New Neg Rep Rule Extreme and Unfair...

[chikenwing]

I could care less about rep.

 

[L.K.Eder]

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.

it's not an atrocity, drama queen. grow up.

 

[Wiseacre]

I'd like to why it is so God-damned necessary to neg somebody more than once in 48 hours, or for that matter more than once at all. You can ignore the person, report the post, call him/her a miserable rotten worthless piece of shit, and get on with your life. If you're worried keeping track of who and when, then maybe you're worried about the wrong things.

 

[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.

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

It was the whiners, not the neg reppers.

I have received quite a few neg reps. Certainly many many more than the less than five I have given. Most neg reps came from the same persons. Not one was due to a personal attack or for flaming or being hateful or obnoxious or for posting anything other than something the negger didn't agree with. In every single case it was somebody 'bullying' just because they knew they could. In my opinion that is 'negging without cause' but I have never reported anybody. So I am glad I was not part of that particular problem. I can appreciate what the mods probably had to put up with though.

But remember what was intended to be a pos rep but was translated into a neg rep I gave you that time? Some kind of glitch in the system? I pos repped you twice later to correct the damage, but what if the glitch had happened twice in 48 hours? I would be major pissed at losing rep privileges due to a computer glitch.

And regardless of what anybody considers rep abuse, I still think a newbie or returning member who didn't brush up on the rules should not have the 'death penalty' imposed because they didn't read the new rule and inadvertently broke it. The rule isn't imposed for 'rep abuse'. It is imposed for neg repping somebody twice in 48 hours.

 

[L.K.Eder]

death penalty? atrocity? disastrous?

you are pathetic.

 

[The Infidel]

*yawn*​

 

[HUGGY]

death penalty? atrocity? disastrous?

you are pathetic.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F54rqDh2mWA]Hindenburg disaster - YouTube[/ame]

 

[uscitizen]

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.

Wow! What a whine.

 

[uscitizen]

Pale should get a disability exemption on this since he cannot remember from one day to the next.

 

[Dr Grump]

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

You see, I see it the other way around. I see it as more than likely a bunch of Cons abusing the rep system by serially repping people they don't like. Not only is that against the rules, but it's childish...

 

[WillowTree]

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

You see, I see it the other way around. I see it as more than likely a bunch of Cons abusing the rep system by serially repping people they don't like. Not only is that against the rules, but it's childish...

I knew it all along. This is all about punishing the conservatives brought to you proudly by the whining liberals.

 

[Dr Grump]

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.

I disgree. When I first started on this board way back when it was a haven of uber cons. Jillian and I started on the same day. Jillian and Kathieanne had a set-to over something minor. I put in my two-cents (from memory it was something along the lines of "I don't think that is what she was saying"). Bam! Negged. And it continued like that for a while. There are people on here who take it all a bit seriously, but I find it funny that whenever a Con joins their rep skyrockets within days (at one stage lumpy's so-called son had one rep point for every post - if that was to happen to you look how much rep you would have), whereas when libs join their rep either takes an age to go anywhere or is in the neg.

Now while some might so, 'so what, who gives a shit'. It drives some people away. In the case of George Phillip or whatever his name is, and Axiwhatshisface who both have a tonne of red stars by their names, I never read their stuff because it reeks of troll...

 

[Dr Grump]

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

You see, I see it the other way around. I see it as more than likely a bunch of Cons abusing the rep system by serially repping people they don't like. Not only is that against the rules, but it's childish...

I knew it all along. This is all about punishing the conservatives brought to you proudly by the whining liberals.

Typical Neo Con...starts a mess and then blames others for it...

 

[Plasmaball]

pole change your tampon and eat some ice cream...

 

[del]

And now I suppose I'll get banned for "questioning" board rules, even though I'm under the impression it was "open for discussion" being in the "announcements & FEEDBACK" section.

you've always been a whiny bitch

no one will notice another one

 

[del]

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.

i don't blame you. the members would probably quit.














both of them

 

[del]

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.

i bet you tell that to all the girls

have any of them found it?

 

[bobcollum]

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.

Pole Rider's having a bad day...can't neg the crap out of noobs anymore.

Gonna be tough pretending to be an alpha male now.

 

[Sarah G]

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

Look for it.

i bet you tell that to all the girls

have any of them found it?

 

[Lumpy 1]

And now I suppose I'll get banned for "questioning" board rules, even though I'm under the impression it was "open for discussion" being in the "announcements & FEEDBACK" section.

you've always been a whiny bitch

no one will notice another one

I think we all know who the rep abusers are, don't we Del..