New Neg Rep Rule Extreme and Unfair...

[Sarah G]

This new rule?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/annou...lines-for-giving-out-negative-reputation.html


Rep is back to 20 in 24 hrs (I'm glad about that, 5 in 24 hours was really a small amount, imo) ; negging the same person more than once in a 48 hour period will get you whacked. Permanently, no exceptions. Seems pretty fair to me.

I never understood serial neg repping anyway ...

They said they'd take all your rep away and not give it back. You can stay though.

 

[Sarah G]

So one can very quickly assume that this new neg rep rule is because a few whiners, the ole wheel that squeaks gets the grease rule, that have ruined it for EVERYONE, and I think most that have been here awhile know exactly who those, (BDBoop), people are.

But with that aside, this new rule is very extreme, and with new members that virtually NEVER read the rules, it's unfair as well as extreme.

One, to wipe out what took YEARS for most here to acquire for what could be an HONEST MISTAKE is unjust.

Two, for admin to assume every person on the board, old and new, is going to be aware of this rule is ludicrous.

Three, if this abortion is to stay however, then it should be written into the board software so that it's just something you CAN'T DO, as you CAN'T pos rep someone more than twenty times in twenty four hours, then you shouldn't be able to neg rep someone more than twice in 48 hours. If one limit can be written into the board software, then so can the other. Why impose such strict, over the top, outlandishly unjust and unfair punishments? Is it a trap? Is it a joke? What's the reasoning? Who thought this atrocity up? I think you will see people leaving the board, and for sure those "supporting memers" will fall off. Not a smart way to run a board.

This is a big mistake.

My two cents.

My "quick assumption" is that you are free to start your own board as others have and run it any way you choose to.

I don't really have a dog in this fight having given exactly one neg since I've participated in this MB.

If one of your goals in being here is to give negs then you probably will push your luck and OD by negativity. Live by the neg rep..die by the neg rep.. Seems fair.

I already do have my own board, and I would never pull something like this there.

It's the cry babies that brought this about, and my guess is it's less than five people, and the board has over thirty thousand members that will now have to suffer the consequences of just a handle full of little cry babies, and my bet is they're all liberals because we all know how liberals are. If a conservative doesn't want a gun, he doesn't buy one. If a liberal doesn't want a gun, they don't want anyone else to be able to buy one either. So goes the new rep rule.

Oh, tell us where it is, we want to visit.

 

[007]

Pole Rider earned the right to bombard people with negs, g-dammit.

slobcolon is one of the little liberal cry babies that's got his dick sack in a bunch.

 

[007]

My "quick assumption" is that you are free to start your own board as others have and run it any way you choose to.

I don't really have a dog in this fight having given exactly one neg since I've participated in this MB.

If one of your goals in being here is to give negs then you probably will push your luck and OD by negativity. Live by the neg rep..die by the neg rep.. Seems fair.

I already do have my own board, and I would never pull something like this there.

It's the cry babies that brought this about, and my guess is it's less than five people, and the board has over thirty thousand members that will now have to suffer the consequences of just a handle full of little cry babies, and my bet is they're all liberals because we all know how liberals are. If a conservative doesn't want a gun, he doesn't buy one. If a liberal doesn't want a gun, they don't want anyone else to be able to buy one either. So goes the new rep rule.

Oh, tell us where it is, we want to visit.

Look for it.

 

[syrenn]

Why would you rep Cheerios?

Honey Nuts!

Cracklin' Oat Bran!

Buckwheats!

 

[freedombecki]

So one can very quickly assume that this new neg rep rule is because a few whiners, the ole wheel that squeaks gets the grease rule, that have ruined it for EVERYONE, and I think most that have been here awhile know exactly who those, (BDBoop), people are.

But with that aside, this new rule is very extreme, and with new members that virtually NEVER read the rules, it's unfair as well as extreme.

One, to wipe out what took YEARS for most here to acquire for what could be an HONEST MISTAKE is unjust.

Two, for admin to assume every person on the board, old and new, is going to be aware of this rule is ludicrous.

Three, if this abortion is to stay however, then it should be written into the board software so that it's just something you CAN'T DO, as you CAN'T pos rep someone more than twenty times in twenty four hours, then you shouldn't be able to neg rep someone more than twice in 48 hours. If one limit can be written into the board software, then so can the other. Why impose such strict, over the top, outlandishly unjust and unfair punishments? Is it a trap? Is it a joke? What's the reasoning? Who thought this atrocity up? I think you will see people leaving the board, and for sure those "supporting memers" will fall off. Not a smart way to run a board.

This is a big mistake.

My two cents.

In my opinion... all new changes to the rules... should be added into the rules as set forth. That way newbies can read the rules as they stand and not have to wade through all of the amendments as stickies.

I know there is an add on to do mass PMing to new members... and i think the rules should be added into a welcome PM....

Hi so and so... welcome to the USMB.... if you have any questions feel free to ask the mods or consult the rules... and give a link to the rules


I also think a mass PMing to ALL members of this new rule would be a good idea.

thems is my two cents

Syrenn, that makes very good sense to me because if they send that to everyone, some have not read that rep is back, and when word gets around, those who left because they were getting to much negative here could decide to stay, come back, etc.

 

[007]

So one can very quickly assume that this new neg rep rule is because a few whiners, the ole wheel that squeaks gets the grease rule, that have ruined it for EVERYONE, and I think most that have been here awhile know exactly who those, (BDBoop), people are.

But with that aside, this new rule is very extreme, and with new members that virtually NEVER read the rules, it's unfair as well as extreme.

One, to wipe out what took YEARS for most here to acquire for what could be an HONEST MISTAKE is unjust.

Two, for admin to assume every person on the board, old and new, is going to be aware of this rule is ludicrous.

Three, if this abortion is to stay however, then it should be written into the board software so that it's just something you CAN'T DO, as you CAN'T pos rep someone more than twenty times in twenty four hours, then you shouldn't be able to neg rep someone more than twice in 48 hours. If one limit can be written into the board software, then so can the other. Why impose such strict, over the top, outlandishly unjust and unfair punishments? Is it a trap? Is it a joke? What's the reasoning? Who thought this atrocity up? I think you will see people leaving the board, and for sure those "supporting memers" will fall off. Not a smart way to run a board.

This is a big mistake.

My two cents.

In my opinion... all new changes to the rules... should be added into the rules as set forth. That way newbies can read the rules as they stand and not have to wade through all of the amendments as stickies.

I know there is an add on to do mass PMing to new members... and i think the rules should be added into a welcome PM....

Hi so and so... welcome to the USMB.... if you have any questions feel free to ask the mods or consult the rules... and give a link to the rules


I also think a mass PMing to ALL members of this new rule would be a good idea.

thems is my two cents

Syrenn, that makes very good sense to me because if they send that to everyone, some have not read that rep is back, and when word gets around, those who left because they were getting to much negative here could decide to stay, come back, etc.

I'd be willing to bet no more than 1 in every 50 people that sign up here will read the neg rep rule, let alone any rule. Going to have to take away a lot of members rep before they ever get a chance with this draconian new rule.

 

[Si modo]

Ok, this is pretty funny.

 

[BDBoop]

And I get called a whiner?

Dude, you set a standard!!

 

[Unkotare]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFZrzg62Zj0]OMG WHO THE HELL CARES! - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Skull Pilot]

So one can very quickly assume that this new neg rep rule is because a few whiners, the ole wheel that squeaks gets the grease rule, that have ruined it for EVERYONE, and I think most that have been here awhile know exactly who those, (BDBoop), people are.

But with that aside, this new rule is very extreme, and with new members that virtually NEVER read the rules, it's unfair as well as extreme.

One, to wipe out what took YEARS for most here to acquire for what could be an HONEST MISTAKE is unjust.

Two, for admin to assume every person on the board, old and new, is going to be aware of this rule is ludicrous.

Three, if this abortion is to stay however, then it should be written into the board software so that it's just something you CAN'T DO, as you CAN'T pos rep someone more than twenty times in twenty four hours, then you shouldn't be able to neg rep someone more than twice in 48 hours. If one limit can be written into the board software, then so can the other. Why impose such strict, over the top, outlandishly unjust and unfair punishments? Is it a trap? Is it a joke? What's the reasoning? Who thought this atrocity up? I think you will see people leaving the board, and for sure those "supporting memers" will fall off. Not a smart way to run a board.

This is a big mistake.

My two cents.

Mods are like the government they feel they have to make up new rules even when there is no need to just as the fucking legislators feel they have to pass new laws even if none are needed.

 

[Dot Com]

And I get called a whiner?

Dude, you set a standard!!

Si modo? Yeah.

 

[strollingbones]

what new rules? why am i always confused?

 

[syrenn]

what new rules? why am i always confused?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/annou...lines-for-giving-out-negative-reputation.html


we do have our 20 reps back....

 

[BDBoop]

And I get called a whiner?

Dude, you set a standard!!

Si modo? Yeah.

Nooooo. The OP.

 

[Foxfyre]

Come on people. It was rep abusers who created the problem, not the mods. And I can fully understand why it is unreasonable to ask volunteer mods to spend a lot of time dealing with those whining about rep abuse. And I have no problem with rules to remedy what had become an unreasonable situation.

BUT. . . . I do hope the powers that be are reading the possible unreasonable consequences of applying the new rule too so that we don't apply to anybody who doesn't know about the new rule and inadvertently breaks it.

I emphatically think one warning before the ultimate 'death penalty' is imposed should be the policy. That ensures that new members and returning members don't walk into it blind. If they violate it after that one warning, well then, they asked for it.

 

[Unkotare]

what new rules? why am i always confused?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKpX-5jQjQ0]Who am I? Why am I here? - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Politico]

True, some will abuse the system. But until such a time passes that a build-up of neg rep handicaps or hinders your account, it's meaningless apart from the displeasure it conveys.

Some? I have never seen a board where negative reps weren't abused.

 

[hortysir]

what new rules? why am i always confused?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/annou...lines-for-giving-out-negative-reputation.html


we do have our 20 reps back....

Sorta burns the hell outta her flame thread

 

[Si modo]

Come on people. It was rep abusers who created the problem, not the mods. And I can fully understand why it is unreasonable to ask volunteer mods to spend a lot of time dealing with those whining about rep abuse. And I have no problem with rules to remedy what had become an unreasonable situation.

BUT. . . . I do hope the powers that be are reading the possible unreasonable consequences of applying the new rule too so that we don't apply to anybody who doesn't know about the new rule and inadvertently breaks it.

I emphatically think one warning before the ultimate 'death penalty' is imposed should be the policy. That ensures that new members and returning members don't walk into it blind. If they violate it after that one warning, well then, they asked for it.

I strongly disagree. "Rep abuse" is defined as negging "without cause".

It was the whiners, not the neg reppers.