removal of the reputation rating

Let's face it, no one really look it when he's going trough a topic and reads most of the posts anyway


on top of that, nearly everyone here downgrades other ppl's posts not because they aren't useful but for the sole reason that they don't like them.

It's starting to become childish and tiresome so I propose we remove it.

byebye reputation...

Pieter557 wrote:byebye reputation...

tzank you.

For the record, Rowan had the lowest rating.

it's a good new, now we can remove all persons who have 99 years old

I agree with the above statement.

pfft I wanted to post on the - button next too shadow his comment, I'm too late I guess :p

jk ofc, good job !

I liked the reputation. You won't believe me if I say that my own reputation isn't important, but reputation is/was a good tool to express approval or disapproval without having to add yet another post to the already huge amount of reading.

Yes Elynea, and why don't we remove avatars? Do they have any use? And footers, I think they don't add anything to the debate either. The number of posts is also a tool that increases the spamming rate on this forum. And sharing personal details like age and location is not recommended anyway by the parental guidance standards, so let's remove that too... until we have only the pure voice of Reason left

I think icons are childish and pictures waste bandwidth. So why not remove them? Why bother with fonts and colours, they don't have any added value. Hyperlinks are too difficult, they're never used so let's remove them...

Of course, I'm just trolling and I deserve a warning now. Or will you remove that feature too

yeah why not, we can remove all persons on the forum... and after we make another one

Ward De Bever wrote:Of course, I'm just trolling and I deserve a warning now. Or will you remove that feature too

f***, I hope innos sees this.

shadowukcs wrote:Let's face it, no one really look it when he's going trough a topic and reads most of the posts anyway


on top of that, nearly everyone here downgrades other ppl's posts not because they aren't useful but for the sole reason that they don't like them.

It's starting to become childish and tiresome so I propose we remove it.

Strange you asked this when you had one of the lowest reputation on the forum. Just a coincidence?

In the congress it's funny, the standard is the best o/

in other parties i don't think it's important

shadowukcs wrote:

Ward De Bever wrote:Of course, I'm just trolling and I deserve a warning now. Or will you remove that feature too

f***, I hope innos sees this.

Suddenly you became a supporter of Innos? You wanted to remove him only yesterday.

Olv007 wrote:

shadowukcs wrote:Let's face it, no one really look it when he's going trough a topic and reads most of the posts anyway


on top of that, nearly everyone here downgrades other ppl's posts not because they aren't useful but for the sole reason that they don't like them.

It's starting to become childish and tiresome so I propose we remove it.

Strange you asked this when you had one of the lowest reputation on the forum. Just a coincidence?

not really. Everyone on IRC can confirm that I've been against this for ages.

Near the end I even stared rallying ppl to massively downvote posts from ppl whom I know that care for their rep. For the lulz.

Ward De Bever wrote:

shadowukcs wrote:

Ward De Bever wrote:Of course, I'm just trolling and I deserve a warning now. Or will you remove that feature too

f***, I hope innos sees this.

Suddenly you became a supporter of Innos? You wanted to remove him only yesterday.

you might wanna check a mechanic




























Your sarcasm meter seems to be broken, brah

Yes I can confirm Shadow was against it since the start and furthermore I agree that it is childish some like to downgrade everyone for no reason other then not sharing the same opinion and that doesn't make someone being bad.

Xgentis Lempereur wrote:I agree that it is childish some like to downgrade everyone for no reason

Tell that to S&P :p.

Jofroi wrote:

Xgentis Lempereur wrote:I agree that it is childish some like to downgrade everyone for no reason

Tell that to S&P :p.

tyrololol

Jofroi wrote:

Xgentis Lempereur wrote:I agree that it is childish some like to downgrade everyone for no reason

Tell that to S&P :p.

I wanted to vote it up, but it disappeared ...

That tool was an aid to reasoning at short notice...
Among the few arguments against, the first was that "no one really look it" - not true, because i guess everybody looks at it.
Both posters who used arguments against, use the word "childish" at the center. One associates this with "tiresome", the other uses it as a full argument. As if "being like a child" was a tiresome negative adjective.
Voting is the essence of democracy. I don't see why we should remove voting. We should remove the anonymity of voting, and add more complexity to it.

For instance, the ability to filter out votes from certain posters so that indeed one spammer cannot smear red patches everywhere on your screen or you see only your friends' opinions. For instance, there was already a limit of a certain number of votes per day that limited spamming. For instance, if a person consistently spams and spews aggressive, destructive, hurtful, irritating remarks that create a negative atmosphere all over, some red is not bad as it generally denotes spam, off-topic, offending content. You'd read over it faster.

On the other hand, much more important is the ability to give out positive, supportive quick votes. If a post is not liked by someone, and three others jump in to rate the post up: this is a small but helpful bit of info for future readers.

Another progress would be, as with in-game comments and shouts, to make votes named or non-anonymous. Then we could filter out for ourself who liked what. Like green thumbs up, green thumbs down for your friends + or - votes, and red thumbs up, red thumbs down for your foes' opinions.

I would rather have more info/complexity for a better game.

Ward De Bever wrote:That tool was an aid to reasoning at short notice...
Among the few arguments against, the first was that "no one really look it" - not true, because i guess everybody looks at it.
Both posters who used arguments against, use the word "childish" at the center. One associates this with "tiresome", the other uses it as a full argument. As if "being like a child" was a tiresome negative adjective.
Voting is the essence of democracy. I don't see why we should remove voting. We should remove the anonymity of voting, and add more complexity to it.

For instance, the ability to filter out votes from certain posters so that indeed one spammer cannot smear red patches everywhere on your screen or you see only your friends' opinions. For instance, there was already a limit of a certain number of votes per day that limited spamming. For instance, if a person consistently spams and spews aggressive, destructive, hurtful, irritating remarks that create a negative atmosphere all over, some red is not bad as it generally denotes spam, off-topic, offending content. You'd read over it faster.

On the other hand, much more important is the ability to give out positive, supportive quick votes. If a post is not liked by someone, and three others jump in to rate the post up: this is a small but helpful bit of info for future readers.

Another progress would be, as with in-game comments and shouts, to make votes named or non-anonymous. Then we could filter out for ourself who liked what. Like green thumbs up, green thumbs down for your friends + or - votes, and red thumbs up, red thumbs down for your foes' opinions.

I would rather have more info/complexity for a better game.

Can't do named votes because of forumotion limits. I can't remove the downvotes either, just put them to +1 instead of -1 ( might give a nice effect ;p )

So Pieter, forumotion is a bit like erep itself ...

There will be always less and less features because otherwise it would crash

just kidding of course - thanks again for your excellent admin work!

nah, there's more and more features. I just can't do EVERYTHING I would like to

And transferring the forum somewhere else, well... too much work

The forum is OK. More than OK. If you need a manual labourer for your admin tasks, I can always help (with the hands, not the head I guess) - and rest assured for the ULA Forum: I will really really really try not to break anything

Pieter557 wrote:And transferring the forum somewhere else, well... too much work

Last time I checked it was impossible (forumotion refused to give you a copy of the forum data unless your transferring it to another forumotion site). If I knew a way, I would've done it months ago, and would be willing to do it now if you knew how.

On a slightly unrelated note, did you guys ever actually vote to remove my admin status? Because I never technically resigned...

Medrolke 2 wrote:

Pieter557 wrote:And transferring the forum somewhere else, well... too much work

Last time I checked it was impossible (forumotion refused to give you a copy of the forum data unless your transferring it to another forumotion site). If I knew a way, I would've done it months ago, and would be willing to do it now if you knew how.

On a slightly unrelated note, did you guys ever actually vote to remove my admin status? Because I never technically resigned...

We did so last week. after a long and hard debate.

wow. I looked through the voting area. how the hell could I miss "Removal of Medroke as Moderator - ACCEPTED"?

There is a loophole there btw but I don't want to be an dick and try to exploit it since we've already got too many directors and it probably wouldn't work anyway.

Yes. Welcome back. I suppose that, legally speaking, the directors rank 1 can reintegrate you anytime based on your merit I the only criticism was lack of activity over some period in the recent past

no, we have plenty of admins/mods atm. Too many even



Admin status used to for watching over the forum, managing it. Now it's more a status symbol for dickwaving purposes

Yes, thank you shadow. I forgot to mention that Congress can remove anytime anyway - wonder what would happen if Congress voted to remove all admins at the same time

And: dickwaving is forbidden by forumotion law - shad may only brag about his dick but he has to leave doubt about "the truth behind it all"

Ward De Bever wrote:I suppose that, legally speaking, the directors rank 1 can reintegrate you anytime based on your merit

Technically, I can request my status back at any time (I never actually resigned and you removed my right to be a mod not an admin) so I only really need to convince one single admin to add me again. However, as I said, we really don't need another admin at the moment, I doubt an admin would be willing to add me anyway and although I love finding loopholes, I hate using them.

Also, I feel the need to point out that I did say before I left that the admins could feel free to remove my forum rights at any time, so the whole debate was kinda pointless (although I did apreciate the amount of abstains ).

As far as i remember, no-one questioned the quality of Medrolke's work
Legally speaking, we don't have too many directors: the Constitution quota of 6 allows the current 5-strong admin (rank 1 directors) team to accept one new colleague upon simple notice. Also, almost all people were sad that Medrolke left. He announced he would be in South-America and return after summer. Now summer is not over yet and he is back. I say: "Welcome back and pick up your business where you left it, if that is what you want." If a citizen has fun doing this s*** unpaid job, then we should stimulate it with all we can. The admin job is too important to be potentially understaffed.

let's not start the admin debate again Ward. We removed him, not because we don't like him or don't appreciate what he did, we removed him because there's 1 admin for every active members.

Ward De Bever wrote:As far as i remember, no-one questioned the quality of Medrolke's work
Legally speaking, we don't have too many directors: the Constitution quota of 6 allows the current 5-strong admin (rank 1 directors) team to accept one new colleague upon simple notice. Also, almost all people were sad that Medrolke left. He announced he would be in South-America and return after summer. Now summer is not over yet and he is back. I say: "Welcome back and pick up your business where you left it, if that is what you want." If a citizen has fun doing this s*** unpaid job, then we should stimulate it with all we can. The admin job is too important to be potentially understaffed.

Well, I said I'd only be away for a month (at least I did to mittekemuis, I honestly have not idea what I said to everyone else) so it can't be that surprising that a month later, I'm here.

I think we've established that I probably could get my admin job back if I really wanted to but 3 things:

1. It's the summer holidays. The main reason I'm spending so much time on here at the moment is because I'm too tired/ill to go anywhere. Hopefully once I'm caught up on sleep and off my medication (which I forgot to take today actually) my activity should go down slightly until school starts again.

2. I kinda want to hit the ground running with school this year so I don't really want to commit to anything 'till I'm settled in.

3. I consider what I did before to be a past life, and I want to try something new. I enjoyed being an admin, and unlike the military I probably will return to it at some point, but for now I want to see what else interests me.

Other than that there's the simple fact that with people complaining about there being 5 admins, I doubt they'd appreciate a 6th.

Edit for shad's post:

shadowukcs wrote:let's not start the admin debate again Ward. We removed him, not because we don't like him or don't appreciate what he did, we removed him because there's 1 admin for every active members.

This isn't really a debate about my removal. Heck, as much as I appreciate anyone who abstained/voted no, I would've supported my removal if I was around. We're just discussing it (the point of forums) not trying to start up the debate again.

I still don't see why some complain when we could gain or keep a good admin - maybe they don't know that, IRL, good admins a rare and expensive 'commodity'

*that should have been "there's 1 admin for every 5 active members. " (numlock wasn't on when I typed this)

I see it like when people used to complain about the excessive amount of officers in the US mil.

1. Admins are free. Adding an extra admin doesn't harm the rest of us in any way, so if people want to do it and are qualified, why not let them?

2. Although this wasn't used in the US mil reference, if an admin is inactive, he quite literally can't do any damage. It makes no difference to anything. Pieter, for instance, knew that I was leaving the forums for several months, but he left my mod status because since there was a chance I would come back, there was no real advantage in removing it, since no one could do anything with it.

Medrolke 2 wrote:
1. Admins are free. Adding an extra admin doesn't harm the rest of us in any way, so if people want to do it and are qualified, why not let them?

Same argument that admins use to keep inactive admins and moderators
I have no doubt in my mind that Meldrolke will be given an forum staff position again soon.
Admins are forum staff are made and kept admins/mode based on if they are friends with the admins and not based on how good of a job they will do or if they are doing a good job and are active

Pure nepotism

Fhaemita Malodorous wrote:Admins are forum staff are made and kept admins/mode based on if they are friends with the admins and not based on how good of a job they will do or if they are doing a good job and are active

That doesn't really make sense as an argument.

It is the admins' job when deciding to accept or reject a person's application to judge whether they are trustworthy enough and whether they are likely to cause any problems.

Not only will the system work better if all the forum staff are on good terms, but you can only reasonably judge someone's trustworthiness if you know them well, meaning people who are friends with the admins already are probably more likely to get in.

You can say the same thing about a CP choosing their cabinet. Your hardly likely to appoint someone you really don't get on with are you?

shadowukcs wrote:

Pieter557 wrote:byebye reputation...

tzank you.

For the record, Rowan had the lowest rating.

Hm.... I wonder who did that, and you were second last so you can't talk.