Reputation "comments" are gonna' be a big problem...
 

I like in principal the reputation feature-- but the "comment" portion is already being used to take anonymous pot-shots... a recipe for trouble, obviously. Can the "comment" portion of reputation be disabled? I definitely think the "comment" feature is a fire-starter.

The weird thing is most users I've checked say "xxx will not re-qualify for the next elite level.." does that mean that these comments are actually generated automatically rather than actual user comments? I saw one comment on the AA board that said "xxx has a dubious reputation" (actually I'm paraphrasing-- it was something like that though.) It did seem like it was a targeted comment.

BTW, This is from another site-- http://www.mini2.com -- that also uses vBulletin-- but it's an interesting "design" as it were, lot of factors, some pretty interesting when you think about it-- I wonder if FT's system is the same or similar? Is there a a FAQ for same?


How does Reputation work?

Many have asked how the reputation system works. Below you will find the guidelines used to determine how many 'points' of reputation are awarded or taken away by each user.

Register Date Factor
For every X number of days, users gain 1 point of reputation-altering power.
182

Post Count Factor
For every X number of posts, users gain 1 point of reputation-altering power.
500

Reputation Point Factor
For every X points of reputation, users gain 1 point of reputation-altering power.
100

[Administrators give or take 50 points of reputation unless their calculated reputation-altering power is greater]

Minimum Post Count
How many posts must a user have before his reputation hits count on others?
100

Minimum Reputation Count
How much reputation must a user have before his reputation hits count on others?
30

Daily Reputation Clicks Limit [Administrators are exempt?
How many reputation clicks can a user give over each 24 hour period?
10

Reputation User Spread [Administrators are exempt]
How many different users must you give reputation to before you can hit the same person again?
20

Any user can let you know whether they approve or disapprove of one of your posts by clicking the ? button associated with the post. They should also provide a short comment as to why they approved or disapproved.

If you look in your User Control Panel you can see the last 10 reputations given to you. There will be a little dot next to each reputation:
• A ? dot means the user approved of your post, and as a result your reputation has grown,
• A ? dot means the user disapproved of your post, and as a result your reputation has "taken a hit",
• A ? dot means the user giving you reputation has not yet met the minimum qualifications to do so, and you will have to read the associated comment to determine what they thought.

I don't see the "comments" portion to which JonNYC refers. Unless he is talking about the "Report Bad Post" feature, which is probably an excellent idea, if it's a shortcut to obtain moderator intervention.

As for the reputation square, I think it's an unfortunate mistake. Do we really need FTers evaluating one another in such a manner? Do we need some FTers giving each other a pat on the back, while others are left in the cold? Let's not create further class division within FT.

As far as reputation goes, I think most of the regulars can make their own subjective determination by looking at a user's tenure, post count, and by using the search feature. And the real FT diehards probably already have a fairly decent appreciation of the reputation of their friends and acquaintenances by virtue of having read many of their posts. To me, the explicit reputation thing, however it's calculated, will likely open up a Pandora's Box. So I suggest jettisoning it before the problems arise.

Other than that, the new FT looks great. I can't wait until its back up to speed.

The comment is visible if you "hover" (or sometimes click) on the little gemstone next to your post count-- your's is a positive comment-- different that 90% of the "boiler-plate" comment that appears next to most users already.

I think the "xxx is an unknown quantity at this point" and "xxx will not re-qualify for the next elite level" and the others are generated by the system itself-- not actual user comments?? Just a guess-- it can't be the same for everybody otherwise?

One can always edit one’s options in the MyFlyerTalk area and disable the Show My Reputation Level function.

Thanks Canarsie for pointing this out. Your entire experience on FT is now in your hands and once that is learned, this will likely to be less of a factor.

May we first explain why we have engaged that particular feature: We really only wanted to engage it for The Coupon Connection forum and I'm sure you can guess why. Similar to the same reputation systems on very popular exchange or other commerce Web sites like eBay and even Amazon to some degree, we wanted a way to give members, especially the newer ones, something to know more about a member whom they may be considering an exchange. Over time we're likely to figure out how to isolate this to that forum. The messages you currently see are defaults, the system provides them and it's likely that all of you will soon with your normal participation develop systematically, the fine reputations you already enjoy. Remember, just like changing frequent flyer programs - you are starting with no miles and no elite status.

As for a concern above about other members spamming your reputation. Well, on the back end, we have the ability to look at the comments when called to do so and more importantly to trace the voter. If a member thinks they are being singled out in an unfair way, we can easily track that and deliver the "evidence" to the offender if necessary. But again, the goal and only goal of this implementation is to provide tools for the member to use. If someone on TCC rips other members off, their reputation will suffer and the members won't have to worry about not seeing a post among the tens of thousands that warned others....

Hope this helps understand this and while quite natural, we're really not interested in being your "Big Brother."

Thanks flyertalk for the explanation-- I've just left you positive reputation feedback. :D ;)

I wonder what my reputation was on the old FlyerTalk. Then again, who cares. :D

flyertalk: I understand and appreciate what your trying to do in increasing confidence levels among Coupon Connection mates, but unless and until the software is tweaked to limit this new reputation feature entirely to that purpose, I still have my concerns. I agree that weeding out Coupon Connection delinquents is a great idea, but hopefully we don't wind up with a reputation caste system that transcends The Coupon Connection in the meantime.

Guess what? I am "an unknown quantity at this point". So much for 5,000+ posts. ;) :D [Someone dinged me.]

This is going to be a vehicle for vendettas (including some from OMNIites), and, as such, unless and until this feature is limited exclusively to Coupon Connection, I have disabled this feature's public viewability in relation to moi and will abstain from using such feature toward others.

I've never used ebay etc, but have heard about the reputation type things on there & guess that makes sense, and possibly for Coupon Connection. But - I'm adamently against it in the other forums - there is the potential for abuse. I don't want to have folk assigning or taking points on my reputation & I'm not going to do it to others. I think most of us can figure out from handles, posts, styles, # of posts, what a person is like; there's no need to rank their reputation. And if someone doesn't like someone then there's always the new ignore user feature. And if they're being totally out of line, report to moderator or Randy. As w/ someone above, I'm going to take mine off public display & I won't be ranking anyone else. And I do think that until it's limited to just CC, then it shouldn't be enabled. I haven't seen the potshots that I've hard are occurring, but I can imagine that they do exist, knowing some of the folk on FT.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but the administrator can choose not to let users hide their reputation rating.

FewMiles..

What option is this? I looked on the Admin control panel (different board, not this one, but also running this version of vBulletin) and don't see where we can find a log of reputation comments. :confused:

But we don't get to see what comments left about other posters. In other words, one can affect the reputation rating of another member, but in a totally anonymous way.

FewMiles..

Not a good feature
 

I've already had the cowardly clique that is obsessed with me ding me on a post from weeks ago.

This has widespread abuse written all over it.

I think we have non-partisan agreement. How do we find out what we got dinged for?

I posted in another thread that people who have issues with someone else should bring it up with them directly as opposed to acting like a guerrila engaged in a hit and run campaign.

Somebody dinged me too. So what?

It may be someone who is out to "get" me or it might have been someone who honestly feels that my post was badly written. Either way, it doesn't really cause me any problems.

I don't think that the ratings really add anything to Flyer Talk but I don't see where they cause any real problem either.

The problem will occur when the same people who like to point out that they have more posts, or they have more replies to their threads, are now going to start crowing about how good their reputation is.

And, as has already been shown, there are groups of cowards who are engaging in attacks on the reputation levels of FT'ers with whom they disagree.

If fellow members are going to be able to "rate" you, at least show the name of the user(s) who are doing so. Being able to rate someone behind a curtain is ripe for problems.

In fact, on ebay you cannot leave feedback unless you have completed an official ebay transaction. The current FT system allows ANYONE to leave feed back for ANYONE! :eek: IMHO, even the ebay system is flawed. 99.9% of ebay feedback given is positive, in hope of receiving positive feedback in return. Ego stroking at it's best. For example, I have been an ebay member since item numbers had five digits (they have ten now). I have nearly 2000 positive comments, and zero negative. Clearly if the feedback system worked, I would have made SOMEONE angry enough to leave at least one negative.
On FT, feedback will be nothing more than another weapon for flame baiting. Do we really need that? PLEASE don't unleash this abomination on us.

I agree 100%, especially on the eBay part above. During my year or so running a full-time eBay business (I've been using it for a total of six or seven), I've gotten two negative feedbacks - and I don't think I deserved either one. Conversely, I know I've not gotten feedback on at least one transaction where if I had received it, it would have been negative. (A guy in the UK was mad at me because his government charged him duty and fees on a package - he insisted it was my responsibility to tell him what his government would do.) Feedback on eBay is only reflective of the people who actually participate in it.

Now, back to the FT side. If anonymous trolls were enough of a problem in OMNI, then they've got even more potential for harm here. And to me, this comment section makes it possible that *everyone* who doesn't disclose their name is an anonymous troll.

Mike

How do you see positive or negative comments about your reputation. I know that I am slow but can't see anything. Or maybe know one is commenting on mine, which is understandable since I am such a great guy and never offend anyone. :D

Click on "myflyertalk" in the top left.

There is a similar thread in OMNI, but I suppose that this is the best forum
for the subject.


The anonymous nature of this feature can be a blessing, or a curse, for an
individual, depending on how they take it, and what they make of it.

As far as the more important perspective - - how it affects the overall FT
community and forums, including OMNI - - how will this play out for all of us?
This remains to be seen...


We have already seen a number of individuals 'dinged' for no apparent reason,
other than someone has decided that they are an adversary, and wish to bring
them down. And we have even seen at least one individual (who admitted it)
who tries to correct these wrongdoings...

So we have 'good' guys and 'bad' guys starting to battle it out in the 'reputation
game'. As I mentioned in the other thread, this is starting to seem like "Survivor",
and we don't need more 'reality' games like this - - we need more communication
and discussion between dissimilar viewpoints.

If there is a higher purpose for OMNI, this is where it can help bring around
something positive, or act as medium for change - - but not as a battleground
for individuals with personal grudges with other individuals, and their ideas...

And for the main body of FlyerTalk, I don't see how ANY spillover from the
OMNI grudges will help the purpose of helping other fellow travellers.


But perhaps there is a silver lining. It is possible, I assume, that the folks
who run the board, and make the FT decisions, CAN view the 'anonymous'
comments, and see who made them, just as they can view any FT member's
activity. This is already apparently done to assess any individual's attitude
and behavior, when it becomes necessary. An irresponsible and out of control
member who abuses the 'reputation' framework can be caught - - just like a
common criminal who thought that they could 'get away with something', just
because they thought no-one could - - or would - - see them.


I received one comment, which I will share - - since it was anonymous - -

it said: "ignore posts with which you disagree".


Hmmm....

Not only was I **not** disagreeing with any post or poster (just adding a
further comment, extending the thread of thought), but the person who
'dinged' me was the one who apparently disagreed with a post (my post,
or the fact that I posted). Why couldn't THEY ignore a post? So much
for logic and reason. I suppose that the anonymous commenter wishes that
everyone with an opposing viewpoint just 'shut up', as this would be more
convenient for them. If we all did as they suggested, there would be no
dissenting opinion in FT at all. Sounds pretty dictatorial to me...

I believe this illustrates the lack of logic used by some 'early adopters' of
this 'dinging game'. I certainly hope that this thread (and this forum) does
not become a dumping ground for every complaint from OMNI and / or for
every unfair 'reputation' comment. But if someone has a good example that
shows the problems (or promise) of this system, perhaps some of us will
tolerate more examples.


I wonder if it is possible to mandate the use of PM for the comments, or
perhaps allow replies to the anonymous commenter, but I suspect the best
course might be to disable 'reputation' and the comments altogether...
.

From what I see so far-- and this could change-- I actually like the reputation feature-- the description below helped me come to understand that it is a bit tougher to abuse than I would have thought originally, YMMV. The "comment" feature is still a big question-mark in my mind.

Here is a slightly easier to understand version of the FAQ (lifted from another v.bulletin BB) that I posted on page 1 here...

BTW, looks like 60 points is the the level at which one gets "[member] will be famous soon enough" (I think less than 60 is the "...on a distinguished path" moniker-- I think that's it, anyway.

Just for that ScottC, I am leaving you a negative feedback :mad:

Just kidding, I see you have two breathmints, how many fake ID's did you have to create in order to get that many positive responses :D

See, I just reponded to Scott's comments, and they went before this original post.

This is weird :confused:

:confused:

I think my replies were using my computer time :eek:

Wow, I wonder how we are going to handle people who post in different time zones then :confused:

OK, sorry about all the posts, please don't leave me any negative feedback ;)

I actually like the feature, I'm getting some really nice feedback from people I've helped out in threads and I'm leaving some feedback to people who have helped me.

I'm pretty sure it's turned into a game for some as certain posters went "negative" really fast, and then oddly recovered really fast, obviously asking buddies to "help them out", but come time I'm sure that it could turn into a pretty good pointer about someones online behavior, though I doubt it's going to last very long.

Better would be to leave to judging up to Randy and his staff (timeouts cost you, TOS violations cost you etc...)

^ Scott, I'm with you. It's not like one user can continuously keep changing a single user's reputation -- rather, they get their one vote and that's it for some period of time.

I hope that the FT management keeps reputations around for sufficient time to see how it all plays out -- I don't think it'll be as bad as some have predicted.

Also, maybe this could evolve into a slashdot-style filtering system for message reading. I think that would be outstanding!

If the reputation feature curtails some of the “hey use the search feature” responses to new posters I’d be thrilled.

Got caught by the board -- this is a dupe.

If the reputation feature curtails some of the “hey use the search feature” responses to new posters I’d be thrilled.

It is the anonymity that I think is wrong.
 

If someone wishes to make negative comments about someone else, they should at least be required to have the courage to sign their name.

Is it possible to set the reputation list to bar folks who are on your "ignore user" list? I suspect that all of the negative comments I have received are from exactly those folks whose post I never read.

Interesting that the folks who make positive comments do sign their names, while those who take cheap shots just don't seem to have the courage to own up to their behavior.

I agree, or people who cross-post, flame others, attack moderation etc...

I see plenty of ways the community can point out to others that the posts has shown some "shameless behavior" in the past.

And then what?

"You voted negative for me so I'll do it to you?"

Angry private messages and emails asking WHY a negative post was left?

Public flames because someone dinged you?

Sorry, but if someone doesn't agree with me or I make them mad for whatever reason then I'm fine with them leaving a negative comment in my reputation, I really don't want to surf around FT with a list in my head of people I don't like because they "dinged" me.

I **may** think I've never done anything to harm or annoy someone but isn't that THEIR decision?

Plus, it's really not hard to find out WHO left the comments, once you know the algorithm Vbulletin uses (based on posts/years of membership and current point level) you can determine who it was ;)

There may be a few folks who might retaliate, but most FlyerTalkers are mature and intelligent enough that I suspect that they would first try to resolve the misunderstanding at hand, or if that were impossible, thereafter simply ignore the negative poster.

Well, with all the hoopla about negative comments, I started out to give positive rep'. to everyone posting to this thread, with the comment 'Thank you for being part of flyertalk.". About half way through, I got a message saying:
"vBulletin Message
You have given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later."

Sorry, but those of you on page 3 will have to wait until tomorrow. :D ;)

I think we should let it stand and see how it plays out. There could be interesting unintended consequences :)