Aethelwulf Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 I mean, let's think about it for a second. We have people here who have dedicated their time to help people in their times of trouble. People like... pmb who is very capable of talking about scientfic ''things'' and helping people. No doubt he has dedicated a lot of time to answer people but you take one look on his personal profile and you see he has a negative reputation. Any outsider would look at that and think he is... unreliable, contrary to him being a physicist. Not that it bothers me being ''liked'' here, but it has come to my attention posts I have made could be easily ignored because of this system as well, since recently I have went down quite a few reputation points since me making a thread on the possibilities of a God. Again, I don't care about reputation points, I do care however if this is going to have a substantial impact on people actually listening to what I have to say. Favoritism is a horrible way to induce the reliability of a person. Why should a reputation precede you on the quality of whether someone agree's with you? It's a fact of life that you will always experience someone who does not agree with what you say, whether partially or in the whole. But this shouldn't weigh up whether you are capable of even talking about subjects. This reputation system here is disheartening for anyone. It's not only childish, perhaps even morally wrong, but it is systematically flawed as it tries to the summarize the character of an individual.
CaptainPanic Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 Essentially, because this is an open forum where anyone can become a member, this system is all we have. We (staff) cannot check the credentials of people, which is the normal way to check the scientific reliability of someone. If you get a new job, your boss and the human resources department will want to see your diploma, and possibly a reference letter from a former employer. We cannot do such a check, because members are anonymous on our forum. Anyone can claim to be a scientist, and unfortunately, we get plenty of people who claim to be one, but who are essentially a crackpot. So, we allow all members to like/dislike people's posts. I don't know why pmb has a negative reputation. I do know that many valued members have a positive reputation, and this is because they have often been helpful. And btw, reputation should have absolutely nothing to do with being right or wrong. Unfortunately, we do get members who come to this forum with the only purpose of "being right". They do not wish to learn anything, and just preach their own ideas. And they might give out reputation in a similar fashion. We have limited the amount of negative reputation that people can give per day to keep this a positive place. Personally, I think that the reputation system is a good system. It has its flaws like every system, but its better to have it than not to have it. 1
hypervalent_iodine Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 You may want to have a read of this: http://www.sciencefo...on-versus-time/ It's short, but offers some explanation as to how members choose to use the reputation system. Simply, it encourages people think a bit more before they post. The main use of the positive rep points that I've seen is to congratulate something that is well thought out and well presented. I myself give pos reps to such posts even if I don't necessarily agree with them. Within a thread, rep points can help direct members (particularly new members and those who can't tell the difference) to posts that should be paid attention to and which ones to maybe ignore. To my mind, the points given to individual posts are more often what people will pay attention to as opposed to the total number of points an individual has received. I really wouldn't worry about one thread that went badly. Most often, neg reps are given to posts that are insulting, posts that are an obvious attempt to troll and ignite a flame war or posts that come across as deliberately ignorant (the latter kind of falls under the second category). It is very, very rare that a member would use the reputation system to punish someone simply because they don't like them. This would indeed be quite difficult to accomplish, as regular members are restricted to 1 neg rep per day. On the flip side, what we do sometimes encounter are members creating sock puppet accounts to increase their reputation. Remember too that mod staff and admin staff can see who gives out what. If something seems off, we can check it and reverse it. In the case of spam sock puppet accounts, the great and almighty Cap'n has this special move with instant cool-down best described as, 'BAM, -1000 rep points.' I've seen it happen only once and it was glorious. 1
Aethelwulf Posted June 27, 2012 Author Posted June 27, 2012 You may want to have a read of this: http://www.sciencefo...on-versus-time/ It's short, but offers some explanation as to how members choose to use the reputation system. Simply, it encourages people think a bit more before they post. The main use of the positive rep points that I've seen is to congratulate something that is well thought out and well presented. I myself give pos reps to such posts even if I don't necessarily agree with them. Within a thread, rep points can help direct members (particularly new members and those who can't tell the difference) to posts that should be paid attention to and which ones to maybe ignore. To my mind, the points given to individual posts are more often what people will pay attention to as opposed to the total number of points an individual has received. I really wouldn't worry about one thread that went badly. Most often, neg reps are given to posts that are insulting, posts that are an obvious attempt to troll and ignite a flame war or posts that come across as deliberately ignorant (the latter kind of falls under the second category). It is very, very rare that a member would use the reputation system to punish someone simply because they don't like them. This would indeed be quite difficult to accomplish, as regular members are restricted to 1 neg rep per day. On the flip side, what we do sometimes encounter are members creating sock puppet accounts to increase their reputation. Remember too that mod staff and admin staff can see who gives out what. If something seems off, we can check it and reverse it. In the case of spam sock puppet accounts, the great and almighty Cap'n has this special move with instant cool-down best described as, 'BAM, -1000 rep points.' I've seen it happen only once and it was glorious. Then it clearly is being abused. Not once have I sat down and created a thread frivolously, or went out my way to deceive in a post or even... in my own eyes, created a thread and answered anything with stupid thoughts or questions. What does seem clear, is that this ''reputation'' is a kind of slander without words on a person and will be abused by people who generally don't like you. I have never been really insulting either... if anything I have been insulted. I certainly don't think it is rare that someone would distribute negative reputation points to punish someone. My most recent thread is a prime example, of posts being disliked because ''it is not within their mentality or standards''. And I don't think for one moment the several odd negative reputation points was from many people. I think one person has just found each and every post and zapped them regardless.
hypervalent_iodine Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 Then it clearly is being abused. Not once have I sat down and created a thread frivolously, or went out my way to deceive in a post or even... in my own eyes, created a thread and answered anything with stupid thoughts or questions. What does seem clear, is that this ''reputation'' is a kind of slander without words on a person and will be abused by people who generally don't like you. This is really not much more than anecdotal. Maybe you do put time into your posts regardless of any reputation based repercussions. And good for you if that's true (I have no reason to doubt you). You are not everyone else, however and just because you do happen to put thought into what you write does not mean that the system is being abused. I am confused as to how you come to that conclusion, unless you meant for your first sentence to refer to your last one in that paragraph (in which case, see below). I have never been really insulting either... if anything I have been insulted. I certainly don't think it is rare that someone would distribute negative reputation points to punish someone. My most recent thread is a prime example, of posts being disliked because ''it is not within their mentality or standards''. You misread what I wrote. I said that it is rare for someone to go around and punish another member by neg reping their posts because they don't like them as opposed to what they've actually said in the post(s). I then went on to say that it would be quite hard for a member to do that anyway, since you are incredibly restricted in the number of neg rep points you can dish out. The only way you could do that is with sock puppets, but then that would be incredibly obvious and very easily fixed. You also have to consider the fact that the other people reading the posts are capable of individual thought themselves. If they don't agree with how something has been repped, it's likely that they'll counter it. This post is a classic example of that. It has in total, 19 neg reps and 17 pos reps. Most of the neg rep points are by random new members out for a casual Sunday troll (and are likely from only a coupe of members in total; I didn't check the IP's), whereas almost all of the pos reps are by members who have been here a while and made in excess of 100 posts each. And I don't think for one moment the several odd negative reputation points was from many people. I think one person has just found each and every post and zapped them regardless. Are you talking about your rep points or pmb's? Because I can tell you that the 6 neg rep points you received in the thread you're referring to were given out by 5 different people. 3
swansont Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 There is a pretty strong correlation with negative reputation and posters who run afoul of the rules. 2
hypervalent_iodine Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 What posts were tagged? Your overall reputation is zero. http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/67333-could-there-be-a-god/page__st__20
swansont Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 I have never been really insulting either... if anything I have been insulted. I certainly don't think it is rare that someone would distribute negative reputation points to punish someone. My most recent thread is a prime example, of posts being disliked because ''it is not within their mentality or standards''. Really? If you knew an INCH of science, you wouldn't ask isn't a bit insulting? Something you will learn in science friend isn't a tad condescending? 1
Aethelwulf Posted June 27, 2012 Author Posted June 27, 2012 (edited) Really? If you knew an INCH of science, you wouldn't ask isn't a bit insulting? Something you will learn in science friend isn't a tad condescending? When did I say ''an inch'' of science. If i did, I apologize upfront now, but I don't find this second case insulting. Ecoli was extremely condescending in the previous and following posts. Stating things like ''your physics knowledge seems a bit muddled,'' yet hyprocritical since I hadn't seen him contributing here in the physics subforum once since my arrival. http://www.sciencefo...od/page__st__20 I really don't see how my posts deserved to be harshly criticized in such a way. As I said, being liked doesn't bother me... you could hate me and it wouldn't phase me. But knowing that your reputation can impact how people view your posts is actually frustrating. Edited June 27, 2012 by Aethelwulf
swansont Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 When did I say ''an inch'' of science. If i did, I apologize upfront now, but I don't find this second case insulting. Ecoli was extremely condescending in the previous and following posts. Stating things like ''your physics knowledge seems a bit muddled,'' yet hyprocritical since I hadn't seen him contributing here in the physics subforum once since my arrival. If you knew an INCH of science, you wouldn't ask. Clicking on the little swooping arrow takes you to the post. These remarks did not involve ecoli.
Sergeant Bilko Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 Seems to me the OP has come to the forums just to engage in a good argument such as the link below http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-572077907195969915
hypervalent_iodine Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 Then don't make posts that garner negative responses amongst members. Moreover, instead of assuming it's to do with how much people like you (and ignoring the posts people have made here in the process), maybe have a look at the content of the posts that were neg repped and work from there. I have to ask, is thread really about the rep system as a whole, or is it specifically about your discontent at the rep points you and/or pmb have been given? Seems to me it's more of the latter.
Aethelwulf Posted June 27, 2012 Author Posted June 27, 2012 Seems to me the OP has come to the forums just to engage in a good argument such as the link below http://video.google....077907195969915 Have you even took the time to see the quality of my posts? A lot of them take a great deal of time as well due to latexing. Clicking on the little swooping arrow takes you to the post. These remarks did not involve ecoli. Well plenty of people where being condescending in that thread. You may need to be specific. Then don't make posts that garner negative responses amongst members. Moreover, instead of assuming it's to do with how much people like you (and ignoring the posts people have made here in the process), maybe have a look at the content of the posts that were neg repped and work from there. I have to ask, is thread really about the rep system as a whole, or is it specifically about your discontent at the rep points you and/or pmb have been given? Seems to me it's more of the latter. The reputation system in general. I wouldn't care at all if I didn't think it would influence the veiws of others. ---Sorry swansont, didn't realize about the post.
Sergeant Bilko Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 Yes Aethelwulf I have read your posts at great length, and I am under no doubt that you are an intelligent, articulate individual who could have much to offer this forum. However if you insist upon attacking, insulting and generally taking an argumentative stance as indicated by the Monty Python sketch I posted you will alienate your peers and cause us all not to take you seriously. You seem to take offence when forum contributors ask you to back up your assertions with evidence or further information which is both condescending of you and frankly makes you guilty of exactly what you are accusing others of. May I suggest that you try and respond without the emotion which runs through so many of your posts and stick to the facts of your Hypotheses. Maybe read and try to understand the advice you have been given by some extremely esteemed contributors and you will get a much warmer response. 4
KatzAndMice Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 perhaps certain area's of the forum shouldnt have rep points? then peoples posts will only be judged on their scientific knowledge rather than political, religious or philosophical opinions i can relate to aethelwulf in so much as i got a negative rep point for a post by almost certainly the same person i was debating with but long *AFTER* i made the post, the person didnt look at the post and decide to neg rep it by its own value, only after discussing the topic with me further, maybe due to my proving him wrong or my absolute lack of knowledge on the subject, either way it seems an outdated post got neg rep due someones distaste in me.... not that i care or would have said anything had it not been for this post but aethelwulf has made a good point of how someones distaste could affect someones reliability in a totally different field 2
hypervalent_iodine Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 i can relate to aethelwulf in so much as i got a negative rep point for a post by almost certainly the same person i was debating with but long *AFTER* i made the post, the person didnt look at the post and decide to neg rep it by its own value, only after discussing the topic with me further, maybe due to my proving him wrong or my absolute lack of knowledge on the subject, either way it seems an outdated post got neg rep due someones distaste in me.... Firstly, no it wasn't. Secondly, why assume that it was?
CaptainPanic Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/67333-could-there-be-a-god/page__st__20 I really don't see how my posts deserved to be harshly criticized in such a way. As I said, being liked doesn't bother me... you could hate me and it wouldn't phase me. But knowing that your reputation can impact how people view your posts is actually frustrating. Aha! That explains a lot. A religious topic in the speculations forum. perhaps certain area's of the forum shouldnt have rep points? then peoples posts will only be judged on their scientific knowledge rather than political, religious or philosophical opinions And it seems KatzAndMice beat me to this excellent proposal. I completely agree, but I am not sure it's technologically feasible with our software. The religious forum, and to a lesser extent also the speculations forum, is a subjective minefield, and I don't have the idea that anyone is there to actually learn. Everybody seems totally stuck in their trenches, and reputation seems a matter of opinion. Threads are often just a repetition of statements.
KatzAndMice Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 Firstly, no it wasn't. Secondly, why assume that it was? Because he was the only person i was debating the subject with, just expected who ever gave/gives a negative rep to explain why. The subject matter is irrelevant here but regardless it was only a 2 way debate at the point i got the negative rep which led me to believe thats why i got the negative rep
Aethelwulf Posted June 27, 2012 Author Posted June 27, 2012 Yes Aethelwulf I have read your posts at great length, and I am under no doubt that you are an intelligent, articulate individual who could have much to offer this forum. However if you insist upon attacking, insulting and generally taking an argumentative stance as indicated by the Monty Python sketch I posted you will alienate your peers and cause us all not to take you seriously. You seem to take offence when forum contributors ask you to back up your assertions with evidence or further information which is both condescending of you and frankly makes you guilty of exactly what you are accusing others of. May I suggest that you try and respond without the emotion which runs through so many of your posts and stick to the facts of your Hypotheses. Maybe read and try to understand the advice you have been given by some extremely esteemed contributors and you will get a much warmer response. No no, I don't take offense when asked to back up a claim. That I am happy doing. One of the most recent things which has got up my nose is saying ''I can see English is not your first language''. Why? What am I doing... am I speaking in chinese or something?
michel123456 Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 Michel has 2053 posts divided by rep 149= 13,778523489932885906040268456376 Just to keep statistics: Michel today has 2994 posts divided by rep 242= 12.3719 That means I got a point on average for each 12,4 posts (against 13,8 in the past) And also for the last 941 posts I got 93 rep. , that's almost a rep point for each 10 posts. I really doubt the increase is caused by the quality of my posts, it must be caused by time as I stated in the other thread. Essentially, because this is an open forum where anyone can become a member, this system is all we have. We (staff) cannot check the credentials of people, which is the normal way to check the scientific reliability of someone. If you get a new job, your boss and the human resources department will want to see your diploma, and possibly a reference letter from a former employer. We cannot do such a check, because members are anonymous on our forum. Anyone can claim to be a scientist, and unfortunately, we get plenty of people who claim to be one, but who are essentially a crackpot. So, we allow all members to like/dislike people's posts. I don't know why pmb has a negative reputation. I do know that many valued members have a positive reputation, and this is because they have often been helpful. And btw, reputation should have absolutely nothing to do with being right or wrong. Unfortunately, we do get members who come to this forum with the only purpose of "being right". They do not wish to learn anything, and just preach their own ideas. And they might give out reputation in a similar fashion. We have limited the amount of negative reputation that people can give per day to keep this a positive place. Personally, I think that the reputation system is a good system. It has its flaws like every system, but its better to have it than not to have it. Bolded part is terribly correct. IMHO. Now that I am thinking about, that's maybe the unconscious purpose of this post of mine...
CaptainPanic Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 Now that I am thinking about, that's maybe the unconscious purpose of this post of mine... Hehe, we all suffer from it. Scientists are especially bad sometimes. As long as it's an incident, not the general rule, it's fine. Anyway, it's something we must deal with. As much as our reputation system is not perfect, the real scientific world is possibly a lot harder, with people openly attacking their competition with the only purpose of bringing fame and glory to themselves. Our forum is only a training ground for the real world out there. 1
Moontanman Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 (edited) Since we only get one - rep per 24 hours I hesitate to give it out unless the person is really being a jackass because each time i do i find someone else who deserves it more. i do give out a lot of + rep points. if someone really tries to mount a decent argument I do give out points even to people I think are jackasses. I give + rep to people to encourage them, when you are new and can't find your footing it's nice to get + rep for an informative post. The carrot and the stick.... I think we should have 3 - rep points to give out per 24 hours but no one asks me Edited June 27, 2012 by Moontanman
studiot Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 (edited) Well I can honestly say that I have never given you a rep point of either colour. In fact I think I have only given one or two since I've been here as I too am not sure of the value of the system and view it with caution. I did however wade through your extensive presentation in this thread http://www.sciencefo...__1#entry683191 and posted a comment when no one else seemed prepared to. Your spiel seemed to me to be associating mass with charge and you introduced Larmor as an explanation. Your reply was suprising since you asked me why I had associated Larmor with mass. I gave up the thread at that point. Edited June 27, 2012 by studiot
swansont Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 One of the most recent things which has got up my nose is saying ''I can see English is not your first language''. Why? What am I doing... am I speaking in chinese or something? The thing is, nobody has said ''I can see English is not your first language'' nor ''your physics knowledge seems a bit muddled,'' two things about which you've complained. (Though, ironically, you have complained about someone not carefully reading your posts). The sentences were similar, but those are not actual quotes, and the meaning does change when you look at the actual statements. One of the realities about discussions such as the one in question is that there will be criticism. One needs to be able handle a certain amount of it and not overreact. For the record, "I'm not sure if its just 2:30AM, if english isn't your first language or if you're just naturally incomprehensible" isn't an ad hom. This comes up a lot. Maybe we should have a thread for that discussion. If you want to complain that there is some minor snark in the comment, fine. Rather than complain, though (seeing as nobody complained about your snark) perhaps you could read it as someone not understanding what you posted, and making a new effort at explaining yourself. Especially in light of the fact that this was explained in a subsequent post. In the broader view, there's a certain amount of hubris involved in immediately assuming that giving negative reputation is personal, or that it's being given by the person with whom you are having the discussion.
Aethelwulf Posted June 27, 2012 Author Posted June 27, 2012 (edited) Well I can honestly say that I have never given you a rep point of either colour. In fact I think I have only given one or two since I've been here as I too am not sure of the value of the system and view it with caution. I did however wade through your extensive presentation in this thread http://www.sciencefo...__1#entry683191 and posted a comment when no one else seemed prepared to. Your spiel seemed to me to be associating mass with charge and you introduced Larmor as an explanation. Your reply was suprising since you asked me why I had associated Larmor with mass. I gave up the thread at that point. That's because at the time I was unsure exactly what you where asking. So you don't (it seems you are saying) have the attention span to actually sit and explain yourself? Nice one. The thing is, nobody has said ''I can see English is not your first language'' nor ''your physics knowledge seems a bit muddled,'' two things about which you've complained. (Though, ironically, you have complained about someone not carefully reading your posts). The sentences were similar, but those are not actual quotes, and the meaning does change when you look at the actual statements. One of the realities about discussions such as the one in question is that there will be criticism. One needs to be able handle a certain amount of it and not overreact. For the record, "I'm not sure if its just 2:30AM, if english isn't your first language or if you're just naturally incomprehensible" isn't an ad hom. This comes up a lot. Maybe we should have a thread for that discussion. If you want to complain that there is some minor snark in the comment, fine. Rather than complain, though (seeing as nobody complained about your snark) perhaps you could read it as someone not understanding what you posted, and making a new effort at explaining yourself. Especially in light of the fact that this was explained in a subsequent post. In the broader view, there's a certain amount of hubris involved in immediately assuming that giving negative reputation is personal, or that it's being given by the person with whom you are having the discussion. Please don't get me started with this again. Ecoli was hinting that either I was incomprehensible or that English was not my native tongue. He also said I seemed to be muddled up physics wise. I am not getting into this again, read his posts. Oh, and in my case it certainly felt personal. Right down to a long list of each of my posts being negatively repped. I don't know if it was just the nature of the thread, but I know my posts where hardly the trash it was made out to be.. and being negatively repped isn't even my problem. As I have explained, this kind of system acts more as punishment and reflects on the person enough that someone first coming here will think to themselves.. ''oh, don't read his posts or listen to him.'' Its morally wrong having such a system. Edited June 27, 2012 by Aethelwulf
Recommended Posts