New Policy on Reputation Threads

[Boss-Hog]

All,

Since the reputation system went into place in early May of this year, every so often, a poster starts a thread about it, asking questions such as 'How do I get points?', 'Why was I dinged for doing...?', etc. Lately, we (the administrators and moderators) have noticed that posters are being handed reputation points simply for starting threads like this and that is NOT how the reputation system should be used. I've said it a million times before but I'll say it once again: positive reputation should only be given for a poster making what YOU consider to be a quality post that adds value to the board. Reputation should not be given because a user asks for it, because you know the user personally/like him or her, or because the user has been around for a while, or ANY reasoning along these lines. Conversely, negative reputation should not be given as a way of handling personal disputes - only if the post violates the core values of what this site is all about. The rules, posted at the bottom of every page, are a good guideline as to what is, and isn't, acceptable.

In any event, newly created threads about the reputation system will no longer be tolerated. If the board administrators or moderators see a new thread created about it, the thread will IMMEDIATELY be deleted. The following thread, which is linked within The Old Red Guard description, does a pretty good job explaining the reputation system and why it was necessary. Additionally, there have been no shortage of posts (readily available via a search) about it since its inception. In short, the topic has been beaten to death, and the vast majority of us are tired of hearing about it on a regular basis. Any additional questions a user may have about the reputation system must be directed to an administrator or moderator via private message or email.

Thank you for continuing to make RedsZone.com to most popular Reds' discussion board on the Internet. Feel free to discuss this new policy in this thread.

[zombie-a-go-go]

Gentlemen, raise your tomato-shields.

[guttle11]

That is a good idea, except maybe the deduction of points. Those threads are annoying, but 25 points? Maybe just a stern pm would suffice. But I dont make the rules.

[Boss-Hog]

Originally Posted by guttle11

That is a good idea, except maybe the deduction of points. Those threads are annoying, but 25 points? Maybe just a stern pm would suffice. But I dont make the rules.

Fair enough. That rule was put in to discourage someone from, as it aptly put, trying to "***** points", but if someone has a legitimate question and simply forgets the board is not the proper place for it, I'm willing to be a little more lenient for the latter. Either way, the board is not the place for such questions.

[Casey_21]

I totally agree. Bout' as aggrivating as those damned Duke boys, eh Boss?
_______________________________

:kearns: 'First you gotta do the Truffle Shuffle'


ena: 'Boo Hoo, Me need Fastball... FASTBALL you stinkin' pitchers!!'

[Slider]

Boss,

I respect what you and the other moderators are trying to do here. I would suggest however, that with 2413 members there are likely 2,413 interpretations of what a "quality post that adds value to the board" comprises.

If I read a post and think it's interesting and gets me to think a bit, I consider giving reputation points. I'm not as concerned about the length of the post as the content. Some people can say a lot with a little.

Others might read the same post and dismiss it as obvious or even without merit.

I don't have any problem with stopping threads that appeal for points, but I tend to agree with guttle that deducting points would be a little over the top for first time offenders. I think a PM would get the job done. If you have a repeat offender...deduct points.

Bottom Line...as long as you leave the awarding of reputation points in the hands of all of us, members will get called up that not all would agree merit that promotion. That makes them no less deserving...it's really a reflection of the diversity of the board...and that's a good thing. IMHO

[Chip R]

Originally Posted by Slider

Bottom Line...as long as you leave the awarding of reputation points in the hands of all of us, members will get called up that not all would agree merit that promotion. That makes them no less deserving...it's really a reflection of the diversity of the board...and that's a good thing. IMHO

Since giving out rep is such a subjective thing, you make a good point. I may think someone deserves rep and another person may read the same post and have the opposite reaction. We really can't control what reasons you give rep or take rep away for. This is mainly to discourage people from giving rep out to people who whine that they aren't getting rep.

[Ender]

Originally Posted by Boss-Hog

trying to "***** points"

Gee, if I had known I would've been gettin' ***** Points, I would've posted a lot more.

[Casey_21]

Originally Posted by Ender

Gee, if I had known I would've been gettin' ***** Points, I would've posted a lot more.

_________________________

:dunn: 'Been there, Dunn that'

:kearns: 'First you gotta do the Truffle Shuffle'

ena: = Swiss Cheese

[RFS62]

Originally Posted by Ender

Gee, if I had known I would've been gettin' ***** Points, I would've posted a lot more.

Ho Points.... HO POINTS!!!!!!

Woo Hoo, I had no idea!!!!!!

This is gonna be GREAT!!!!!!!!!

[Roy Tucker]

So, Boss, doesn't this thread violate your new policy?






Just kidding, just kidding, works fine for me.

Continued thanks for the fine job you and GIK and the mods do here in RZ land.

[919191]

Thanks for this. Other than a few negs I gave for rudeness, most of my negs have been given to people asking for rep points, or complaining about the system.

[REDREAD]

Boss, I think the thread you linked in the archives by GIK does a great job of explaining the motivation for the rep system, but I think you could clarify a few more questions by adding the following info:

It takes 200 rep points, X days registered, and X posts to get into ORG.
Explain the formula for power points
Explain that a given user can only give out 5 votes/day, and not the same person within 3(?) days.

There seems to have been a lot of quesitons about those topics. I know the answers have been displayed in numerous posts, but I think it would be good for new posters if you could add that to GIK's post linked above (and hopefully reduce questions).

[MWM]

Nice work, Boss as usual.

[Unassisted]

Not trying to be snarky here Boss, but this creates a dilemma for me.

I routinely hand out negs for posts within existing threads on other topics that discuss rep, because they are off-topic and because they discuss rep - which I agree has been discussed to death.

Since those don't seem to fall under this rule, except as to no longer be appplicable for negging, would you prefer that such posts be mod-alerted or ignored?