Information on turning off the anonymity of the reputation system

[Red Leader]

To ws1990reds I dinged him for not being on topic, but it was mainly a revenge neg because I thought that he had negged me. After realizing that I didn't know for certain that it was ws1990reds, and that I was just being awfully petty, I wished that I could have taken that one back. Even if I had known that it was ws1990reds who dinged me, it was still a horrible thing for me to do.

You could always give him positive rep to "counter" the neg you feel bad about giving him. Of course, you have to serve your sentence of giving rep to 14 other people to do that. Just an idea.

[GIK]

Flip the switch.

[Jpup]

I think the only people that would compain about it, would be people that have given negs for no reason. I deserved the 1 neg that I got, so it won't make me so upset at the person. It's just an internet forum. Surely, most adults will feel the same way.

[savafan]

You could always give him positive rep to "counter" the neg you feel bad about giving him. Of course, you have to serve your sentence of giving rep to 14 other people to do that. Just an idea.

I plan on doing that.

[IslandRed]

modify the query to only show the username starting today in the vbulletin template.

I don't think you'd even have to do that -- the HTML table showing our reputations received are already displaying the date/time of that record. So it should be as simple as a conditional date test within the code when building the HTML table, and include/exclude the giver's username based on that.

[smith288]

I don't think you'd even have to do that -- the HTML table showing our reputations received are already displaying the date/time of that record. So it should be as simple as a conditional date test within the code when building the HTML table, and include/exclude the giver's username based on that.

Perhaps. Changing the query is always my method because building a page takes longer than the actual query.

[Red Leader]

I don't think you'd even have to do that -- the HTML table showing our reputations received are already displaying the date/time of that record. So it should be as simple as a conditional date test within the code when building the HTML table, and include/exclude the giver's username based on that.

Yea, do that.

[Red Leader]

I'll step out of the conseration now. I have nothing to add. I'm an idiot.

[KronoRed]

I'll step out of the conseration now. I have nothing to add. I'm an idiot.

Never stops me from being in the convo

[IslandRed]

Perhaps. Changing the query is always my method because building a page takes longer than the actual query.

As I understand the issue, they have to change the code anyway to add the "giver" column and this would be easy to slip in as part of that. Much easier to implement for a non-SQL expert than trying to change a query. I agree with your general principle on database server versus PHP script execution efficiency, though.

[Boss-Hog]

The "switch" has been flipped and from this point forward, all reputation comments, positive or negative, will have the commenter's user name attached to it. That means you don't have to sign your name in the comment field, as this information is already included. Please do NOT carry over any disputes about negative reputation into the forums; if you must, handle that privately.

Let the chaos ensue.

Boss

[princeton]

The problem this presents is that even if we wait until July 1st to make feedback viewable, it's undoubtedly going to display your user name for someone's 10 most recent feedback comments, and that's not really fair since these comments were left given the impression they were made anonymously.

The "switch" has been flipped.

[Falls City Beer]

The people have spoken. Unless you have a better idea.

[zombie-a-go-go]

I wonder how many people are viewing User CP right now?

[princeton]

The people have spoken. Unless you have a better idea.

why, the bulldozer already went through. Early.