[DarkLloyd]

This is a non-issue for me. I couldnt possibly care any less about what random people on a forum think of me. However, for those who do, another solution might be to have the option of removing/hiding the rep score in the modify profile section.

This would work too.
But would that stop you from seeing it for all or just on your profile?

[FastJack]

This is a non-issue for me. I couldnt possibly care any less about what random people on a forum think of me. However, for those who do, another solution might be to have the option of removing/hiding the rep score in the modify profile section.

This would work too.
But would that stop you from seeing it for all or just on your profile?

That would be additional coding on the part of Admin and Moderators, so I'd say it's off the table as well.

[Xzylvador]

Keep it as it is. For the people who get upset because anonymous people on the internet don't like them, I'd tell them the same thing my mother told me, "Life is not fair." Good people have bad things happen to them. Bad people get away with things. Assholes get laid like nobody's business, and nice guys stay virgins into their 40s. Life is not fair. You can either cry about it, or you can accept it, grow a thicker skin, and keep moving forward.

My god, you asked for a reason why people don't like the system; they explain it and all you can say in response comes down to "Suck it up, life ain't fair!"...
... and you even think that's a reason to KEEP it?

This topic isn't about real-world fairness. (Nor virginity... seriously, where'd that come from?) It's about this forum's rep-system and whether or not to keep it as-is.
So far, all I've read are people who either want it gone because of the abuse; or people who just don't care what anonymous others think about them. FastJack might have wanted to include that option...
I've yet to find any serious Pro-Rep-system argument other than "Jackpoint has one too"... which I agree is actually a good one. The flavor is great, but I'm also dead certain that smite-spamming in the way it's being done here would get you treated to a Black Ice bombardment and banned for life by FastJack (the real one). But admin/moderator control over smites aren't an option here
If most people "don't care about anonymous people on the internet" and just ignore it, and the ones that DO care think it sucks in its uncontrolled and abused state, isn't it better to remove it?

[FastJack]

I've yet to find any serious Pro-Rep-system argument other than "Jackpoint has one too"... which I agree is actually a good one. The flavor is great, but I'm also dead certain that smite-spamming in the way it's being done here would get you treated to a Black Ice bombardment and banned for life by FastJack (the real one). But admin/moderator control over smites aren't an option here

I'm not so sure... But we'll have to see about that.

[PeterSmith]

My god, you asked for a reason why people don't like the system; they explain it and all you can say in response comes down to "Suck it up, life ain't fair!"...
... and you even think that's a reason to KEEP it?

Yup.

This topic isn't about real-world fairness.

Except it is. We're talking about a real-world rep system, not something from a game book.

If most people "don't care about anonymous people on the internet" and just ignore it, and the ones that DO care think it sucks in its uncontrolled and abused state, isn't it better to remove it?

I like it as-is, so no. It's not better to remove it.

[Smileinbob]

I know that I don't post alot here but I do lurk quite abit so I'll toss in my two nuyen...

I'm not going to quote the others, because y'all pretty much covered what I said just above. I will say the Rep system was never intended to be anything more than "fun", especially since those of us here in the beginning saw it as something similar to the Persona 2.0 (PITO) ratings and Jackpoint Rep scores.

I think this quote pretty much sums up the whole debate.. it's intended just as a bit of fun, nothing to get bent out of shape over.. compared to some of the other boards I visit on my various travels around the interwebs, this place is pretty warm and fuzzy. 

If something that was intended as mainly a lark is really getting peoples panties in a wad, then I would have to go with remove it. I would say in parting that to those who did get bent out of shape over it, you might wanna check up with your armor guy and pick up some tougher stuff, it's rough out there in the anonymity of the interwebs, the best thing you can do is try not to be a dick when its not needed and don't worry to much when some one is a dick to you. Odds are they are just another internet tough guy, and do you really care what this guy below thinks of you?

[CanRay]

...

...

...

Yes.  Yes I do. 

[FastJack]

Okay, just as a side note: Let's keep the disparaging remarks to a minimum. People have a right to their opinion, which this poll is taking into account. I am in agreement that if you're on the internet, you need to have a tough skin, but they also have a point in that the system may be doing more harm than good.

So, let's keep the discussions civil and not resort to a back and forth between both parties.

[Pyromaster13]

I vote to keep it, because the system itself is not flawed, it is the people who use it.

[Black]

Ahhh... but a system should support its users, not the other way around.  A system built to only support the ideal will quickly fail when faced with the real world.

The above argument is what I usually use for Developers/Architects who only design solutions which don't cater for user error or just plan computer illiteracy.  But I think it also applies here.  The Rep system does not cater for user abuse.

Also, in support of Xzyl's statement, if the workaround to a system issue is simply to ignore it, then thats not a solution at all.  If resources a cannot spent to resolve the issue, I think its better to remove the system for now.

[FastJack]

Ahhh... but a system should support its users, not the other way around.  A system built to only support the ideal will quickly fail when faced with the real world.

The above argument is what I usually use for Developers/Architects who only design solutions which don't cater for user error or just plan computer illiteracy.  But I think it also applies here.  The Rep system does not cater for user abuse.

Also, in support of Xzyl's statement, if the workaround to a system issue is simply to ignore it, then thats not a solution at all.  If resources a cannot spent to resolve the issue, I think its better to remove the system for now.

I understand the point you're making, but no system will ever by free from user abuse, much like you cannot build anything to be truly foolproof.

[CanRay]

Nature just keeps pumping out better fools...

[Black]

Hey Fastjack, what about increasing the cooldown time between smiting/applauding.  Maybe make it a 24 hour gap or something.  As least when the mystery person(s) goes on a smite rage, it will be less noticable.  I think its also the speed/regularity of the smites which have starting upsetting people.  When you recieve 5+ smites a day when you haven't even posted, that gets annoying.  But if we slow the smite/applauds down, it has less impactive. 
I'm guess this would be a code change, but it should be a much easier one then some of the other ideas.

[ArkangelWinter]

I second this idea, and +1 because irony.

[FastJack]

Code changes, even small ones, are problematic in that any time Simple Machine Forums sends out an update/patch, we would then have to re-code the pages again, not knowing if the same code would work on the new update/patch. In this regard, we're at the whimsy of the forum software. The Rep System is built into SMF as-is.

So, once again, you're votes are to turn it off or keep it on.