Rep

[King Patrick Star]

Okay, I understand this.

You cannot give Reputation to the same post twice.

I don’t understand this.

You have given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later.

What is the limit exactly?? More importantly, why is there a limit?? Do you know how many great posts there are out there that aren’t getting any of my Green??

 

[JGlass]

So you can't go and rep every post you see, thus diluting the system.

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

You can only give 10 reps a day Patrick, and you can only rep a poster again after you have repped 10 others.

That is what I thought it was anyway.

 

[King Patrick Star]

Oh. Okay, thanks guys. My next 2 questions are:
What’s the difference between dark green rep squares and bright green rep squares??
What exactly is rep power and how is it calculated??

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

You get a green square of rep each time you reach a certain amount of positive rep...and if your rep hits a certain level below 0 you get a red sqaure...then its goes lower you get a 2nd square.

I think this is all explained in the FAQ section of the forums. I thought you'd know all this by now, having been here nearly over 2 years and having nearly 1000 posts?! lol

 

[Dagger Dias]

Oh. Okay, thanks guys. My next 2 questions are:
What’s the difference between dark green rep squares and bright green rep squares??
What exactly is rep power and how is it calculated??

The dark green squares are worth 100 while the light greens are worth 200. Anyone with 1500+ rep has a full bar.

Rep Power is how much green rep you give someone. Divide that by half (round down on odd numbers) to get your red rep value. Yours are worth 3 in green and 1 in red. Mine are 9 in green and 4 in red, for example.

Rep Power levels are calculated by both post count and rep total. You gain your first level at 30 posts. After that it is 1 for every 750 nonspam posts and 1 for every 1000 points of rep.

Hope that cleared it up.

 

[King Patrick Star]

I never really paid attention to it till I got my latest Red Rep. Then it started to bug me, so I thought I’d ask. Thanks for clearing that up, Triple Naitch and Dagger Dias.

 

[Slyfox696]

More importantly, why is there a limit??

Because the current Administrators don't care enough about rep to bother changing it?

 

[hatehabsforever]

Why would the administrators even want to change it? There's too much "disproportionate rep" on here already, relaxing the rules would only make that worse.

 

[King Patrick Star]

Oh, it’s one of those, “If you smell the bottom line, what the Rock is cooking, because Stone Cold said so” type of deals. Okay, thanks, Slyfox696.

 

[Slyfox696]

Why would the administrators even want to change it? There's too much "disproportionate rep" on here already, relaxing the rules would only make that worse.

If I had it my way, I would remove point values from rep, and posts could then only be repped good or bad. And you would have to have at least 50 posts to give a green or red (not that it matters, since they wouldn't be assigned any points).

 

[Blue Chipper]

If I had it my way, I would remove point values from rep, and posts could then only be repped good or bad. And you would have to have at least 50 posts to give a green or red (not that it matters, since they wouldn't be assigned any points).

I like this.

 

[hatehabsforever]

If I had it my way, I would remove point values from rep, and posts could then only be repped good or bad. And you would have to have at least 50 posts to give a green or red (not that it matters, since they wouldn't be assigned any points).

Hopefully, this is not the big announcement that you and KB have been teasing for the last couple of weeks

Personally, I would not like this change. I do like the idea of a minimum of 50 posts before you can rep. But I don't like the idea that everyone's rep would count the same, whether it be green or red. It wouldn't make sense to me for administrators, moderators, or longer term well established posters to be on equal footing as Joe Blow who joined last month and has 51 posts. Getting higher rep from certain posters is harder to get, and more "valuable" (if you consider rep on a wrestling forum to have actual value), whereas getting rep from some noob would be easier.

I'd like to see rep restricted to the non spam sections. If you make a good, well thought out non spam post, you get the appropriate green rep. If you make a shitty one, you get the deserved red rep. But perhaps you shouldn't get the same degree of rep for wishing someone happy birthday, flaming or trolling someone, posting your current rep score, or posting some one liner. Maybe these types of posts shouldn't receive zero rep, but perhaps reduced somehow. I think this would even out the "disproportionate rep" which we all know exists on here, especially from the past.

 

[DirtyJosé]

But your opinion is based in the fact that you feel rep should be worth something and be an indicator of value and worth. Furthermore, it's reinforced by your opinion that only non-spam posting can be of any value or worth. Come on, mang. Plenty of good posting goes down in spam zones, and that's not even counting the "humor" or "troll" stuff.

 

[hatehabsforever]

But your opinion is based in the fact that you feel rep should be worth something and be an indicator of value and worth. Furthermore, it's reinforced by your opinion that only non-spam posting can be of any value or worth. Come on, mang. Plenty of good posting goes down in spam zones, and that's not even counting the "humor" or "troll" stuff.

Of course you are somewhat correct Jose, that's why I modified my original thoughts from spam posts being worth nothing, to them simply having lesser value. I realize a lot of great posting goes on in the spam sections, so I conceded that it wouldn't be correct to have that be worth nothing.

Let's say, though, for example, you and I were to decide to debate some wrestling topic. After going back and forth and making good points, we decide to green rep each other. I see value in that. Next week comes and it's your birthday, so I type in "Happy Birthday Dirty Jose" . Should that be worth the same amount of rep as our previous debate was? That's all I'm saying. There should be some way to distinguish between the two.

 

[DirtyJosé]

Of course you are somewhat correct Jose, that's why I modified my original thoughts from spam posts being worth nothing, to them simply having lesser value. I realize a lot of great posting goes on in the spam sections, so I conceded that it wouldn't be correct to have that be worth nothing.

Let's say, though, for example, you and I were to decide to debate some wrestling topic. After going back and forth and making good points, we decide to green rep each other. I see value in that. Next week comes and it's your birthday, so I type in "Happy Birthday Dirty Jose" . Should that be worth the same amount of rep as our previous debate was? That's all I'm saying. There should be some way to distinguish between the two.

The thing is, yes, I do feel they are worth the same value in green rep. Specifically, MY green rep. A pleasing debate with you and a genuine well wishing on my birthday are both things that would incline me to share the gift of green. I get where you're coming from with it, though, so I'm not saying "YOU'RE WRONG", just that I disagree.

 

[Slyfox696]

Hopefully, this is not the big announcement that you and KB have been teasing for the last couple of weeks

Personally, I would not like this change. I do like the idea of a minimum of 50 posts before you can rep. But I don't like the idea that everyone's rep would count the same, whether it be green or red. It wouldn't make sense to me for administrators, moderators, or longer term well established posters to be on equal footing as Joe Blow who joined last month and has 51 posts. Getting higher rep from certain posters is harder to get, and more "valuable" (if you consider rep on a wrestling forum to have actual value), whereas getting rep from some noob would be easier.

I'd like to see rep restricted to the non spam sections. If you make a good, well thought out non spam post, you get the appropriate green rep. If you make a shitty one, you get the deserved red rep. But perhaps you shouldn't get the same degree of rep for wishing someone happy birthday, flaming or trolling someone, posting your current rep score, or posting some one liner. Maybe these types of posts shouldn't receive zero rep, but perhaps reduced somehow. I think this would even out the "disproportionate rep" which we all know exists on here, especially from the past.

But your opinion is based in the fact that you feel rep should be worth something and be an indicator of value and worth.

What DirtyJose said. I wouldn't assign ANY point value to the rep, it's just simply a thumbs up or thumbs down. It wouldn't matter how hard it was to get rep, it would simply be whether people like your post or not.

 

[Uncle Sam]

 

[Twiztid Rodimus]

More rules than a f**king church, I swear

 

[DirtyJosé]

More rules than a f**king church, I swear

Irony being that, yes, you can say "fuck".

This is a universal "Red Rep Me" post. You all should join in.

 

[Twiztid Rodimus]

And I'm sure, I give a flying fuck about red rep. Hell, I'd red rep myself, just to prove it means NOTHING

 

[Hyorinmaru]

And I'm sure, I give a flying fuck about red rep. Hell, I'd red rep myself, just to prove it means NOTHING

except you can't rep yourself

 

[FunKay the Inevitable]

And I'm sure, I give a flying fuck about red rep. Hell, I'd red rep myself, just to prove it means NOTHING

[YOUTUBE]q6cyDsuNx_U&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]