Hmm, a few thoughts on this one.
Anonymity.
I have been doling out positive reputation to the majority of people with a comment but without signing it until a couple of days ago when I changed my mind and just started putting 'H' on some of them. Reason for not signing it was that I didn't want it to look like I was soliciting reputation in return as that struck me as not entirely in the spirit of things! Reason for changing? because most other people seem to be signing it, and when they didn't I was always dead curious about who it was!!!
Negative rep.
When I have given it out (which TBH hasn't been often) there has always been a reason & I have always put a comment explaining what it is. Generally it has been pretty good humoured and light hearted - or at least intended to be taken as such. I had applied the same rules on anonymity as with positive rep, and I've never written anything that I wouldn't be prepared to say to that individual in person. As an example, I shall come sidling out of the closet here and confess to being the person who gave Mark Davies negative rep for admiring Porg's hideous avatar! My comment was something along the lines of 'don't encourage her!!!'. I think Mark has responded asking Porg to redress the balance which to me (I hope) means that he has taken it in the humourous spirit it was intended. I did threaten someone with negative rep, but found that I couldn't actually be bothered to give him it when I had the opportunity (i.e. when the system wasn't telling me that I had given out too much in that 24hrs). It just struck me as a bit handbag.net-ish
Positive rep.
I always try to give it out when someone has posted something I find interesting, thought provoking, or funny. Quite often I find myself stymied by the 'you need to spread some more rep around before you can give it to X again' rule as it is usually the same people whose posts I find entertaining. I try to remember to go back and reward it afterwards.
My reputation.
To be entirely honest, I actually don't really care much about it, provided I am not being told that I am a dreadful human being who has innumerable character flaws! That's why I've deliberately not posted on the subject before - I just don't hink it's all that important.
I try and post things that I find interesting or amusing in the hope that they will fulfil the same function for other people. I have had quite a few little red boxes for that - none of which have been signed, and some of which have had some rather snide and unpleasant little comments in. Equally, a couple of the negative reps I've had have had hilarious comments on. Yeah, if all I was getting was little red boxes, then I'd probably think twice before posting, but it isn't, so that hasn't been an issue so far. On the flip side, I have also had some really nice little green boxes with comments left (some signed, some not), and it's good to get the feedback that someone has enjoyed your post.
'Spirit of YD'
I'd like to think that people would want to use the reputation function in the traditional 'spirit of YD' - i.e. open, funny, honest and non-handbaggy. I like the idea of rewarding someone when they post something worthwhile, and I don't have a problem with being given negative rep for a reason. I just don't like the idea of people who are abusing the system to post things that they wouldn't have the bottle to put their name to on the forum. That's a bit sly for my liking. In my view, if you wouldn't be prepared to put your name to something, then you really shouldn't be saying it.
Options?
1) Well we could bin reputation altogether - but I think that'd be a shame
2) We could bin the 'negative' element of reputation and just have a general love-in. If there continue to be people upset by those who use the red boxes just to have meaningless pops at people then perhaps only allowing positive feedback is the way to go
3) Carry on as we are and just don't stress about it! In the grand scheme of things, your reputation on YD is really not something to get your harness in a twist over!
4) Admins to put together some kind of 'How we'd like to see reputation applied on YD' thing? Don't know if they can see what people are voting, but perhaps if they can and can see that one person is just giving out negative the whole time they could provide a little gentle 'counselling'.
5) Admins- is it possible to keep the reputation function going, but to show who has given it?
For what it is worth, I'd suggest that we carry on as we are, but if option five is a possibility and people keep using the system to be bitchy, then that'd probably get my vote.
I'd be fascinated to see what Tom thinks of the entire reputation thing from his position as an esteemed psychologist... I suspect that this is something of a fascinating live case study for him! I know I've been intrigued and amused watching how people have applied this new 'power'!
That's just my 2p anyway.
H (Expecting an avalanche of red boxes for this post!)
P.S. Mark - hope you did take my anti-Porg avatar vote as light-heartedly as it was intended!  |