(04-11-2012 02:26 )mellover Wrote: [ -> ] (03-11-2012 19:28 )seth Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know if it's possible to do, but instead of getting rid of the negative reps why not instead only allow someone with over 500 posts and been on the forum for at least 3 months before they're allowed to gives out rep. This will stop most people bothering having multiple accounts and repping themselves or negatively repping someone else.
Either that or just scrap it altogether.
What makes you think it's just those under 500? Biggest flouters of rules and regulations I've seen on this forum are those who have been on the longest with the most post, the ones who have the mods ear.
I don't think it's just those under 500. But it might put off those who create multiple accounts to rep themselves, or to negatively rep others. Usually those who've been banned come back and do that type of thing.
Hard to see why this would bother anyone but the minority who were using the neg reps to hurl foul mouthed abuse around. A neutral rep is perfectly adequate for a reasonable, critical comment about another member.
As for the babes getting too many reps relative to the number of posts they have - who gives a shit. Find something to worry about that really matters.
A simple solution, in my opinion, is to refer all reps to the moderators first.
You state to them positive/neutral/negative and give your reasons. The moderators will then determine whether it's personal, nasty or whatever.
A (positive) rep in my opinion should be given for contribution to the forum only - this should be for things like consistent posting of caps, videos, posts of quality (rather than quantity) etc. Neutral/negative posts should also be given but justifiably (hence referral to a mod).
Things that really bug me about reps is that they're given too easily, rather than earned. And that too many "babes" get them purely for being on the shows and too many members get them for liking this babe, that babe.
(04-11-2012 07:32 )The Silent Majority Wrote: [ -> ]A neutral rep is perfectly adequate for a reasonable, critical comment about another member.
Agreed. It's not necessary to have both neutral and negative. One or the other is perfectly adequate.
many thanks guys for give me 71 reputation vote