¿Is There A Way To BUY The Ability To REP More Than ...

[fyrenza]

the three or ever how many times we're allowed to do it, daily?

I don't want to underhandedly boost someone's rep count,
but there are FAR more great replies and members
than just 3 or 5 or ever how many "rep"s we're currently allowed to give.

AND, how many ARE we allowed to give?

Limiting the number of times a member can do it defeats the whole idea of "rep," imho,
though I DO see "the beauty" of making folks have to give it to, say,
4 others before they can rep the same person, again.

[Alyosha]

I don't know. I can only rep like once every four days or something. It's weird.

[Chris]

One reason you may be limited is because you give "Thanks" and those count for whatever criteria exists for repping.

I'd prefer no repping and in it's place a "Groan" button.

[roadmaster]

I don't know. I can only rep like once every four days or something. It's weird.

Me too here lately. Sometimes I don't even see the thanks button.

[Cthulhu]

One reason you may be limited is because you give "Thanks" and those count for whatever criteria exists for repping.

I'd prefer no repping and in it's place a "Groan" button.

I am not opposed to a "Groan" function.

[Captain Obvious]

We had a negative rep function but of course it got abused.

But... it was funny seeing former members like Cary Grant with like a negative bazillion rep.

I don't get the rep limits either, what's the purpose?

[Alyosha]

When PF had the negative rep button, The Xl and I spent one night neg repping this guy...I forget now why but it was hilarious because he took it so personal.

[KC]

The problem with negative repping is that someone with a very high rep power can very easily give new members extremely low negative rep balances, which tends to piss off and scare away new members (which is why it was taken away in the first place). A "groan" button that only subtracts one point the way "thanks" adds one point is a good idea.

[Cthulhu]

When PF had the negative rep button, @The Xl (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=865) and I spent one night neg repping this guy...I forget now why but it was hilarious because he took it so personal.

Negative rep, from a moron like some of the trolls there, may as well be a badge of honor.

[Peter1469]

I don't think that a groan button would be a good idea. Unless I thought that it would lower snark comments.

[Alyosha]

I think it was Blackrook. I can't remember, but he was angry. Maybe it was Dujac...no! SNAP. It was that JasonBourne .

[Cthulhu]

The problem with negative repping is that someone with a very high rep power can very easily give new members extremely low negative rep balances, which tends to piss off and scare away new members (which is why it was taken away in the first place). A "groan" button that only subtracts one point the way "thanks" adds one point is a good idea.

Why not have both systems? But have them independent of each other? And then have someone "groan proof" for like their first 500 or so posts so as to not scare newbies?

[roadmaster]

I don't think I ever gave a neg rep even to Cary. May have been the only one that gave him positive ones.

[Chris]

Why have a reputation system to begin with? It serves no purpose I can see, you are what you post. We know each other for that.

[KC]

Why not have both systems? But have them independent of each other? And then have someone "groan proof" for like their first 500 or so posts so as to not scare newbies?

I like the idea of the "groan" button if it only takes a single point away, but if you mean allow negative repping after a user reaches 500 posts, I'm not sure that's possible in this version of VBulletin Experience.

This version of VBulletin is Vbulletin 4.1.8. As for the technical possibility of what you're talking about, this manual doesn't really mention being able to set a limit for new members, but it does allow you to set a floor for reputation.


http://www.keithbloom.com/jay/vBulletin Manual.html#item306

[Cthulhu]

Why have a reputation system to begin with? It serves no purpose I can see, you are what you post. We know each other for that.

It is a gimmick that serves the purpose of slaking ones vanity and pride. Little more.

But that is big currency to those of small minds - most people.

[Cthulhu]

I like the idea of the "groan" button if it only takes a single point away, but if you mean allow negative repping after a user reaches 500 posts, I'm not sure that's possible in this version of VBulletin Experience.

This version of VBulletin is Vbulletin 4.1.8. As for the technical possibility of what you're talking about, this manual doesn't really mention being able to set a limit for new members, but it does allow you to set a floor for reputation.


http://www.keithbloom.com/jay/vBulletin Manual.html#item306

I'm sure the program could be written, but really, is the juice worth the squeeze?

I highly doubt it.

[The Xl]

When PF had the negative rep button, @The Xl (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=865) and I spent one night neg repping this guy...I forget now why but it was hilarious because he took it so personal.

Good times

[zelmo1234]

I don't see the threads getting better until after the mid term elections!

As a matter of fact they are likely to continue to get worse.

What I wish is that you could save a post, so when people come back with he same false statements you did not have to take the time to post all of the facts again and again and again

[Chris]

I don't see the threads getting better until after the mid term elections!

As a matter of fact they are likely to continue to get worse.

What I wish is that you could save a post, so when people come back with he same false statements you did not have to take the time to post all of the facts again and again and again

Bookmark 'em. But it won't matter with repeaters.

[Cthulhu]

Bookmark 'em. But it won't matter with repeaters.

That would take up a lot of space with respect to a few repeaters that exist.

[Chris]

That would take up a lot of space with respect to a few repeaters that exist.

Best way to silence a repeater is to ask them to back up, heck, even elaborate what they say.


Anyway, a "Groan" would be good for repeaters.

No rep system.

[Cthulhu]

Best way to silence a repeater is to ask them to back up, heck, even elaborate what they say.


Anyway, a "Groan" would be good for repeaters.

No rep system.

That never seems to work, they just play a different broken, but equally worthless record. And they invariably seem to have an endless supply of them.

[fyrenza]

When PF had the negative rep button, @The Xl (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=865) and I spent one night neg repping this guy...I forget now why but it was hilarious because he took it so personal.

I'd actually take Jillian off of Ignore if ^THAT^ option was available! http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee57/Fyrenza/Forum%20Stuff/rofl-smilie_zpsbe9cabeb.gif (http://s235.photobucket.com/user/Fyrenza/media/Forum%20Stuff/rofl-smilie_zpsbe9cabeb.gif.html)

[fyrenza]

Best way to silence a repeater is to ask them to back up, heck, even elaborate what they say.


Anyway, a "Groan" would be good for repeaters.

No rep system.

I totally disagree ~

there are members here that post valid, timely and controversial topics that are Super Stars,

who more than deserve to be recognized for their efforts,

whatever they are.

ummm ... well, except trolling, but Of COURSE!

Some of y'all have Up-To-The-MINUTE news topics to share;
some are masters of their chosen professions;
some are just downright hilarious,

but those BRIGHT LIGHTS should be recognized, by all,

and "rep" is a way for us to thank each other, for all that any of us does.

[Green Arrow]

I don't see the rep system as a stroking of the ego. I see it as a way to show your agreement. The "thanks" button is there for agreement, and the "rep" button is there to show a REAL appreciation for the post. It's a good way to show someone that their posts are appreciated, even if they may not always get a response. I certainly prefer that to a thread full of superfluous "I agree" posts.

[Chris]

I totally disagree ~

there are members here that post valid, timely and controversial topics that are Super Stars,

who more than deserve to be recognized for their efforts,

whatever they are.

ummm ... well, except trolling, but Of COURSE!

Some of y'all have Up-To-The-MINUTE news topics to share;
some are masters of their chosen professions;
some are just downright hilarious,

but those BRIGHT LIGHTS should be recognized, by all,

and "rep" is a way for us to thank each other, for all that any of us does.



Probably the best recognition of a posted contribution, is discussion, responses in agreement or disagreement.

Rep systems are abused.

[Chris]

I don't see the rep system as a stroking of the ego. I see it as a way to show your agreement. The "thanks" button is there for agreement, and the "rep" button is there to show a REAL appreciation for the post. It's a good way to show someone that their posts are appreciated, even if they may not always get a response. I certainly prefer that to a thread full of superfluous "I agree" posts.

We've seen far too much abuse. Say you and I decide we don't like peter, so we start neg repping him to death. His rep will drop to a negative but no one will know why, those who like him would scratch their heads, how'd that happen. The opposite is just as easy, say you and I decide because we like Alyosha we're going to pos rep her every post. Her rep will rise above other but no one will know why.

To be clear, I'm not even hinting you would do that, but there are those here who see forums as a self-aggrandizing and other-degrading game and would do so.

[KC]

I don't see the rep system as a stroking of the ego. I see it as a way to show your agreement. The "thanks" button is there for agreement, and the "rep" button is there to show a REAL appreciation for the post. It's a good way to show someone that their posts are appreciated, even if they may not always get a response. I certainly prefer that to a thread full of superfluous "I agree" posts.

I agree.

[Green Arrow]

We've seen far too much abuse. Say you and I decide we don't like peter, so we start neg repping him to death. His rep will drop to a negative but no one will know why, those who like him would scratch their heads, how'd that happen. The opposite is just as easy, say you and I decide because we like Alyosha we're going to pos rep her every post. Her rep will rise above other but no one will know why.

To be clear, I'm not even hinting you would do that, but there are those here who see forums as a self-aggrandizing and other-degrading game and would do so.

Perhaps.

[Codename Section]

I like the rep system better than "Thanks" because then I get to tell them why I liked their post. Thanks don't let me do that.

[Chris]

I like the rep system better than "Thanks" because then I get to tell them why I liked their post. Thanks don't let me do that.

Reps seem limited to twitter-like messages. Just post and explain your thanks.


Matters little, no one will agree, things rarely change.

[Captain Obvious]

Can we get rid of that rep limitation thingy - or increase it (substantially)?

What's the purpose of limiting rep? I don't get it.

[Chris]

Get rid of it, it serves no purpose.

[Chris]

Oh, yea, and add a "Groan" next to "Thanks"!!! That would be fun.

[Captain Obvious]

"Thanks"

and

"Cockpunch"

[Ravi]

Can we get rid of that rep limitation thingy - or increase it (substantially)?

What's the purpose of limiting rep? I don't get it.
someone probably whined

[Captain Obvious]

someone probably whined

Now I'm whining.

:laugh:

[Chris]

someone probably whined

Why, ravi, what would they have complained about?