Vote on the Basschat Reputation System

[Vibrating G String]

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1321745293' post='1442753']
I'm not falling for that - it's just a ruse to get me to change my settings back to "view signatures".

I don't use a signature - I write an X in wax crayon & put a big thumb-print next to it.
[/quote]I just noticed my post violated my own rule

[leschirons]

[quote name='icastle' timestamp='1321742278' post='1442727']
Yeah, but there's always the chance that I'm not joking which'd make it a triple bluff, but having just admitted that, it might be a quadruple bluff... or not.
[/quote]

So, the old quintuple bluff trick eh?

[alyctes]

[quote name='EssentialTension' timestamp='1321703462' post='1442131']
This is a good point. It should be the post that is being 'liked' not the person.
[/quote]

That is true. I approve of this post.

[alyctes]

[quote name='EssentialTension' timestamp='1321727839' post='1442520']
But the top two are in favour of different things so [u]shouldn't[/u] be conflated.
[/quote]

Fixed

[alyctes]

[quote name='bluejay' timestamp='1321730252' post='1442579']
Aherm. Works the same with a woman too.
...
[/quote]

I like this part of this post

(I liked the rest of it as well, but not enough to say so...)

[icastle]

[quote name='Vibrating G String' timestamp='1321746054' post='1442762']
That a mod would be heavily dropping hints and comments about it shows that the system is already being abused and far from anonymous. This particular mod has an argument with me in another thread and I feel this is being used to win that. I've already been told by one mod that I will be banned if I say anything negative about a mod. Yeah reputation system
[/quote]

It's not what's said, it's the way that it's said.

[quote name='Vibrating G String' timestamp='1321746054' post='1442762']
My girlfriend opened an account to mock the whole thing. So you have a slander issue that's factually wrong. Sure she did it to protect me but am I going to tell her to stop as the internet is a scared place and people will get totally bent out of shape if you mock them? I'm sure there's no way this will be rectified short of simply silencing me. So long and thanks for all the fish.
[/quote]

Oh for pitys sake.
I've lost count of the number of times I've not agreed with the content of a post, or someone has expressed dismay at an opinion I've held.
Taking it 'on the chin', knowing when to walk away and staying friends at the end of it will not be achieved by getting ones partner to stir the pot and add fuel to a cock-eyed conspiracy complex.

If you're going to play games then you have a 50/50 chance of losing - either accept that or don't play.

[icastle]

[quote name='leschirons' timestamp='1321748354' post='1442781']
So, the old quintuple bluff trick eh?
[/quote]

LMAO - Why am I reading that with an Inspector Clouseau voice thing going on in my head?

[Ou7shined]

[quote name='EssentialTension' timestamp='1321729447' post='1442562']
I'd say that you are misreading it with a bias to a particular view. You might as well say that the first and the third are the same because they are both against negs but that would also be a biased reading.
[/quote]
How am I misreading the options? The first two options begin (and I quote) "Keep the reputation system but..." while the last one is "Deactivate the reputation system...". A & B are clearly the same option differentiated by a sub-proviso while option C is clearly their absolute antithesis.

A & C can't be the same - C is against the use of Reputation System as a whole, while A is in favour of the system but against one of it's features. And (again) B is also in favour of the system but is not against either of the features. I do see how it can at first look unfair but the wording clearly stipulates that it is a vote to keep, or not to keep... but if kept there is a further condition to the choice.

[skankdelvar]

World's in trouble, there's no communication. An' everyone can say what they wanna say, it never gets better anyway.

So why should I care 'bout a bad reputation?

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJARlX5vAZM"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJARlX5vAZM[/url]

[Jean-Luc Pickguard]

BC members should be allowed to like their own posts as long as they click using their left hand after making it numb by sitting on it.

[Kiwi]

[quote name='Jean-Luc Pickguard' timestamp='1321760293' post='1442828']
BC members should be allowed to like their own posts as long as they click using their left hand after making it numb by sitting on it.
[/quote]
LMAO

Quotes thread. That is all.

[leschirons]

[quote name='Jean-Luc Pickguard' timestamp='1321760293' post='1442828']
BC members should be allowed to like their own posts as long as they click using their left hand after making it numb by sitting on it.
[/quote]

If I made my left hand numb, I'm not going to waste it on voting.

[RhysP]

[quote name='Jean-Luc Pickguard' timestamp='1321760293' post='1442828']
BC members should be allowed to like their own posts as long as they click using their left hand after making it numb by sitting on it.
[/quote]
Don't forget to paint the nails on the left hand a nice tarty colour for added excitement.

[leschirons]

[quote name='icastle' timestamp='1321749405' post='1442792']
LMAO - Why am I reading that with an Inspector Clouseau voice thing going on in my head?
[/quote]

Damn you, I'm now trying to do that, but it keeps coming out like the Gestapo officer in Allo allo!!

[Marvin]

[quote name='Ou7shined' timestamp='1321752457' post='1442809']
How am I misreading the options? The first two options begin (and I quote) "Keep the reputation system but..." while the last one is "Deactivate the reputation system...". A & B are clearly the same option differentiated by a sub-proviso while option C is clearly their absolute antithesis.

A & C can't be the same - C is against the use of Reputation System as a whole, while A is in favour of the system but against one of it's features. And (again) B is also in favour of the system but is not against either of the features. I do see how it can at first look unfair but the wording clearly stipulates that it is a vote to keep, or not to keep... but if kept there is a further condition to the choice.
[/quote]

The wording of the poll question though actually clearly stipulates which option the voter prefers. It's the poll question that's important to obtain the result.

The poll question is 'Which option do you prefer'. It's a simple 3 horse race. Nowhere does it say the vote could be construed in the manner you're setting out. [color=#000000]You seem to be taking the option statements and turning them into the poll question. [/color]

[color=#000000]We could have a discussion on whether the poll has been very well devised or on how the question has been phrased. However, it's been presented in a relatively straightforward manner hence I should imagine the upshot is is that it's first past the post poll.[/color]

[color=#000000](holds back from say simples and doing meerkat impression)[/color]

[color=#000000] [/color]

Edited November 20, 2011 by Marvin

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='Ou7shined' timestamp='1321752457' post='1442809']
How am I misreading the options? The first two options begin (and I quote) "Keep the reputation system but..." while the last one is "Deactivate the reputation system...". A & B are clearly the same option differentiated by a sub-proviso while option C is clearly their absolute antithesis.

A & C can't be the same - C is against the use of Reputation System as a whole, while A is in favour of the system but against one of it's features. And (again) B is also in favour of the system but is not against either of the features. I do see how it can at first look unfair but the wording clearly stipulates that it is a vote to keep, or not to keep... but if kept there is a further condition to the choice.
[/quote]
I understand what you're saying but I think the problem is that your interpretation assumes that anyone who chooses option two automatically has option one as their second choice (and vice versa). However, it's quite feasible that someone could first choose option two and yet be against any reputation system that didn't have negs in it and so would have option three as their second choice. Similarly, anyone who chooses option one may prefer option three, and not option two, as their second choice.We don't know anyone's second choice because the poll doesn't ask for it. So, we ought not to jump to conclusions about second choices when they are unwarranted by the question asked. You may well not agree with me.

I did choose option one at first - I don't mind the earlier not-anonymous system - but I've since changed my vote to option three in case a vote for option one is interpreted as a vote for option two or some other not presently existing system.

[quote name='Marvin' timestamp='1321784600' post='1442908']
The wording of the poll question though actually clearly stipulates which option the voter prefers. It's the poll question that's important to obtain the result.

The poll question is 'Which option do you prefer'. It's a simple 3 horse race. Nowhere does it say the vote could be construed in the manner you're setting out. [color=#000000]You seem to be taking the option statements and turning them into the poll question. [/color]

[color=#000000]We could have a discussion on whether the poll has been very well devised or on how the question has been phrased. However, it's been presented in a relatively straightforward manner hence I should imagine the upshot is is that it's first past the post poll.[/color]

[color=#000000](holds back from say simples and doing meerkat impression)[/color]

[color=#000000] [/color]
[/quote]
Yes.

Edited November 20, 2011 by EssentialTension

[JTUK]

For me, it is simple..if you agree or disagree, you can post as much.

The like button is a lazy way of doing this, but at least you used to get notified.
Now the system is anonymous so that helps no one... IMO

If you feel strongly about a plus or minus content..then post as much so people can respond.

If you take away or reduce the element of a thread stretching its legs, you neuture the whole forum, IMV which will mean less interaction/banter and admittedly a few flames...but at least the whole thing would be more upfront and you could get a better spirit in the long run.

I can sort of understand the thinking which might be less to admin and mod... but at some cost, IMO.

[Lfalex v1.1]

Did I miss something? [i]What[/i] Reputation System? Is that what the funny coloured arrows do?
I'm still trying to find the equivalent to "my assistant"!
Using the site at the mo' is a bit like sitting down to practise, only to discover someone's swapped all of the strings around... It's all still there, but in different places.

Still, I'm posting less, gassing less and playing more, which can only be a good thing.

[discreet]

[quote name='leschirons' timestamp='1321779094' post='1442862']
If I made my left hand numb, I'm not going to waste it on voting.
[/quote]

Or you could try making your **** numb, then it would feel like you were ******* off someone else.

[discreet]

[quote name='Lfalex v1.1' timestamp='1321788425' post='1442951']
I'm posting less ... and playing more.
[/quote]

Probably the best way to improve your bass reputation in the long run!

[BassBus]

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1321645419' post='1441668']
What about a not fussed option?
[/quote]

Why don't you just be fussed and have an opinion, hmm.

[discreet]

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1321790992' post='1442996']
Me have an opinion? That wouldn't do.
[/quote]

That's an opinion.

[Luulox]

voted

[ShergoldSnickers]

There is a question that needs asking. Apart from 'How do I transfer funds to your bank account Snicks?'

What is the reputation system for? What's its purpose? You can follow that up with... Will the way the function is instigated achieve that purpose? At present, the system encourages me to be slightly lazy and click the arrow rather than responding with words, something already pointed out. It also confuses the voting for post or voting for person issue - again something already pointed out.

I've just looked and I see I have a score way beyond what looks like any sensible totting up of my 'reputation'. Which begs the question: What are we really measuring? What is reputation? Whose measure of reputation? Stuffed if I know. It just all seems a bit arbitrary to me. However, it's not meant to be taken seriously is it? So it doesn't matter really. And I've just wasted 5 minutes valuable snacking time. Rectifying as a I type... nom... nom... nom Wanders off muttering....What is food? Why am I eating now? What is its real purpose? Why does bread mould taste so awful?....

[Jean-Luc Pickguard]

Good point snicks. The simple 'like' option seemed to be good for people who would have responded to a post they agreed with by posing a quote followed by +1 without any new content to add. Keeping a total score for someone's account and rating the person, not their individual posts does seem less useful and possible counter-productive.