Neg Reps

[Mr Dr Professor Spaz]

What more need I say, aside from to ignore the sign there.

[Brinolovania]

I support this as a member of the TCG section.

[Professional Duelist]

If this feature isn't put back on, you need to take the rep/like system off.

[Wahrheit]

Negative reputation was removed as part of the IPB 3.2 update and has nothing to do with the decisions of the board's staff. There is no way to turn it back on, the "like" system is meant to be used akin to stuff like digg, reddit etc but only with upvoting.

[Ieyasu Tokugawa]

Negative reputation was removed as part of the IPB 3.2 update and has nothing to do with the decisions of the board's staff. There is no way to turn it back on, the "like" system is meant to be used akin to stuff like digg, reddit etc but only with upvoting.

So basically what you're saying is there is no longer any neg function to turn on again?

[Guest PikaPerson01]

If idiots in TCG are bugging you or w/e, just mark their messages.

[Umbra]

@the people saying "I can't tell noobs they're bad without negs": have you actually tried, you know, telling them that? Instead of just clicking a button, you get off your lazy behinds and actually do something that people might just remember you for.

[Mugendramon]

@the people saying "I can't tell noobs they're bad without negs": have you actually tried, you know, telling them that? Instead of just clicking a button, you get off your lazy behinds and actually do something that people might just remember you for.

 

Because most of said noobs will counter your argument with the typical "what are you talking about, I'm right, this is the best card in the game and you're wrong".

 

Then again, that doesn't mean negs will make them change, but "getting off our lazy behinds" is reserved for when we can do something about it.

[Toffee.]

 

 

Because most of said noobs will counter your argument with the typical "what are you talking about, I'm right, this is the best card in the game and you're wrong".

 

Then again, that doesn't mean negs will make them change, but "getting off our lazy behinds" is reserved for when we can do something about it.

That, and because its better not to start a flame war over a 'silly' argument.

[Ieyasu Tokugawa]

That, and because its better not to start a flame war over a 'silly' argument.

YET IT HAPPENS ANYWAY D=

[Mugendramon]

YET IT HAPPENS ANYWAY D=

 

And both Dr McNinja and I have a word or two for Shard when he comes back.

[byak]

Neg reps should exist because they're fun

[evilhorus]

I actually support this now.

 

I miss them.

 

Negging the random idiot here and there would be fun.

 

People from 'Your Deck' should know what I'm talking about.

[Yankee]

Neg repping people does nothing. It doesn't change their behavior. Stop fooling yourselves.

[Guest Ravenous Black]

Neg repping people does nothing. It doesn't change their behavior. Stop fooling yourselves.

Shard disagrees

[Yankee]

Yay for a single example.

 

I don't have to explain how little your argument affects the situation. Some people truly don't want to be negged. However, this is an online forum - a children's forum at that. A neg rep is meaningless.

[Guest Ravenous Black]

The negs have caused Shard and others to change. I can name him off the top of my head because he's obvious.

 

And don't use the "It's just a forum" argument. I expect that from a 5 year old, such as "It's just a game, it doesn't matter who wins or loses", but the very point of the game is to have fun and WIN. If there was no drive to win, there'd be no playing once a id gets past, say, 7? So, remind me, why did you accept the mod position?

 

Granted, it IS just a forum, but if you care THAT little, why are you a mod? Hell, why are there rules at all?

 

And, again, you can't just EXPLAIN stupidity to people 9/10, even if you try, and you can't report a person for said stupidity.

[Yankee]

You argument is completely invalid.

Comparing my thoughts on internet reputation points to reasons for being a mod is simply stupid. I didn't get to be a super mod by getting reps. If you haven't noticed, good 'ol YCMaker doesn't have a large amount of reps compared to the other mods. Also, every mod has received a negate rep at some point.

 

You're ignoring my original argument. Sure, some people do change. However, there is always an exception to the rule. The rule here being that negative reputation points do not change a person. Trolls, idiots, and uncaring people make up the majority of the forum-using internet goers.

 

Do you know how childish it is to care about a individual rating point on a child's forum is? To me, the only use for them is to warn OTHER people about the user. More often than not, the person who has the negative reputation will simply not care. Negative reps are there to show who is consistently being stupid. However, based on what I'm seeing on this forum, information of that type is not required, as everybody can point out the good members from the bad very easily.

 

 

Reps don't change people. Life does. If you truly care what people on the internet have to say about you, something is wrong in your life.

 

Didn't we want to get rid of reps before? Wasn't one of the reasons because they were "useless"? Including neg reps? It's funny how YCM forgets its own past so quickly, and so easily.

[Guest Ravenous Black]

You argument is completely invalid.

The general argument of someone who knows they have nothing airtight, non?

 

Comparing my thoughts on internet reputation points to reasons for being a mod is simply stupid. I didn't get to be a super mod by getting reps. If you haven't noticed, good 'ol YCMaker doesn't have a large amount of reps compared to the other mods. Also, every mod has received a negate rep at some point.

You completely misunderstand. I'm not saying reps count towards being mod. I'm saying your apathy towards the site means, plz resign, kthx

 

 

You're ignoring my original argument. Sure, some people do change. However, there is always an exception to the rule. The rule here being that negative reputation points do not change a person. Trolls, idiots, and uncaring people make up the majority of the forum-using internet goers.

But, there are those who DO change. The troll may not care, so don't neg them. Neg the people who will actually listen. So, we shouldn't have it because it only helps the minority?

 

 

Do you know how childish it is to care about a individual rating point on a child's forum is? To me, the only use for them is to warn OTHER people about the user. More often than not, the person who has the negative reputation will simply not care. Negative reps are there to show who is consistently being stupid. However, based on what I'm seeing on this forum, information of that type is not required, as everybody can point out the good members from the bad very easily.

Again, there are people like Shard who DO care. And, you'd be surprised. The "Good members" are mostly trolls themselves, so, wat do?

 

Reps don't change people. Life does. If you truly care what people on the internet have to say about you, something is wrong in your life. Didn't we want to get rid of reps before? Wasn't one of the reasons because they were "useless"? Including neg reps? It's funny how YCM forgets its own past so quickly, and so easily.

I never wanted to be rid of reps, at all. See, you people who keep saying "Didn't we want them gone?" Are the ones who DID want them gone, not those who didn't. Most of us didn't say anything while they were around, due to being around. So, we aren't the ones who wanted them gone.

[Yankee]

You completely misunderstand. I'm not saying reps count towards being mod. I'm saying your apathy towards the site means, plz resign, kthx

 

You don't have to be overly enthusiastic about a place to mod it. I find it strange that you're saying to resign, honestly.

 

But, there are those who DO change. The troll may not care, so don't neg them. Neg the people who will actually listen. So, we shouldn't have it because it only helps the minority?

 

Majorities dictate the direction a society goes. Notice the majority chooses the president?

Also, yes, there are those that DO change. However, why would it require a neg rep? What is so special about a neg rep, and a few PM's from members saying the exact same thing? If a person is willing to change, it has nothing to do with the reputation point itself.

 

Again, there are people like Shard who DO care. And, you'd be surprised. The "Good members" are mostly trolls themselves, so, wat do?

 

You're saying this as if I have no knowledge of what the members here a like.

 

I never wanted to be rid of reps, at all. See, you people who keep saying "Didn't we want them gone?" Are the ones who DID want them gone, not those who didn't. Most of us didn't say anything while they were around, due to being around. So, we aren't the ones who wanted them gone.

 

Of course. There were those that opposed the original idea of getting rid of reps. However, the majority decided. As with any vote, it's very unlikely that you will get something agreed upon by all. The best you can do is provide logic to them, and hope they understand.

Logically, reputation points (positive or negative) do nothing to change a person. Again, there ARE exceptions to this. However, more people will not care than those who will. Moreover, as I said earlier, if they change, it's not because of the negative rep. It's because they were the kind of person that is willing to change. It never had to be a rep. It could simply have been a PM. A comment. A warning from a moderator. What makes a rep different? The fact that it's able to be seen by all? If that's the case, it brings me back to another point I made. As most members won't care, as you yourself have acknowledged (agreeing that those who change are the minority), the neg reps are only for other members to look at as a reference.

A good member might turn out to be a troll, yes. However, that is only because your definition of what a good member is is wrong. For a good member to be a troll, he would have to be a bad member. He may be popular and liked, but that does not mean he is good.

 

[Guest Mr. Striker]

Both of you shut up. Yankee, that is not how you return to YCM. Arguing the first day back isn't good.

[Yankee]

Did I ever really leave? ;)

[Guest Ravenous Black]

Thank you for making it hard to quote, o' benevolent one.

 

You don't have to be overly enthusiastic about a place to mod it. I find it strange that you're saying to resign, honestly.

 

I find your apathy strange. If you don't care, give it up.

 

Majorities dictate the direction a society goes. Notice the majority chooses the president?

Also, yes, there are those that DO change. However, why would it require a neg rep? What is so special about a neg rep, and a few PM's from members saying the exact same thing? If a person is willing to change, it has nothing to do with the reputation point itself.

 

But, it does. People told Shard (And others) to change. He did not. Got negged, and he did. And this was in the era of reps without explanations. We need them to be like a comment on a wall, but as a neg, like in the old forum, but I don't see that happening.

 

You're saying this as if I have no knowledge of what the members here a like.

 

You're inactive as hell, and you obviously don't or you wouldn't say that. The trolls are considered some of the best members, not that I agree.

 

Of course. There were those that opposed the original idea of getting rid of reps. However, the majority decided. As with any vote, it's very unlikely that you will get something agreed upon by all. The best you can do is provide logic to them, and hope they understand.

 

The majority didn't decide. YCMaker upgraded to a kind of server without negs, for some reason, it seems. Only people like MBX who refuse to listen to reason or people who, like you, are apathatic didn't want negs.

 

Logically, reputation points (positive or negative) do nothing to change a person. Again, there ARE exceptions to this. However, more people will not care than those who will. Moreover, as I said earlier, if they change, it's not because of the negative rep. It's because they were the kind of person that is willing to change. It never had to be a rep. It could simply have been a PM. A comment. A warning from a moderator. What makes a rep different? The fact that it's able to be seen by all? If that's the case, it brings me back to another point I made. As most members won't care, as you yourself have acknowledged (agreeing that those who change are the minority), the neg reps are only for other members to look at as a reference.

 

Again, Shard changed because he was sick of being negged. He was told how to fix it, and he ignored it. He just got tired of being negged, and got up. See, you keep saying that's the exception, and it's childish... But many on this forum are 11-14-ish. They're, le gasp, children.

 

A good member might turn out to be a troll, yes. However, that is only because your definition of what a good member is is wrong. For a good member to be a troll, he would have to be a bad member. He may be popular and liked, but that does not mean he is good.

 

My definition isn't that. In fact, I think most "good members" are trolls, not good members. But, people who are trolls can even become mods for "Being a good member". And, if good member is subjective, negs can come back, oui? Shows who people think is good, and who they think is bad. They need to come back, if only as a reference.

 

Alas, it seems this is futile, according to Warheim, but don't delude yourself into that sense of arrogance you give off.

 

@Striker: ... =/

 

At least we're not really jabroniING at each other. It's more a debate.

[Guest Mr. Striker]

Did I ever really leave? ;)

 

Yes, you did. There hasn't been a trace of you in a while. Now, can things go civilly and not involve forceful resignation?

 

EDIT: Black ninjas me again.

[Sweetie Belle]

However, the majority decided.

 

That stood out to me. YCMaker decided to update YCM. Not the members. Not the majority. The update to the newer version of IPB doesn't include neg reps. An Warenheit said.

So no matter how much you wish for neg reps to come back, chances are, they aren't.

 

However, you can always use the report button just to try to make a point. =3