Policy Change -- Sockpuppets & Reputation System

[ME]

No Jim - it's not about some shown rep.status, I was just saying: I'm about to revoke a given green-dot for the opposite reason I revoked the red one.
It is my dot to give.. I'm just sharing my reasons why I'm dot-swapping this particular dot, without trying to get into the pointed-out personal issue of this forum-member.

::: For the status: As far as I payed attention, it only changed the reputation of the other, and not mine.

But yes, perhaps I should have formulated it more carefully or accurately.

[jim_mich]

OK. Now I understand.

Being that you are currently at two green dots, if you switch your green-click of someone to a red click, then you end up reducing that member's rep. count by 10 points.

That is a hefty sword to swing.

PS. I gave you a green-click, which raised you to three green dots.

[daxwc]

ME:

::: For the status: As far as I payed attention, it only changed the reputation of the other, and not mine.

Does giving a bad rating affect my own reputation?
Yes. Giving a bad rating to another member will slightly lower your own reputation. Thus, giving someone a bad rating is not "free," so you should consider your bad ratings carefully. The more bad ratings you give, the lower your own reputation will be.

How many reputation points can a member give or take away?
The number of points a member can give or take away depends on his or her own reputation according to the following multiplier chart.
Reputation of rating member Multiplier for a good rating Multiplier for a bad rating
Revered.........................20.......15
Admired .........................15.......12
Highly regarded .............12.......9
Well respected ................10.......8
Respected ..................... 8....... 6
Appreciated .....................6....... 4
Acknowledged ..................5.......4
No reputation ..................4....... 3
Disregarded by some.........2.......0
Disregarded by many........1....... 0
Should be banned.............1....... 0
Banned......................... 0.......0
Each member starts out with 1000 reputation points. Periodically, the site admin will adjust the multipliers and the reputation category boundaries to even out the distribution of rated members among the various levels and to rectify any disparities in the calculation.

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/faq.php#44

[ME]

Uh-oh, thanks I guess...

It is quite lonely at the top, it was more comfortable with just two (I guess that's easily arranged)
I was not busy counting points... so I looked it up: such swing is now worth 14 points.

Add: ah-ha, so I can just fix that 'loneliness' myself by sending out red-dots: I'll think about it.

[daxwc]

Each member starts out with 1000 reputation points. Periodically, the site admin will adjust the multipliers and the reputation category boundaries to even out the distribution of rated members among the various levels and to rectify any disparities in the calculation.

I guess I lied with the Buddha quote 8P

I imagine we are a very long way from there 8))))

[jim_mich]

Suppose a member (such as Marchello is hovering on the line between two green-dots and three green-dots.

Now suppose Marchello had previously given Jim_Mich a green-click and suppose Jim-Mich was hovering on the line between one green-dot and two green-dots.

Now suppose Jim_Mich green-clicks Marchello (like I just did, and this caused Marchello to rise to three green-dots, like it just did.

This means that all of Marchello's green-clicks are each now worth eight points rather than the previous six points.

Now suppose Marchello's eight points versus the previous six points were enough to raise Jim_Mich points into the Appreciated status (Just dreaming). Thus the green-clicks that Jim has given rise from 5 points to 6 points. This might be just enough to raise another forum member into a higher category.

What I'm attempting to show is that the whole red/green dot and red/green click system is very dynamic.

Now I will take away Marchello's green-click.

[jim_mich]

Scott said (awhile back) that giving red-clicks can lower your own dot score. But I've seen no direct effect from giving red-clicks except by the indirect way as I just described.

[ME]

Daxwc, I looked it up and this is the complete part.
I know religious-talk is normally not appreciated, but I think it does apply to this topic.

Chapter 10: Joyfully Aid Others in Giving
The Buddha said, “When you see others practicing dana and
joyfully aid in their efforts, you gain great blessings.� A
shramana asked, “Will these blessings ever be exhausted?� The
Buddha said, “It is like thousands of people who light their
torches from the flame of a single torch, to cook food and dispel
darkness, yet the original flame is undiminished. So it is with
these blessings.�

dana (according to wikipedia): a Sanskrit and Pali word that connotes the virtue of generosity, charity or giving of alms in Indian philosophies.

So it should be a joy to give a green to a fellow member, and not be a means to make a red-one more effective (even though it actually works that way)

Now Jim has all to power over me, which means he actually controls all the dots I gave, which controls all the dots connected to these, etc.
(hmm for some reason Jim is back to "none", how could that be?)

If someone is in desperate need of some PHD-thesis on the social effects of online-reputation-systems: We've got one!!

[jim_mich]

As an example of how dynamic the Rep system is, When I gave Marchello a green-click, which raised Marchello to three-dot Rep. then Marchello's increased Rep. cause some other member to be raised from none into the Acknowledged category. When I then reversed my green-click to Marchello that other member got demoted back from Acknowledged to simply None.

Again, all I'm saying here is the system is quite dynamic.

(hmm for some reason Jim is back to "none", how could that be?)

So someone is either red-clicking me or revoking their green-click of me.

Marchello, I gave you back your green-click, which gave you back your well deserved three-dots.
Fletcher used to be a three-dots. I think he deserves to be up there with you. Marchello.

[Fletcher]

I wouldn't worry about it jim_mich. I'm perfectly OK with it (haven't actually checked but will take your word for it).

I don't give dots of any colour very often (I did yesterday tho), and certainly not as a popularity vote.

I give green ones when I think someone is making an honest worthwhile contribution to the cause (in whatever way they are able).

I give red ones when IMO they purposefully distract in a harmful way from that cause.

That's my simplistic take on how the dot system should be used and I'll keep doing that when the mood takes me.

[ME]

I don't necessarily need to be the only "king of the hill", Fletcher and others are more than welcome...
(oh, I was not anymore - or I'm there again: It's hard to keep-up)

While we're here in this topic, why not try to make the best of it.

[AB Hammer]

Marchello E

I guess a leopard (Jim L) can't change his spots. Slapped by the olive branch again.

[ME]

.. but we can!
(dots, spots: same difference)

That is a hefty sword to swing.

Because he is unique: I think his builds are That good, and his quibbles That bad.

[WaltzCee]

Now Jim has all to power over me, which means he actually controls all the dots I gave, which controls all the dots connected to these, etc.
(hmm for some reason Jim is back to "none", how could that be?)!!

my guess is democracy in action.

Just a guess.

[james.lindgard]

Marchello E

I guess a leopard (Jim L) can't change his spots. Slapped by the olive branch again.

AB Hammer,
All you have are word games. IMO you are abusive.


edited edited to add: Are you in love with yourself? Your post makes me wonder that.
After all, should I want some type of relationship with you? I don't. I like discussing engineering and building while you talk about how your feeling s are hurt.