12-16-2017, 02:07 PM
(12-16-2017, 11:41 AM)Bengalholic Wrote: Eh, I've never really seen the value of neg rep. If you like a post then rep it. If you don't like it, then don't rep it. Not sure why a 3rd option is needed.
It's your board, your rules. As I don't think I've ever properly thanked you for the time and effort to recreate the old board, allow me to do so now. As for red, it's no different than green. One expresses approval, the other disapproval. If you're worried about people getting rep nuked then limit the number of times you can rep a particular poster, with either red or green, i.e. you can't rep Jim again until you've given out rep to X number of other posters. It would prevent both rep nuking and rep circle jerks.
(12-16-2017, 12:47 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I liked neg rep, myself. Helped identify trolls, and some posts deserve it. If most of the board disagrees with your post, it should be reflected. That said, too many people complained.
This I don't get, let them complain. Are they shareholders? Anyone complaining about getting red should be beat with a sack of doorknobs anyways. If you're so insecure that receiving neg rep hurts your feelings then the internet is not the place for you anyways. I say bring it back under the rules I suggested above. Reset everyone's rep to zero in the process, let actual quality posters be identified.
