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

1. All members when registered get 10 points of reputation.
2. New members cannot pass reputation until they have posted 10 posts.
3. Every member gains one point for every 180 days they are registered.
4. Every member gains one point for every 100 posts they contribute.
5. Every member gains one point for every 100 points they have been passed/earnt by other members.
6. Users are limited to passing 10 clicks of reputation within a given 24hr period.
7. Users are forced to distribute reputation equally before being allowed to give to the same user twice.
8. The system will not allow you to give yourself reputation.
9. 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.

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

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.

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!!!

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?

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

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

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

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.

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