything, it is not perfect, though with a little intervention and monitoring, we'll see how it goes, and if it works it works, if not then so be it. If users don't approve of it, then they can turn their own reputation system off within their user CP, so their reputation is just not shown, whether positive or negative. So each user still has a choice on whether they want their reputation to be seen or not, though reputation may still be given and taken whether a user turns it on or off uniquely, it is just not shown to the public.

The system itself though does not have the capability to assign points to certain factors, ie. allow a user to assign points to how they perceive a post, it is merely their reputation power that is assigned. What you give, also affects your own reputation through the system, that much I will say. So a user has to think about the post, and if they think it deserves opinion, then give it, otherwise, leave it alone until a post warrants the occassion.

[secretstars]

uhh sorta old thread but it's been bothering me,

how can you check what the comment someone made was when they gave you the reputation point?! i can't figure it out and i wanna know!!! lol

[anthony]

When you click on the "user cp" link at the top of the forum, in the black navigation bar, the window that opens displays your latest reputation given or taken. IF the person giving or taking the reputation has left a comment, you will see it, if not, then all you will see is the post that it was left upon.

Again, if any person believes they have been given negative reputation unjustifiably, then please private message me as I can look at it in further detail than what users can, and change the reputation if I believe positive or negative reputation is abused.

[batgirl]

I know this thread is super old but, there is no such thing is negative reputation anymore is there? It's been changed? Because when I give reputation to someone I can only choose positive, not negative. Actually I'm happy about that, I think the ability to give negative rep could definitely be abused. I know at times when I am upset with someone I would be sorely tempted to give them negative rep unfairly and then regret it later.

[anthony]

Negative reputation has been turned off for all members. Moderators and above do have the ability to give negative reputation though, being trusted into their positions.

[Lisa]

Big up Anthony.

Negative reps are kinda awkward... sometimes its hard posting on this site and I know I regularly feel that I'm getting it all completely wrong, and that people must get the wrong impression of me. I would hate to get a negative rep in the form of the rep system - because it's not a "i dont like that post" it's "You now have a negative reputation"... I would rather someone PMed me specifically if they had a problem with a post I might have put up.

However, do agree with Anthony in that the possibility of triggering someone is so high in PTSD, in the end its about each individual person taking responsibility for what they can or can't cope with and if they can't cope then don't look and protect yourself. If I worried about triggering someone, I wouldn't write anything ever about PTSD just in case.

I have had one positive rep comment, and I tell you what - it made my day. I don't know who gave it to me (is it meant to be anonymous?), but thanks to that person cos for once I actually felt good about myself to get some good feedback. So for that reason I'm all for the system. It's quite a thoughtful and supportive system in that respect.

[anthony]

I have turned off a lot of parts within the software that could trigger people, though at the end of the day, having the toilet roll around the wrong way can trigger a person, so its useless trying to continuously shape the forum. If I tried, I would be constantly changing it, removing information that offended another, adding what some would see as positive steps, to then remove them for another who believes it was a negative step, etc etc etc.... we all get the idea I'm sure.

The forum is a broad software program written to cater as a wide variety of owners and users as possible, each simply having to modify to suit. Initially I never used the system for these reasons, being it can and does cause conflict, but that is not something that can always be avoided, and it has more positive self esteem issues than negative for sufferers overall IMHO. That is the idea of it.

I encourage more users to use it, because the more it is used, the more you find those who are being outlined for their quality posts and those who can be looked towards for guidance. Not to say a person with low reputation is any lesser, again, not the aim. The problem as it stands though is members must use it, and that is where the system falls down.

Its pointless only editors using it, because its a member system, not just for editors to use. I rarely give reputation because mine is so high due to the way the system is built. No, as the admin I do not have special priveleges in regards to the reputation system. I can, but I turned it all off so "every" member has the same building power. The problem is with me giving reputation, is that because I have so many posts, and the system is based on posts, time registered, reputation earned, etc etc... a combination of factors that if balanced would see a member with enough reputation to give once and increase a persons reputation immediately, as mine does, ie. gives more than 100 points at once. Veiled and bec would have high passing points also looking at their posts vs. time vs. rep given towards them.

I think most get the idea though... More can be read from vbulletin themselves at: http://www.vbulletin.com/docs/html/main/reputation

[Jim]

Is there such thing as giving out too much of this reputation? Evie gives out quite a lot, not recklessly I believe, but often says thank you to people using that method. Wife and I included.

Jim.

[anthony]

No, as the system limits the amount that can be given to any one person by any given person within specified periods. For example, whilst Evie can give you reputation every day, she would not actually pass any points to you because she must actually give reputation to "x" amount of people first before any points will pass back to yourself. The best explanation I could give, it to read the actual ACP settings I adjust behind the scenes, which will give you an idea how the system is based and the options presented to me in order to manage the system. Basically, I am not going to reveal exactly how I have set it because then people could manipulate it, though I can set any combination of factors for the system based upon: http://www.vbulletin.com/docs/html/main/vboptions_reputation

[Kathy]

Well if Evie is being "accused" of giving out too much reputation, then I suppose I should admit in all fairness that I do the same thing! :tongue: More than once I have received a message saying I have given out too much reputation in the last 24 hours. I suppose that is part of the built in system to prevent abuse that you are speaking of Anthony. In no way am I trying to inflate anyone's scores, and I don't believe Evie is either. When I see a post that moves me, I make a comment. I have commented in this fashion to at least 20 different individuals. Thank you for the link Anthony, it was an interesting read.

[Lisa]

I am guilty of rarely using the system... tend to forget it exists. Going to make conscious effort now!

[Kathy]

I have had one positive rep comment, and I tell you what - it made my day. I don't know who gave it to me (is it meant to be anonymous?), but thanks to that person cos for once I actually felt good about myself to get some good feedback.

A tip Lisa, if you click on the link to the thread next to the positive comment, it takes you directly to the post for which you have received reputation. From there you may be able to guess who has given you the comment, if you are curious. :wink:

[Jim]

Reckon should say thank you to the little birdie who gave the wife and myself reputation recently. ;-)

Jim.

[batgirl]

Is there such thing as giving out too much of this reputation? Evie gives out quite a lot, not recklessly I believe, but often says thank you to people using that method. Wife and I included.


Sorry, I initially was annoyed by this and posted too soon. Then I felt what I said wasn't quite respectful or nice to you Uncle and I didn't have enough time to edit properly. Anyways, it's true, I do give out a lot of reputation, but I'm definitely not doing it to increase anyone's levels, even if I could do that, it's kind of dumb... I mean who cares how many green squares a person has? I do really like using the system though, sometimes I don't feel like posting but I've really appreciated something a person has said, so I tell them through the rep system. I know what you mean Lisa, it makes my day when I get a comment too. It's a like a compliment really. That's one of the reasons I started giving it out so often, because it makes me feel good and I would like others to feel good too.

[anthony]

There is no such thing as abusing the system, because I have set it so that nobody can do that. What your doing Evie and Kathy, is correctly using the system, being if you read something and it means something to you, then you don't have to reply, you can simply give that person reputation and/or both. If you try and give one person reputation too many times, the system will give you are message as Kathy described, and others, depending on what it picks up, though its all automatic, simply set on principles I have adjusted the system to calculate in order to keep the system fair and unbiased at all times.

Your welcome Jim...

[Lisa]

Yep... thanks Kathy - I am figuring out who is giving me nice reps :) ;-) Thank you, you know who you are!

[anthony]

Something that has been a topic of concern with some members is viewing neutral reputation within their profile. What I discovered is this; when a new member especially comes into the forum, they have no reputation giving power until such time as they actively participate, are given reputation, etc etc... which means they have a zero figure to pass. This zero figure comes up in the members profile as neutral. The only reputation that can be given, is positive or negative. Only moderators and above have the ability to give negative reputation, however; if a member has no positive points, then neutral is passed instead.

[Portabella]

I know I am quite stingy when it comes to givng reputation. But....I must be totally moved before I will even think of it. I think I should lighten up a bit, I just forget to use it most times. I think most on this forum family know how I feel about you all. (time to hold hands and sing KUMBIYah).....

[batgirl]

Thanks Anthony, I'm glad you and my aunt cleared that up for me. Sorry for jumping to conclusions and overreacting like I did, as you've often said to me, I really have to stop thinking for other people.

[batgirl]

I have a question... now that I have 4 green squares, when I give someone reputation, I am giving them more points than I would if I had fewer squares, right? So does that mean I should be more selective in giving out rep? I've been pretty free with it up until now, but I don't want it to appear like I'm trying to inflate anyone's rep. I actually give out to lots of different people, but the last couple of times I did so, I noticed the 2 people I gave rep to got an extra square after I gave them rep! Anyways just wondering, thanks.

[anthony]

Evie, yes you do have more to give out, but its not maybe as much as you think. An extra square only gives you one (1) more point, because it means you got another 100 points, ie. everybody gets one square initially, and when you have 100 points, the second would appear.

[batgirl]

Okay well thanks I will just continue to give out as much as I feel like for now then.

[anthony]

Your welcome. Points accumulate over many factors, and likely if you give out and peoples blocks change, chances are they are just nearing the fallover amount, and you have enough to push them over for their next block. Trust me Evie, you can't do anything wrong with the system... give as much as you want. Even as your reputation continues to grow, the system reflects this in those who reside with a lot of points, where hundred affect a user up to say, 500 points (6 blocks), then the system begins jumping in several hundred amounts to get 1 block, then thousand amounts, etc. It is a linear system if you like.