Bling. Ding. Dong.
 

This statistic really fascinated me at the time.

OK, so if 2 months ago the highest "thread view" total all of the recent threads in this Forum was 332 views, things have changed. Dramatically.

As we know the new look FT allows all users to see not only the number of posts to a thread but the number of VIEWS. Which at times is most instructive. I never knew there were SO many lurkers. :D

Right now I count over 10,000 'views' to just 3 threads in this Forum - all of them about these silly "reputation" points. One thread started by JonNYC has alone received 6,631 "views" or TWENTY times the highest thread view here in recent times.

If nothing else this proves these 'reputation' points are controversial.

I think this "reputation" thing is THE most divisive and negative thing FT has introduced for years. Many folks are begging, swapping, cajoling, soliciting and even emailing requests for these things. Some VERY well known FT'ers too I might add. It has turned into a 'game' like trading baseball cards to many. I turned mine off on day#1 as I foresaw the trouble they would create.

Cowards are making childish pests of themselves leaving negative 'dings' for respected FT'ers and signing those 'dings' with the names of other respected FT'ers - who of course left NO such comments. Punki, doc, PremEx and myself have publicly stated here this has occurred to them, as well as several others whose names do not spring to mind right now.

Other very respected FT'ers have posted here they have received negative 'dings' after posting very helpful and worthwhile comments, and clearly this upsets/disappoints them or they would not have posted the actual comments that attracted these lunatic fringe responses. I wonder how does any of this add to their enjoyment of FlyerTalk????

My thoughts are that this reputation feature is incredibly divisive - and in the end harmful to FT overall.

Some in favour of them say "just ignore the negative dings" or "IJAFIBB." However the mere fact valuable and helpful members feel affronted and upset to read a caustic 'ding' left by some anonymous yahoo - upset enough to post them here, shows their feelings are truly hurt.

Randy is this what you want to see valuable members get from their FlyerTalk experience? Donate their time and knowledge and get some unsigned coward abuse you for it - knowing they likely can't be traced? Some people react very badly to criticism and are very sensitive to it. Most especially if unwarranted or unjustified.

FlyerTalk got along just dandy for 6 years or so when one's "reputation" was made or lost based on WHAT you posted. Not how many times you blinged, dinged, donged or doled out your little green squares.

Everyone else formed their own view of FlyerTalkers based on the helpfulness and accuracy of the information they posted. And the system worked. Right now, a persistent troll could feasibly rack up a swag of green squares if that was his/her main game objective. How does that assist FT or new users in any way?

I recall Randy posting on Flyertalk: "You are what you post".

The new FT has a ton of great features. ^ I really like most of them. They make FlyerTalk a much better board to use, and to be part of. Thanks for the significant investment of time and money that made it all possible. :p

"Reputation" IMHO is one 'feature' that should be turned off. Soon.

You posted a couple of weeks back that you only ever intended "reputation" to be possibly useful for 'Coupon Connection' and no other Forum. My view is that common sense and some prudent background checking will always RAPIDLY sort out the coupon traders and sharks and "gimme" merchants from the genuine Flyertalkers using that Forum. The "search all posts" feature for other members is fast and accurate now - and does this job a treat.

Randy, I realise you are especially busy the past few weeks, but if you have time to offer a brief note on your thoughts on the future of "reputation" it might go a long way to addressing the concerns of many members. (And save you reading 500 posts on this matter!)

I vote with Ozstamps.
I made a post and lost over 30 reputation points and when all the details came out not one of those responsible gave back one lousy point. Looks like it's only used for negative views.
I even got one on 3 word stories if you can believe that.


Regard,
Robert

Ozstamps is right in so far as it having turned into a game. In fact, it became a game from the very first day and that was probably inevitable.

Where I disagree with him is that I don't consider a game to be necessarily negative. Like trading baseball cards (or stamps, for that matter), it can add a little fun into life. The important thing is not to take it too seriously. For this reason, I think it should remain.

As far as the above is concerned, I am in 100% agreement with Ozstamps. This practice is simply disgusting. I said before, and I repeat here, that if Randy has the ability to track down dings he should announce that right here. Further, he should make a firm rule that anyone who forges someone else's name on a ding will be forever banned from F/T -- no ands, ifs, or buts.

I think that announcement will, in itself, put an end to this practice. If one or two people decide to continue doing it they will soon find themselves gone.

I have weighed in on this matter on a few posts, now, and my view remains the same - a good idea in theory that is a poor idea in practice.

Irregardess of the motives or personalities behind the FT membership, humans like competition - friendly or otherwise - so I am not surprised to see the things we have seen when it comes to both the giving and taking of reputation points.

And nobody likes to be criticized, positively or negatively, "in person" or anonymously. Myself included. I think it silly to be dinged for misspelling Qantas, but the person who did so took extreme offense at my doing so and such things are in the eye of the beholder - both mine and theirs.

There are solid arguments for and against keeping reputation active, from both long-time members and new ones. Randy has commented on what he desired/intended reputation to be used for and, in due time, I expect he will make a decision on whether or not to keep reputation active.

In the end, I have to agree with Randy - you are what you post. Whether I have a long string of green boxes or a long string of red boxes, if someone finds value in what I post, then my "goal" in posting it has been met. Whether they want to give me reputation or take it away for posting it is not important to me ( though I'd prefer they gave it then take it, of couse :) ) - it's that they found value is what is important to me.

As I have noted, I joined FlyerTalk to learn, and that is also why I stay. But I also try and teach, giving back to the Community that has been so helpful to me these past eighteen months.

Couldn't possibly agree with Oz more. ^

Also, recently, a member registered a duplicate handle, D'uH (I think), which was banned at, like, post count 8. If I were a moderator/administrator, I would be mindful that accounts set up post-transition (i.e., within the last month or so) may be simply duplicate handles registered by existing members who will use the account to do nothing more than post gibberish in order to reach the minimum post count for purposes of dispensing dings and blings and anonymous feedback, thereby gaming the system.

I would suggest looking at IP addresses. If someone is using a random anonymizer to access FT with a duplicate handle, the member's IP address will always be different each time they post (I believe, since a random anonymizer anonymizes you by giving you a random IP address, making you virtually untraceable). I know that personally, I wouldn't want to go through all those acrobatics, but if you have the right set-up and know-how, I'm sure it's no more an obstacle than anything else.

PROBLEM SOLVED: (from the new TalkMail)

As of Monday, we will be switching the setting that allows for anonymity. Once the setting is switched, users will be able to see exactly who gave or took away reputation points - and here's the really big news, the switch will retroactively impact all reputation messages, meaning anonymity will disappear from all reputations given prior to Monday as well. Randy has always said, everyone on FT is responsible for everything they post, and this decision has been made to reflect that principle.

Well... just wait until Monday.

If you have read the latest TalkMail, you will understand.

All those Red dings will be identified.

William

^^^^^^^^

You are of course 100% entitled to your personal opinion ScottC. However if you think for one moment that this new announcement will "solve" anything - all I suggest is do not hanker for a career in politics, where accurately reading the wishes of the masses is an essential for success. ;)

Do you really think the recent visitors to this Forum that have leapt up 20 times the usual level as they all LOVE this new feature? :D

This decision will create a mini RIOT on Monday. IMHO.

It will NOT 'solve' most of what I outlined above in any way shape or form. It will simply escalate it.

It WILL generate hundreds more hostile posts in this and other Forums, creating more divisivenesses and rancor and animosity among MANY members. Enemies will be made. There will be nasty emails and PM's among folks and a lot of that will inevitably spill onto the boards.

It WILL create probably hundreds of direct private emails to Randy - whining, sobbing and accusing others. "Demanding" he mete out all kinds of retaliatory and drastic punishment against the yahoos who posted 'nasty' things that were not true or warranted etc. I'll bet my house on that one. Human nature at work.

If Randy is working near 100 hour weeks right now, which I understand is the case, I can imagine this is precisely what he needs clogging his inbox on top of all that "real" work that pays the bills? :rolleyes:

And will all this nasty mess earn one person on FT ONE mile or point? Nope.

Randy - clearly this Talk Mail decision email was formulated well before my posting this thread. May we ask if any members of the ever helpful Talk Board had a hand in its adoption?


Randy you recently said above, when locking down that silly conga line thread for "Wooo Hooo - Let's all beg and swap and trade and schmooze 'Reputation' points" that you only ever intended this "reputation" feature to be "only" for Coupon Connection use and nothing else. Why the apparent complete change of mind might I ask?

The Talk Mail statement is not clear. Exposing the cowards that have dinged others with nasty comments thinking they would be never exposed should have always been how it was set up from the get-go IMHO. Of course many folks will squirm mightily when that retroactively is changed. Good.

However - those many on FT like me that have chosen NOT to become involved whatever in these silly and highly divisive games of 'reputation' points and opted right out of it - does your new announcement mean all those members no longer have that choice? i.e. will those who chose to simply remain a "Black Square" on FT still have that choice?

If not, all I can say it is a new policy I am greatly disappointed to read about. :(

If this opt-out choice does remain - great, and let the dings and bings and 'baseball card trading' type nonsense in many quarters continue, as it will not affect me.

But in the big picture - it will negatively affect FlyerTalk. IMHO.


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

I think most people will be in the same situation that I am in. I have received a number of dings, all anonymous, and one or two with comments.

However, not a single one of them had an obscene comment or even one in bad taste.

Therefore, I will have no complaints. I posted something, somebody did not like it, and dinged me. (Or he/she was dinging me not for that particular post but for my overall body of posts.)

Fair enough.

One thing I would like to see, however, is a public announcement of the real user names of the people who signed someone else's. (This is something which the recipient will have to do.)

I predict a bit of you-know-what hitting the fan on Monday. :D It certainly sounds like a fair few negative dings (with or without a few choice words) were flung about with the expectation they would forever remain anonymous.

It's a tough call. I think in a quieter environment with fewer strong egos (does that exist on an internet discussion board anywhere? ;)) anonymous reputation scoring like that might work nicely. In a setting like this, though, it just breeds the type of stuff we've been reading in these threads over the past couple weeks.

Not that identifying all reputation posts will eliminate the contention. Far from it. But it will discourage the trigger-happy negatives somewhat, I should think. I guess we'll see what happens.

Maybe I should add "Can't we all just get along?" to my signature quotes. :D

I have to agree with ozstamps. We've already seen threads calling for the heads of those who posted negative comments anonymously. When those people become known, we're going to see a backlash of retaliation via reputation points, as well as calls for those "evil people" to be punnished to the "full extent of Flyertalk retribution".

Going to be a long, hot summer, me thinks. *sigh*

Keep in mind that you are only going to be able to see the identities of the last five people who binged or dinged you. People, if you really socked it to somebody, you had better get busy asking five of your buddies to give him positive hits!

(This would be poetic justice at its best. The guy you wanted to screw will wind up with five times as many rep points thanks to you!) :)

Not to mention all the cliques, camp followers and assorted allies piling on. On both sides. It will be like gang warfare for days.

And what we see will be only 10% of it - you can bet. The rest will be going on by emails, PM and contacting Randy IMHO.

Benefit to Flyertalk from all this angst and bitterness? ZERO.

Damage to Flyertalk harmony from all this .......... :rolleyes:

The new FT software has a ton of 'Gee Whizz' features and bells and whistles that are NOT turned on. Member Avatar graphics, supporting visual images/photos in posts etc, etc. IMO a shame this "reputation" option was not left in that bucket.

^

I also agree. Turn off this feature. It just isn't worth the trouble it is causing and will continue to cause.

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!

Good decision, Randy.
 

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.

I'd like to see more too.
 

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.

Under the current system, the "comments" are viewable solely by the recipient. This provides an excellent opportunity for private feedback not previously available to those who preferred not to publicize their e-mail addresses.

The concept behind your suggestion is good, but it can already be employed publicly in the very thread involved. Of course, if closed in Coupon Connection, you may need to ask the moderator to open it so you can do so.

Well come Monday I hope myself, doc, PremEx, Punki and all the others whom the cowards have left fake signed nasty mesaages are visible to Randy and Admin.

And all get drop kicked to Greenland for their stupidity and malice.

^ Just like ebay. :)

Yes, indeed.

I hope to God that people here aren't really hurt by these "dings". C'mon, do you really care? If somebody doesn't like your post, you get a ding. It's a ding on FT, not a personal character assassination.

For instance, I notice Spiff gets "dings" because he's outspoken about the TSA and defending what he views as our Constitutional freedoms. At least he takes a stand that makes people think and let 'em know where he's at (OK, so some roll their eyes). Personally, I repect a person's willingness to take a stand and speak their mind whether I, in my infinite wisdom, agree or not. There's none of this concern about a popularity contest (which life ain't, boys and girls). Taking a stand on merit and a contrary opinion takes conviction, fortitude and guts (unless merely trolling)...as does voicing one's opinion, whether it's popular or not.

Then there's the extra positive points for folks such as, say, missydarlin and ScottC. Well deserved, as we all know, for their selfless contributions of knowledge, valuable information and kindness on FT, but do we really need to "rate" them? These are already highly respected members of this community and will remain so long after any "ratings" disappear. IMHO, the potential for damage goes far beyond the good that these things do.

FWIW, I'd like to see these little reputation point icons disappear. Anyone who's been around FT for awhile knows who's who and what their "reputations" are...there's really little need for these rating points.

Personally, I don't need ratings to determine whether I like someone or want to read their posts; that is, I don't need my thinking and opinions formulated for me. These icons lend no credibility to the poster but indicate a level of hierarchy, smugness and political popularity, that, IMHO, is not the essence of what this place is all about. Or was before these silly little things appeared and caused such a stir.

Now the system is changing I no longer know who to ping or ding :D

Indeed. One particular FT'er is going to owe Spiff a BIG public apology when he finds out that I'm the one who recommended he travel to the former Soviet Union, not Spiff, as he cross posted all over FT.

:eek: :p

There is an old story about a sea captain who went to his safe every morning, took out a piece of paper, read it, and then locked it back up.

He did this every single day for over 20 years.

His entire crew was curious about what was on that paper and when the captain died, they rushed to open the safe to read it.

On it, was written, "Port, left. Starboard, right."

Perhaps the Omni mods could use as their guide: "Bling, left. Ding, right." :)

Dovster
(Actually, I received a very nice bling from Scott.)

Are you sure it was from me? You won't know till Monday :D ;)