WTF is Going on at SEW?

[Nick W]

So, yesterday my rep was at 4 bars - i got a bad rep for being "sarcastic" apparently by some mod in a post that was deleted cos of the original post (not miine) - sarcastic my ARSE...

Now, my rep didn't move from 4 bars when that happend and i have received no negative rep since - but now i see im down to three?

I've seen some dubious posts go missing and now this belated rep demotion when negative votes do not count anymore.....

What is going on at SEW?

Come on, let's hear it please...?

[projectphp]

Seriously, what is it with green bars and the internet? Did someone do a psych reserch paper and find people are more attracted to obsessing over green than pink??

[Dave Hawley]

LOL! I wonder if little green bars and little green men have anything in common, other than they both mean nothing?

[Lex]

Nick,

The rep hit you took is what dropped your shiny fourth bar. The backend adjustment on the rep system has not yet been made. Workin' on it.

Lex

[Old Welsh Guy]

The only green bars I worry about serve ice cold guiness on St Pats day :D

[rustybrick]

The only green bars I worry about serve ice cold guiness on St Pats day :D

Your too funny. I miss your humor. :D

[Old Welsh Guy]

I miss my humour as well :D

[ihelpyou]

2700 members in here, and ihelpyou is the 'only' one with red bars. Do you see me complaining? Nope. Do I really care? Nope.

Go ahead, hit me with more bad reps. :)

[Marcia]

ROFLMAOOOOO... Doug, that is a classic in perfect timing! It couldn't have been more appropriate or more to the point. Perfectly orchestrated, it's got to be the post of the week.

[sebastian]

old grumpy signing in again, but please y'all - look over all these recent posts just in december. this is why i fired away with my post called "getting it off my chest in '04"

so much silliness. it's like the beginning of aol all over again. ...green bars, reputation. EGAD.

why create an environment that encourages the lack of controversy. differing opinions is what creates growth. sarcasm can sometimes put a reality spin on many important points or concepts. people like to read heated debates has long as they are not "derogatory".

SEW seems to have become a haven for people just pushing their own digs. book writers, site owners ...all creating posts that are really designed to just push people to personal agendas. i don't respect that - i don't learn from that - i just get to acknowledge so and so has crowned themselves "all knowing"

it's crap. this place should be about search discussion. open and expressive. ...like it was at launch. now a couple of entrepreneurial people have done well for themselves in this professional space and they dominate discussion.

if you spend so much time learning and researching and producing for clients, how can you be on SEW forums all day, every day???

today, i found out one of my posts was edited for calling out a user that was constantly pointing thread inclusions to their own web site ...a professional web site. they are permitted because everyone "likes this person" or at least "knows this persons place in search"; however, if some new schmo came here that no one knew and did the same thing, they'd be scorned, removed and perhaps banned.

shoots ...i am just waiting for my next PM with the powers to be telling me that i am "not of the same ilk as the rest" and booting me from MOD because i am not outpouring sweet nothings all over the forum...

it's hypocritical and frustrating.

[ihelpyou]

Marcia; It's a Love/Hate thing.

Some people "love" to "hate" me.

But that's a good thing. :)

Great post sebastian!

[Marcia]

Great post sebastian!
That calls for a "me too" post. Ditto what Doug said, great post sebastian!

[dannysullivan]

I've seen some dubious posts go missing and now this belated rep demotion when negative votes do not count anymore.....
Negative votes do still count. It's in the works to make that so it doesn't happen, but it's still the case that they do for the moment.

As always, if you or others feel something was given that was unfair, you should ask a moderator or admin to review. That's in the forum FAQ. I promise we'll attend to it just as if you decided it needed to have an entire thread devoted to the topic. So why not give us a chance to deal with it privately, first -- just as you probably wouldn't want to be publicly moderated? If you disagree with the action and still feel it needs a public airing, then great, go for it.

I looked at your case, Nick. It was a moderator giving you negative rep. I'll ask the moderators not to do that in the future, and to instead deal with issues directly through PM. I've also credited you back the points.

[dannysullivan]

As for these other points:

why create an environment that encourages the lack of controversy. differing opinions is what creates growth. sarcasm can sometimes put a reality spin on many important points or concepts. people like to read heated debates has long as they are not "derogatory".
Sure -- but sadly, very sadly -- people simply act on forums in ways they never act in public. People don't just get sarcastic. They get rude, snippy, decisive. You can have great debate without it devolving into personal attacks -- and frankly, there's been enough of that. It's simply not something that's going to be allowed here. If we err on the side of being too cautious, I'll take that risk.

it's crap. this place should be about search discussion. open and expressive. ...like it was at launch. now a couple of entrepreneurial people have done well for themselves in this professional space and they dominate discussion.
I disagree. I see plenty of great discussion involving people who aren't "known" all the time. I think it's easier to be sensitive when frequent posters are involve, but that's not always the rule.

today, i found out one of my posts was edited for calling out a user that was constantly pointing thread inclusions to their own web site ...a professional web site. they are permitted because everyone "likes this person" or at least "knows this persons place in search"; however, if some new schmo came here that no one knew and did the same thing, they'd be scorned, removed and perhaps banned.

And like any member, if you are edited and have a disagreement, then get in touch with a moderator or an admin about it for review. I'll PM you on this, as well.

The rule for link mentions isn't that a person is well loved or liked. It is whether it's relevant for a link to be included, period.

shoots ...i am just waiting for my next PM with the powers to be telling me that i am "not of the same ilk as the rest" and booting me from MOD because i am not outpouring sweet nothings all over the forum...

For the record, mods needn't pour sweet nothings on the forum. There's no desire to hinder their participation in debate, as long as it meets the standards we'd expect of any member.

[Marcia]

When you try to tactfully keep a thread on track you get negative rep - and that's a fact!

[Old Welsh Guy]

It is difficult if your a mod to post 100% as you feel, as it is often perceived by others as being the 'opinion of the forum'. On my own forum I just let rip and say what I think, but make sure I keep within the guidelines of my forum, as to do otherwise would be 100% hypocritical.

Too often we see personal attacks, that are guised as genreic, by saying things like. ;the industry is full of this type of person who does x y & z, xxxx is one such person'. IMO no matter which way you try to dress that up, it is a personal attack, and any serious forum does not allow personal attacks.

I am mindfull that when I post on a forum where I mod, I am quasi official, and my actions are likely to affect the preception of the forum as a whole. For that reason alone, I have refused invitations to moderate as I feel it might alter the perception of others of my objectivity. For this read I am a complete horses ass and didn't want to be an official horses ass ;) )

I am with Marcia on the 'people take it personal' thing regarding moderating. I am loath to ban anyone on a forum, but one sure fire way to get an account suspended with me is to refuse, or openly question being moderated. This is a big problem with people not reading forum rules (I have to admit to not reading the rules on most forums) I don't think there is a need to though, unless you are doing something that might be outside the norm, like self prooting, or adding a link etc. At this time I consult the forum guidelines to make sure I am doing it right.

If you have a gripe with ANY forum, the way to deal with it is via PM, heck that is why it is there. Honestly I have been attacked via PM on my forum, and others, and I certainly do not take it personally. I normally reply as best I can and try to calm things down. Most things on forums blow up out of all proportion as there is no tone in writing, or the tone can be misunderstood due to the flatness of the written word.

I have waffled long enough now so will go away and crawl back under my Christmas tree, where I will wait like the last turkey in the butchers shop to be unwrapped. This is the norm for me, I mean who wants an old, bald and stupid Christmas gift? :D

[Marcia]

Take a look at msg #2, posting some references for information

http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showthread.php?t=3364

Big hit with negative rep for that post.

Edited to clear up some misinterpretations:

The negative rep is NOT at all an issue, it makes no difference whatsoever.

Ths issue is that with no comment with a reason left, which there wasn't, lookng at the post there is NO way to tell what in the world is wrong with it. I dont have a clue what I did wrong in that post, all I did was post some references so there would be authentic background on the PR equation.

So the rep vote is meaningless - not a clue what it's about.

[Old Welsh Guy]

You deserve a negative rep for linking to "The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine" War and peace is an easier read ;)

It is so difficult, but the thing is that it don't matter. What people think about you anonomousy really doesn't matter. What people think about you doesn't matter, it is what you think about yourself that matters most. If you truly believed in something, and you promoted it, then you have done what is right. If you do what you consider to be the right thing, for the right reason, then why give a hoot what others think?

I was recently top in the annual polls on my forum. Top for 'best contributor' and top for 'worse poster' it really doesn't matter to me lol

If you do what you think is right, and admit when your wrong, then no one can have a pop. You will be surprised how it takes the wind out of the sails of someone if you admit to being wrong, I should know, I have a doctorate in admitting to being wrong.WHY? because the person who never states anything and never makes a decision can never be wrong. Eddison, 500 failures before he got a lightbulb to work. Wrong 500 times, and right once, but remembered for being right once lol

[powerofeyes]

BTW Marcia, i saw you with 4 to 5 green bars, Now I see only a black one, Is it true cant believe you got so many negative rep pts in 1 day,

Is it some sort of glitch in system or is it true??? , I respect Marcia's insights into google, And since she was a Mod of webmasterworld google forum I bet Marcia knows lots of information about google,

[Marcia]

Yep, over 3 years in that forum. Been through a LOT of dances. :)

5 bars, actually. I can give or get, but I got so thoroughly fed up and disgusted with some of what's been going on with the thing that I disabled it from showing to get a rest from looking at it.

[powerofeyes]

oops disabled it Ok :) , i feel webmasterworld is one of the toughest forum to moderate, especially google forum, that is why it is premoderated,

I always enjoyed your thoughts and wish to see more quality posts from you, good day.

[AussieWebmaster]

I never realized that Google forum was premoderated at WMW

[projectphp]

...because i am not outpouring sweet nothings all over the forum...
One is tempted to say that it is only the sweet part of that sentence that is accurate and true :)

today, i found out one of my posts was edited for calling out a user that was constantly pointing thread inclusions to their own web site ...a professional web site. they are permitted because everyone "likes this person" or at least "knows this persons place in search"; however, if some new schmo came here that no one knew and did the same thing, they'd be scorned, removed and perhaps banned.
Can I ask a few dumb questions (too late): why do people use hyperbole like "Constantly"? Constantly implies all the time, i.e. every time. Really, is constantly fair or accurate? Do you mean "excessively" instead? If so, what is enough, and what is too much?

And why do people make statements and not support them with evidence? Throw enough mud and some will stick is well trodden and well tried strategy in life. Quite frankly, NOTHING teaches less than mudslinging supported by nothing.

I find it bizarre that a post that includes such statements as "...learning and researching and producing for clients" and that is aiming to direct us towards more useful discussions uses unfounded and unsupported innuendos wrapped up in hyperbole, instead of evidence driven arguments.

I also struggle with a post that complains and offers no solutions, in fact two straight such posts.

So, lets take this in a different direction: what is your vision for this forum, sebastian? Lets forget the complaints, the problems, and let us hear you positive, empowering vision for SEW in the future. What should the Mod team do? What sort of discussions are the "right" type? What sort of people should be encouraged, what sort of topics and why? What sort of behaviour should be curbed and how?

I really am curious, because so far all I have read is complaints, not any vision for a better future, and complainers never did anything productive to fix anything, they just point out the foibles and leave others to do teh work.

[hooter]

I really am curious, because so far all I have read is complaints, not any vision for a better future, and complainers never did anything productive to fix anything, they just point out the foibles and leave others to do teh work.

In the words of a wise sage:
Only the person not rowing has time to rock the boat

[Lex]

OK this is getting fun. I like this game. It's sorta like the session in Chicago, What Would You Do? (http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showthread.php?t=3314) Four of our own were placed on the hot seat and asked how they would run their own search engine. It was brilliant. The best session I attended, hands down. Dana Todd has remarkable comedic timing. I think she was simutaneously channeling Debra Messing and every search-engine-BS-mouth-piece-disinformation-crapola from the last 3 years. Anyway, I digress...

So the question is... What Would You Do? There seem to be alot of strong opinions about how a forum shoud be run, what should and shouldn't be allowed, policy enforcement, etc. What's your vision for the ideally administrated forum?

[Dave Hawley]

I find it hard that grown ups would be so concerned over these little green boxes. Come on guys, if that's your only problem in life it cannot be too bad can it?

BTW, IhelpYou I'm serious competition for you ;)

[rcjordan]

>webmasterworld is one of the toughest forum to moderate, especially google forum

It was the constant whining and never-ending attempts at reporting other sites that got the G forum pre-moderated. Add to that a barrage of "it's an update" no "it's a new filter" no "it's a penalty" by people that wouldn't know an update if it bit 'em in the ass and you had a great forum --ALL noise.

Watercooler forums like FOO can be the toughest, every thread has the potential of going ballistic.


As for the 'reputation' crap --green dots, black dots, whatever-- IMO, BIG mistake from the git-go, as was the idea to give SEW loose guidance in the TOS. Forum communities that are 'business grade' aren't easy to do, it's easy to think that they're going to develop as nice, cordial meeting places but they simply do not.

What would I do? I'd tighten up on the TOS until only the business-class felt comfortable and I'd put in some bouncers to enforce it. Quit worrying about appeasing every member, you can't do it. You're going to run over some good ones, but it's a big rig and has to make wide turns --nothing you can do about that.

[donut]

Excellent!

Without leadership, a forum will become overun with noisemakers and self-promoters til the truly helpful and professional wander away, tired of wading through the rotten veggies and spoiled eggs that have been thrown.

You can disagree without getting personal or abusive. When the moderators turn personal and abubsive, it reflects on the structure of the forum, IMO.

[dannysullivan]

As for the 'reputation' crap --green dots, black dots, whatever-- IMO, BIG mistake from the git-go
It's not a perfect system, but I'm not ready to give up on it yet. More to the point, this entire thread started because Nick was upset he got negative rep. Well, too bad about that in general. In fact, the entire thread should have been pulled as soon as he posted. It would have been more appropriate to ask a moderator or admin to review what happened, especially given that the FAQs (http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/faq.php?faq=reputationmain#faq_optoutrep) say that admins can step in as required.

The thread wasn't pulled for a couple of reasons. First, there was the issue that the bad rep came from a moderator. Nothing was wrong with doing that -- we've not had a rule against this before. But reflecting on it further, I felt it was better for the moderators not to negative rep people but instead contact them directly. It's more straightforward and a better way to communicate. That's what they've been asked to do now, and this thread is a good way to share that.

Secondly, he was under the impression that negative reps were no longer hurting scores. That's not yet the case, but we hope to make this happen down the line.

I will agree that the amount of discussion and concern over the rep system in relation to the number of people who actually use it is way out of whack. And I'm approaching the point of wanting to throw the whole thing out just to be rid of the headache. But I also do like some of it. I like things like reps on a place like eBay, where they can be useful. I'd like to think we could give it a bit longer and see if it will work here. Maybe it won't, and I'm not wedded to keeping it, in that case.

as was the idea to give SEW loose guidance in the TOS. Forum communities that are 'business grade' aren't easy to do, it's easy to think that they're going to develop as nice, cordial meeting places but they simply do not.

So Elisabeth and I said from the beginning that we didn't want to start out with a ton of rules but rather let them evolve from the community naturally. Personally, I still think that was the right approach. I find it incredibly liberating not to feel like we have to do things exactly like forum X, Y or Z. It's not that those other forums don't have good rules for good reasons -- but that doesn't mean they have to be the same reasons for other places.

What would I do? I'd tighten up on the TOS until only the business-class felt comfortable and I'd put in some bouncers to enforce it. Quit worrying about appeasing every member, you can't do it. You're going to run over some good ones, but it's a big rig and has to make wide turns --nothing you can do about that.
So the balancing act is not to "appease" members but to listen to everyone seriously and understand if there are things that do make sense to do. The no spam policy is a good example of that. Some people really felt strongly about this. It would be easy to simply dismiss the concerns of either side or instead appease those who seem to be the loudest. Instead, it was a case of trying to understand what made the most sense to go forward for this particular community.

The downside is that it takes a lot of time to build these rules organically. The upside is that I feel like we get better buy in from everyone.

The issue of "businesslike" or "professional" or forums not being nice "cordial" places resonates, however. I raised with the mods about two weeks ago that I wanted to bring out a new policy stressing that people will either act professionally here, treat each other with respect, or they'll simply not be able to remain part of the community. I was waiting to raise this in the forums until after the holidays -- frankly, it would be nice if things could slow down during the period. But this is clearly the right time, so I'll get that new thread going now.

The bottom line is that I've seen people behave in the forums in a way they never would do in real life. Yep, SEW is new to forums. But we aren't new to people interacting. People have been doing that in a professional, polite manner at our conferences for years. The usual excuse of forums being different isn't going to fly. People will be responsible for themselves -- that's going to be the ground rule.

That new thread is now up: Members Policing Themselves (http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showthread.php?t=3431)

[Anthony Parsons]

All those that don't want the little green bar, boycott it and turn the thing off. It bites anyway, and only causes concerns like these. You go Nick. Oh, Doug and Dave, I'll race you both to the backdoor.... however, Doug, yes you are winning at present. I have been trying though. I must now try harder....

[rcjordan]

Personally, I don't think management by consensus is the right approach, but that should be no surprise to anyone.

Here's an easy one... Tighten the swear-word filter down to boardroom standards. If a word offends in the least, **** it.

[AussieWebmaster]

All those that don't want the little green bar, boycott it and turn the thing off. It bites anyway, and only causes concerns like these. You go Nick. Oh, Doug and Dave, I'll race you both to the backdoor.... however, Doug, yes you are winning at present. I have been trying though. I must now try harder....
You have to turn the ranking back on to get negative votes!

[kidmercury]

All those that don't want the little green bar, boycott it and turn the thing off. It bites anyway, and only causes concerns like these. You go Nick. Oh, Doug and Dave, I'll race you both to the backdoor.... however, Doug, yes you are winning at present. I have been trying though. I must now try harder....

both ya'll need to remember that i am the badass of this forum. i'm so bad all ya'll are afraid to hit me with negative rep -- even when i ask for it!

the ultimate badass,
kidmercury

[DaveN]

if you are clever you can findout who give you bad rep or good rep :

http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showthread.php?p=26394#post26394 i got bad rep from Dave Hawley here but he didn't say it was him the system did ;)

DaveN

[Dave Hawley]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to DaveN again.Damn! Oh well, merry Xmas instead ;)

Edit: Hey! How come I have 2 green boxes :confused: What sort of a bad arse has 2 green boxes :o

[kidmercury]

Edit: Hey! How come I have 2 green boxes :confused: What sort of a bad arse has 2 green boxes :o

hey dave: don't sweat it. the best bad arses have two green boxes. :cool:

[Marcia]

i got bad rep from Dave Hawley here but he didn't say it was him the system did
Yep, he got me too this week. Amazing how those green bars get to people, like the little green thingo on the Google toolbar.

[Dave Hawley]

Yep, what goes around comes around :D

if you are clever you can findout who give you bad rep or good repOr if you have no life :rolleyes:

[Dave Hawley]

WTF, it's Xmas and you SEO "pros" (cough) have more important things (I assume) to do then find out who gave you the negative reps. So below is the list of usernames I have given a negative rep to;

Marcia
seobook
Lots0
Mel
Bob Mutch
DaveN
I,Brian
kidmercury

Oh, just so you all don't go on a another witch hunt, the list is not in any particular order :p

[kidmercury]

WTF, it's Xmas and you SEO "pros" (cough) have more important things (I assume) to do then find out who gave you the negative reps. So below is the list of usernames I have given a negative rep to;

Marcia
seobook
Lots0
Mel
Bob Mutch
DaveN
I,Brian

Oh, just so you all don't go on a another witch hunt, the list is not in any particular order :p

christ almighty, what's a fella gotta do around here to get some negative rep???? add me to the list man! :mad:

[kctipton]

I felt it was better for the moderators not to negative rep people but instead contact them directly.

Moderators are the ones who should have the clout to knock people around, and negative rep is one way to do it without wasting their time in a fruitless email debate about someone URL-dropping and smart-mouthing and doing other distasteful behaviors.

[Dave Hawley]

Oops sory kidmercury. I did give you some -rep and will now add/edit you to the list.

Sincere aplogies for anyone elses name I have left out. It's not intentional :D

[kidmercury]

thanks dave, i appreciate it. i dont mean to make a big fuss over it, but i am the bad ass of the forum. i've got a reputation to maintain.

[Dave Hawley]

LOL! Anytime.

[Marcia]

I think it's absolutely hysterical that this has been going on for more than three days over a GREEN BAR.

[Dave Hawley]

I think SEW should do Reputation updates just as Google does Toolbar PR updates. Or better still, have the green rep squares we see, lag way behind what the true rep is.

Now if that aint exciting I dont know what is :D

[Marcia]

It's getting close to Google Dave, think about it. Backlinks obfuscated, the algo being tampered with, and threads that go on for days if the little green bar moves.

BTW Mr. Hawley, I have ruined your bad-boy image by giving you a positive rep vote.

[Dave Hawley]

That's twice now Marcia. Don't let it happen again :p

[bobmutch]

Dave: I know it was you that gave me that lame neg rep. Well either you or Mel who I have put on ignore. But hey I don't be bothered entering in to conversations with you anymore, it never goes anywhere but around in circles. But hey its a good idea about the Reputation updates.

Here is more neg rep I have gotten. "For your signature spam" This one is misuse far as I am concerned. Must be alot of lame linux wieners around here : )

When people give me lame neg rep I give them pos rep. Best thing to do with lamers. Just tryed to give Dave more pos rep but I can't. Some body give him some pos rep for me will ya : ) Oh no now I will get another PM from Liz and another lecture on back slapping with rep.

Everybody give me pos rep please so I can pos rep the lamers in here : )

Ya I wonder if this post will stand.

[projectphp]

EURKEKA!!! I have an idea: Lets make a SEW toolabr, that shows rep and all the negative rep as an "advanced" feature. It could even track looks at people's profile to "rate" the best posters. Now, if that aint a great marketing idea, my name isn't Winston T. McGoo.

[Old Welsh Guy]

To be, or not to be: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them?

Why worry about neg rep votes or whatever? The fact is, if you stand up and speak out about something you believe in, and others find that hard to deal with, then that is THEIR problem, not yours.

Any fool can complain and criticise something, but it takes knowledge to debate it. Any thug can knock down a building, but it takes a lot of thought to design and build one.

We defeat a sea of troubles by opposing them with the facts of the debate, as soon as debate becomes personal it is no longer a debate, it is a mudslinging fest, and the potential for learning and growing together as a community is harmed. For this reason alone we should all shy away from being personally critical.

If someone posts something that is waaaaaay off base, it is still possible to correct that person without belittling them (which IMO is one of the worse things anyone can do to another, bullies in the school yard, and cowardly child beating parents do just that). By thanking the person for their post, and saying that you would like to disagree with one or two points, then going on to explain which points and why, is far better than simply being an 'all knowing oracle'.

We all came into this world naked and knowing very little if anything. EVERYTHING we know today has been gained by the generosity of others imparting knowledge to us. Maybe I am wierd, but there is nothing better than seeing a forum member grow in stature and knowledge, and knowing that one had a hand in that growth. We can not and should not take our knowledge to the grave. And we should not crush the minds of others simply to give ourselves a perceived boost in the minds of others.

No one likes a bully in the schoolyard, and forums are the schoolyards of the web.

[Dave Hawley]

Bob I posted your name in the list and you still think it might be Mel? That really is lame. :rolleyes:

I have noticed that you go in circles a lot, my dog does this too when chasing his tail, but you seem to do it chasing green squares :D

[dannysullivan]

Folks, the rep system isn't going away in the near future -- if only that there isn't time to be messing with it right now.

After the New Year, I'll fire up a new thread, and everyone can go at it again. I'll put all the cards back on the table, except one. Moderators are not going to use the rep system to negative rep people. That's not open to debate. I want the moderators here to communicate directly and fully with members if they are out of order.

But should reps carry negative weight? We were going to stop that, for the contingent that freaks out they are harmed for no good reason. OK, maybe that should stay.

Should rep no longer be anonymous? Maybe so, if we can configure the system that way. FYI, moderators have been able to see who gives rep to any member (and has long been disclosed in the FAQ), which is something I said we will work to get shut off. That's still the plan, and it should happen just after the New Year. Admins will still have access, so bad rep me or Elisabeth, and we know who you are. But honestly, go ahead if you disagree. Obviously, if we remove rep being anonymous, moderators will see rep like anyone else.

And also FYI, as Dave and some others have mentioned, there is a way for ordinary members to figure out who gave them rep. I'm not going to spell that out, but yes -- the system isn't going to be anonymous as we (and the forum software people who make it) thought. That obviously has to be fixed, if we do want things to be anonymous.

Should the entire thing go? Sure, we can set up a poll to get a better sense of what everyone things. We've had a similar one that the moderators have been doing. It leans heavily toward sticking with the system but tweaking it to improve.

And that's the key point that I'll stress, as I've said from the beginning. If it doesn't work, we'll tweak, fix or abandon it. One thing we did was link rep to the exact post you made. We also changed the wording of the rep icon in response to member requests. We'll make other changes as needed.

I personally still find it useful. I know others do as well. And for all the freak out the system has, especially sometimes by people who then also say they don't care about it, it's not used that much.

And as for abuse of either positive or negative rep, the noise as opposed to the reality is amazing. I've looked at the reps for a variety of people. Things that are voiced sometimes have no impact, or if there was neg rep abuse, it's arguably offset by some pos rep abuse.

The easiest thing in the world would be to just switch it off. I'm the extra mile type of person -- and so I want to give the system a bit more time.

I'm also closing this thread, because fair to say, it's devolved into mostly silliness. OK, it's the padded room and its also been funny, but time to bring it to a close nonetheless.

After the New Year (prob. mid-Jan), promise -- you can all dive in, and we'll look at it anew.

[andrewgoodman]

2700 members in here, and ihelpyou is the 'only' one with red bars. Do you see me complaining? Nope. Do I really care? Nope.

Go ahead, hit me with more bad reps. :)
The red is pretty. Merry Xmas.

[andrewgoodman]

>webmasterworld is one of the toughest forum to moderate, especially google forum

It was the constant whining and never-ending attempts at reporting other sites that got the G forum pre-moderated. Add to that a barrage of "it's an update" no "it's a new filter" no "it's a penalty" by people that wouldn't know an update if it bit 'em in the ass and you had a great forum --ALL noise.

Watercooler forums like FOO can be the toughest, every thread has the potential of going ballistic.


As for the 'reputation' crap --green dots, black dots, whatever-- IMO, BIG mistake from the git-go, as was the idea to give SEW loose guidance in the TOS. Forum communities that are 'business grade' aren't easy to do, it's easy to think that they're going to develop as nice, cordial meeting places but they simply do not.

What would I do? I'd tighten up on the TOS until only the business-class felt comfortable and I'd put in some bouncers to enforce it. Quit worrying about appeasing every member, you can't do it. You're going to run over some good ones, but it's a big rig and has to make wide turns --nothing you can do about that.
I tend to like this idea, but have found from experience that the business-class will be very unlikely to ever feel comfortable enough to post very often. I have experimented with different, less-accessible forum formats and even there, people will only say so much. In this more popular context there is probably not much to be gained from courting the "business class" alone.