Monday is going to be SO MUCH fun.

For you perhaps.

For those who think this is all a great big fun 'game' perhaps.

However, I'll bet my HOUSE it will be a nightmare for Randy and the Admins.

They will be driven NUTS with the fallout and repercussions from this I suspect.

I truly feel sorry about the whining mess that will land in Randy's mailbox all week, when he is trying hard to run a busy business in there.


-----------------------------------

What's the problem? First everyone complained that they were receiving anonymous dings and that they wanted to know who left them, and now they know and it's still not right. I for one will be most interested to see what happens, it's my opinion that only a FEW people are emailing Randy with complaints, the majority of posters don't give a rats behind about this system, and come monday it will be possible to use it the way it was intended.

I for one am very curious to read some of the reputations left for me

I hope we will see ALL the comments, not just the last five.

I'd be more than happy with just the last 5, unless something changes between now and monday

I agree with Scott, which will undoubtedly put him into a state of shock.

Again, most "dings" either did not have comments attached or the comments were not abusive. Nobody has any valid reason to complain about them. Secondly, nobody will be able to see more than five ratings -- good or bad -- so most of the initial dings will be invisible.

In the future, people will be careful when they ding someone -- which is a very good thing.

Indeed. I am surprised that the esteemed ozstamps, who so prominently proclaims (boldly and colourfully ) to the whole of FlyerTalk that he has turned off his reputation, is one to be forecasting the proverbial tempest in a teapot that will erupt when people get to see who left them their last n comments. Perhaps he is concerned that it is his friends (who did not have the same conviction as he in turning off their reputations) who will be the ones to be driving Randy and company nuts given that they will now see who doesn't like them. He certainly isn't speaking for the actions of his enemies with these predictions.

FewMiles..

To be honest I have no real interest whatever in what nasty comments others may have received. Other than to wonder what motivates such sad and malicious people. (And why FT enables a system that allows it to occur in the first place.) Whatever number of "dings" you (or others) have received or given is your problem - not mine - just as long as they do not involve me.

To that end I hope the identity of the childish lowlife coward(s) who for example left a nasty "ding" on doc's account and signed it "ozstamps" will now be revealed to doc and to Randy. If you feel that the MANY actions reported here like that, which have occurred fraudulently on many accounts will not generate a lot of work and hassle and aggro for Randy you are of course entitled to your opinion. And whatever, YOU will not need to deal with them.

As to whether only the past 5 "dings" will show, I did not read that in the email sent out from FT, although some do seem frantic to convey this message. In fact after a doing a little homework I believe that is NOT the case. "The switch will retroactively impact all reputation messages" is what it actually said. (Bolding mine.) This new software has infinite options to Admin I am advised.

But as always, I could be wrong.

--------------------------------------

Here's to Monday! Accountability at last!

Overall, I think that the positives connected with the reputation feature (primarily getting funny, happy notes) actually outweigh the negatives arising from its misuse (the greatest of which is signing someone else's name to a negative statement to a third party). Therefore, IMHO, Randy's decision is a good one as it will eliminate the possibility of trouble makers sending out ill will in someone else's name but still allow for the joy that the reputation feature spreads around.

I do hope, however, this new policy notwithstanding, that Randy, has or will take very serious steps (hopefully permanent banning) against the trouble makers who tried to cause hurt by signing someone else's name. That is a very, very serious offense.

As for normal dings, this is also a perfect solution. In the future if I get a ding from someone on my ignore user list, well, I guess I'll just ignore them. If I get a ding from someone I like, I will contact them privately and try to understand their thinking.

Works for me.

Question:

How do I view all past reputation posts on my account? When I click on "My FlyerTalk" I only seem to have displayed the "Latest" which consists of only the last 5.

Same question.

I agree completely!

People who would do something like that are the type of people we don't need in this Community. Lawyers call it "moral turpitude" but most folk just call it basic dishonesty. It's one thing to snipe from hiding, that's only cowardly; the person who tries to stir up hatred or distrust between others is malicious.

In my opinion, that sort of malice is evil - it eats at the heart of the relationships that strengthen the community.

While my curiosity might be sated if I could see more, I'd much prefer to get more. Blings, that is, not dings.

Remember, you can indicated "disagreement" in the remarks while still marking "approval" of the poster.

And I'd really like a second green lozenge some day.

I realize this is a very naive and simplistic inquiry, but I'll ask just the same. When I go to give someone a positive reputation point, there is a place to make a comment. Why can't this be employed instead of a ding. To clarify, since reputation is ONLY FOR CC, why not simply provide the opportunity for someone who has traded with another to post in just a few words that the FT has completed a satisfactory trade. If I go to a poster's profile, I would like to be able to see trade comments from people they have traded with. It could be only a few words: "Marysunshine has made a satisfactory trade with me". Since comments appear to be limited to five, that would still provide enough information for a potential participant to check on the other person's integrity in prior dealings. Is it possible to get rid of good and bad unexplained votes and simply note a reputable or nonreputable transaction. I believe that would be less personal and much more helpful in making an informed decision.