Reputation and Post Counts

[MarillionFan]

typically CUK

Childish behaviour of the posters... would you really be that suprised?

That depends on whether you think anyone gives a fig about having a negative or positive count. If you get a high one in either direction then it means you are noticed.

I expect Spacecadet will stay on zero!

[NickFitz]

Oh, I was confused about the monikers we already have like "more time posting than coding". Is this going to replace that or be in addition?

Also, do we really want posters voting on each other's posts on CUK? Even on fairly professional sites where people treat each other with respect, introducing a user-driven rating system can cause a lot of friction... sounds like a bloodbath in the waiting on CUK. I can't imagine SY01 lasting more than a day or two for instance. Such systems work when people vote on a post, but on CUK I am fairly sure people will vindictively target users they don't like.

In addition.

The system is actually pretty well set up to avoid spamming of that kind: you can only vote a few times each day, you can only vote for the same person after voting for a number of others, and with the default settings you would only be able to vote for the same person two to three days after you last voted for them, assuming you used your full daily quota of votes on other people during that time. The amount your vote contributes depends on your own reputation, amongst other factors.

[Churchill]

I thought there was going to be checks and measures in place to ensure that sort of thing couldn't happen
i.e. can't vote for the same user twice in a row and only a limited number of votes to cast per day

Does it really matter?

[Spacecadet]

Look at me!!!!!!! Look at Meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!

FTFY

[Drewster]

Afternoon!

Just testing my new posting style.

More tea vicar.

That depends on whether you think anyone gives a fig about having a negative or positive count. If you get a high one in either direction then it means you are noticed.

I expect Spacecadet will stay on zero!

Mmmmmmm new style lasted..... what 2 mins???

[MarillionFan]

FTFY

Has somebody farted?

[Spacecadet]

Has somebody farted?

What wit!

[rsingh]

I thought there was going to be checks and measures in place to ensure that sort of thing couldn't happen
i.e. can't vote for the same user twice in a row and only a limited number of votes to cast per day

Judging by the number of sockies, there are some veerryy patient posters on this board. If it can be abused, it will.

[d000hg]

In addition.

The system is actually pretty well set up to avoid spamming of that kind: you can only vote a few times each day, you can only vote for the same person after voting for a number of others, and with the default settings you would only be able to vote for the same person two to three days after you last voted for them, assuming you used your full daily quota of votes on other people during that time. The amount your vote contributes depends on your own reputation, amongst other factors.

Ah I see. The main place I've seen a system used (quite successfully) they don't have limits like this, you can ONLY have one current vote on any other member... you can change your vote at any time of course but only have one 'opinion' logged of any other poster. That means you really have to annoy a lot of people to get a big dip. They also work it so the difference in your ratings effects how much impact your vote has.

The best way to hurt your rating is to mention it I've found, whinging "who voted me down" threads invariably lead to bad things happening

[Spacecadet]

Judging by the number of sockies, there are some veerryy patient posters on this board. If it can be abused, it will.

Like that wonderful and very useful tag cloud?