Poll: Should the reputation option on the forum be deleted, or should it remain as it is?
Delete rep system
Allow the rep system to remain
I don't care either way
[Show Results]
 
Reputation arguments... AKA Reputations as Social Caste
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-12-2011, 06:08 PM (This post was last modified: 03-12-2011 07:13 PM by Stark Raving.)
Reputation arguments... AKA Reputations as Social Caste
This could be an addition to the "requirements" thread but then again it's a little bit abstract and also doesn't fit other threads on the subject in the same way, thus a new thread. I also don't want the disturb the good naturedness of the "requirements" one.

I have to give full support for the fact that this forum has a strong base for free speech and free thought that is very hard to find on the Internet. Saying whatever you like is important to both mental and social growth. I have learned a great deal from participation in this forum through trial and error. This is important and a big thanks for that.

On the other hand....

Reputations are another thing. This is a control mechanism that weeds out social inadequacies or establishes socially acceptable individuals. It is used both to give pats to some and reprimand others rarely in useful ways. The socially acceptable answers of the power group become the dogma that rules. Not exactly what I call a free speech environment. Are the emotionally stable, politically correct or the gut tough ones the only people who have a right to speak? Is there an agenda that underlies the reputation system that says "getting tough is the key to participation, otherwise shut up."? I call this "forum grooming" myself and I have written about it in other venues. It doesn't take long before the forum becomes a closed club. Personally, I don't think there are any ideas or ways of communicating that are unacceptable whether reasonable or not. Weeding out through social "INs" and social "OUTs" doesn't add to free thought. The free ability to comment and debate that this forum espouses will take care of reasonable or unreasonable interaction. Reputations are a major restriction.

Anyone who says, "it's just a game" is fooling themselves. It IS a power mechanism; it IS a restriction. Some people have things to say that are legitimate and are unable because of this type of ... I'm going to say it... social bullying, and many people DO get hurt by it. If you think I am wussing out or being overly sensitive, that would put you in a category of those who "groom" your surroundings to fit your social agenda; you don't want to accept the fact that people should be allowed to disagree or be different from your thought patterns. I have watched this forum for about a year now, watching this phenomena develop and it is becoming the way of things here.

Back to my being a wuss... I'm a person with certain mental/emotional issues like many others here. I would like to continue to participate because it is good for me. Psychologically speaking, "getting over it" isn't done by being spanked or shunned. It's in finding a way to participate, argue, being argued against, winning, failing, getting or giving reprimand on point when necessary, and still being accepted. I hope I don't need to give case in point concerning the outcome of forced toughness vs. nurturing. It's a fairly well determined psychological study.

I know others that are in a similar position who won't come near this place. But then, maybe this is the point. Maybe weeding out the unacceptable personalities thus limiting the learning field is what people would rather have. I don't know. I certainly do not. There are a lot of smart open and closed minded people here. Some of us have weak social skills while others have strong ones. Some are overbearing and controlling, others are passive or passive aggressive. I have PTSD and ADHD. There are others who have substance abuse issues and others who are being medicated for many other emotional disorders. There are many different ideological backgrounds, nationalities and different customs.

How do we get along? As it is with teh "reps" determining our social caste, the outspoken, or passive aggressive among us subdue the less so even within our group of non-theists. Do we want this?

There is a certain authority here that is reasonable, necessary and gives position to trustworthy appointed keepers of the forum: the moderators. This is understood and reasonable...

I say continue the free speech open forum... But, get rid of the reputation caste system. There is no usefulness to it that positively affects the whole of the constituency. There is more to it that affects us in the negative.

Who can turn skies back and begin again?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like defacto7's post
03-12-2011, 06:12 PM
RE: Reputation arguments... AKA Reputations as Social Caste
(03-12-2011 06:08 PM)defacto7 Wrote:  I say continue the free speech open forum... But, get rid of the reputation caste system. There is no usefulness to it that positively affects the whole of the constituency. There is more to it that affects us in the negative.

Power to the people, man. I'm on board.

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2011, 06:15 PM
 
RE: Reputation arguments... AKA Reputations as Social Caste
(03-12-2011 06:08 PM)defacto7 Wrote:  I say continue the free speech open forum... But, get rid of the reputation caste system. There is no usefulness to it that positively affects the whole of the constituency. There is more to it that affects us in the negative.

You made a very good case defacto and I don't see anything wrong with your suggestion. Let's wait and see what everybody else thinks. Smile
Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2011, 06:22 PM
RE: Reputation arguments... AKA Reputations as Social Caste
I think the whole argument against the rep system is way overblown.
I personally couldn't care less whether or not the rep system stays or goes but I feel it needs saying that if you take away everything that makes someone feel uncomfortable then you have to take away everything that makes everyone uncomfortable. Sometimes it's important to not take everything so serious and adopt a more live and let live policy. The rep system can surely make some people uncomfortable but so can comments that are against other comments posted or someone not getting likes on a comment they thought particularly hilarious. So do we eliminate replies and the likes button? I've offended my fair share of people in life and on this forum, I've also been offended in life and on this forum. But I've addressed the people who offended me myself and Almost everytime have moved forward an even learned a little about how to better deal with them or the situation.
I would say its almost good to be offended once in a while so long as it isn't purposeful. When it is it can be dealt with and I'm sure would be.

The other thread about the forum rules is less in the vain of taking away something as it is for making things flow more easily for the moderators.

On edit I just want everyone to be aware that I am not saying I'm against eliminating the rep system. I couldnt care less either way.

"I think of myself as an intelligent, sensitive human being with the soul of a clown which always forces me to blow it at the most important moments." -Jim Morrison
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes lucradis's post
03-12-2011, 06:29 PM
RE: Reputation arguments... AKA Reputations as Social Caste
This has come up before. In the end, half a dozen or so people said to get rid of the rep, while everyone else that commented said that the liked it. If the majority of the forum is now in favor of eliminating the rep system, it's fine with me. (I don't even look at peoples rep anyways. I use it as a way of giving that person a pat on the back, or displaying that I feel they are a negative force with regard to honest dicourse).

But I need to hear from people. I won't change this if only a few people speak out. If you do feel "bullied" then please don't hesitate to share your opinion with me through private message.

Not sure if it will make a difference, but to show how little it means to me, I'll reset my rep to zero.

So many cats, so few good recipes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2011, 06:38 PM
RE: Reputation arguments... AKA Reputations as Social Caste
I'm not sure how that "weeding out" works. Nor the bullying, either. It may be true - must be, if you've watched it for a year; i haven't been around that long. I just don't understand the mechanism. Do you mean if somebody doesn't get reps, they feel excluded and stop posting? Or change their style to fit in better? Obviously, it doesn't work against everyone with social and emotional issues, but if it frightens away some who might otherwise contribute, that makes it a counterproductive feature. The awarding of reps is a bit arbitrary, as are 'like' points. I have no strong opinion on them, either way.

It's not the mean god I have trouble with - it's the people who worship a mean god.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2011, 06:49 PM
 
RE: Reputation arguments... AKA Reputations as Social Caste
(03-12-2011 06:38 PM)Peterkin Wrote:  The awarding of reps is a bit arbitrary, as are 'like' points. I have no strong opinion on them, either way.

That's my position, too. I like to give them, I like to receive them and often I am embarrassed by them. I notice that people give likes sometime for pointless (for me) one-liners and ignore very valuable (for me), thoughtful posts at the same time. I am sure that some of the reps are like that too.

Having said that, I agree with Stark and Peterkin -- I don't have strong feelings about the issue either way but, if enough people wish to eliminate it, it is OK with me too.

Let's see democracy in action here!
Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2011, 06:52 PM
RE: Reputation arguments... AKA Reputations as Social Caste
(03-12-2011 06:29 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  Not sure if it will make a difference, but to show how little it means to me, I'll reset my rep to zero.

If that's how you feel about your own reps, great. Can you add reps to yourself as well? Can I? Can we all do with them as we wish + or -? Then it's nonsense and should be eliminated.

Feeling good with reps, or not caring about them is a personal decision. My point in the argument is that you, me, and everyone else are different. I can't have your sensitivities and no one can expect others to change theirs. How people affect or control other people is also the issue. Do we give people control to hurt of make others defensive without the ability to protect our sensitivities?

If someone wants to have that control, does that add to freedom or detract? I think it takes away more freedom than it allows. It eliminates those who can't or don't wish to comply to the social order.

This is very different than allowing people to "like" a post or not. Having a positive opinion about a statement is great. If there is a negative one, the person who disagrees should state it in an argument in the thread and allow the other to reply. Not make a general reputation statement about someone that becomes the status for caste. Arguments are one thing.... personal, long term, unrelated comments that may or may not be pertinent to ALL situations is social caste promotion. Do people change their reps or argue about them? rarely. Why? You answer.

Who can turn skies back and begin again?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2011, 06:52 PM (This post was last modified: 03-12-2011 07:43 PM by Hughsie.)
RE: Reputation arguments... AKA Reputations as Social Caste
I'll be the person on the other side. I LOVE the rep system, it pisses me off that the other forum I occasionally go on doesn't have one!

There are people on here I have a lot of respect for (CYTB, Stark, Observer, Lilith, itsFerdinand, FSM_scot, Lucradis, Zat, BC, Tazmin, DeepThought etc.) and I absolutely love the fact that I have a way to properly show my respect for people as opposed to other forums where you can post a reply on a thread saying how generally brilliant someone is but it will get seen by about 10 people and then get buried somewhere in the forum.

-------------------------------------------------------------

PS. Stark I do not appreciate having reps that I have awarded being deleted without my consent, you're getting them back you bloody idiot Smile!!!

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2011, 06:53 PM
RE: Reputation arguments... AKA Reputations as Social Caste
(03-12-2011 06:52 PM)defacto7 Wrote:  
(03-12-2011 06:29 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  Not sure if it will make a difference, but to show how little it means to me, I'll reset my rep to zero.

If that's how you feel about your own reps, great. Can you add reps to yourself as well? Can I? Can we all do with them as we wish + or -? Then it's nonsense and should be eliminated.

Feeling good with reps, or not caring about them is a personal decision. My point in the argument is that you, me, and everyone else are different. I can't have your sensitivities and no one can expect others to change theirs. How people affect or control other people is also the issue. Do we give people control to hurt of make others defensive without the ability to protect our sensitivities?

If someone wants to have that control, does that add to freedom or detract? I think it takes away more freedom than it allows. It eliminates those who can't or don't wish to comply to the social order.

This is very different than allowing people to "like" a post or not. Having a positive opinion about a statement is great. If there is a negative one, the person who disagrees should state it in an argument in the thread and allow the other to reply. Not make a general reputation statement about someone that becomes the status for caste. Arguments are one thing.... personal, long term, unrelated comments that may or may not be pertinent to ALL situations is social caste promotion. Do people change their reps or argue about them? rarely. Why? You answer.

Also, notice your reps rising now. Why? My point is made.

Who can turn skies back and begin again?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: