Reputation Fast Sinking for Newbie



  • More a question about Reputation and being new. So I'm taking it from my own sinking reputation that if you post something that is perceived by others as disagreeing with their views, you run the risk of being voted down and thereby develop a "negative" reputation. Is that correct? What is the purpose of Reputation in one's profile? It seems as though it is meant to be a way to conform one's views to the majority or suffer the consequences by those who would actively lower your reputation. Under those circumstances, I cannot see any real benefit in remaining within such a back-scratching community since it really wouldn't serve any purpose other than to ask questions but remain quiet otherwise.


  • Moderator

    @Joel90 - Generally speaking, I would say it is NOT one's view, but more likely one's tone that would impact a commenter's reputation. The purpose of reputation, initially, is to establish whether the person is just here to spam some product or view, or to slag off the browser, rather than contribute or offer helpful ideas. Once a person gains 3 reputation points, the reputation serves more to alert other users whether the commenter "plays well with others" or tends to offer constructive comments or not. Other than that, there is no "purpose" to be served by reputation points. I would venture to say that the community administrators pay attention to reputation "not at all," and that other users pay attention "hardly at all." What is generally attended to at any given moment is whether another user finds a comment useful or not.

    That said, I've earned hundreds of "thank you" responses without the person thanking me or ever "up-voting" my comment, so be aware that votes are probably fairly scarce on the whole, and so if you earn a lot of downvotes, that only means that either you're being an ass on line, or that you are making a lot of suggestions that Vivaldi fans find unhelpful. That's for you to measure your own comments by - not for anyone here to do anything about.

    edit: I took a look at your reputation and your comments (you've only made 13) and I conclude that your popularity suffered because you opined in one comment that Vivaldi's business plan may be poorly thought out, and in another you said you were leaving. I think the downvotes are just reflections of users' opinion on the whole that Vivaldi is valuable and really ought to succeed, and that someone leaving is a "quitter" or something. I would say, ignore the reputation points, and just be yourself. If you hang around long enough the browser will tend to grow on you I believe, and you may even find yourself helping noobs, which will earn you their gratitude. Your reputation will recover soon enough. If it doesn't, don't worry about it. Be yourself.



    • 2 out of 13 posts is not too bad. BelaBela is at the bottom of the heap with -14 from 7 posts.

    As said before, it's all about tone and attitude. If you prefer Chrome to Vivaldi, that's fine, but most of us are here because we prefer Vivaldi, so if you knock it, and the forum, you're not likely to do well. Instead of complaining about how things are, post something constructive in the Feature Requests thread. and you may get some upvotes.

    Most likely, whatever you want, it's already on the list, but it takes time to develop a browser. Old Opera was under development for well over a decade, while Vivaldi is just two years old. Be patient.



  • If there's no official guide (other than this thread? :D ) to the votes, they will be totally random because people won't know what they do or mean. If there was such a guide, they would be random anyway since especially the downvoters would not read it...



  • Reputation is pointless when you have threads using the reputation system to vote for your favourite extensions or features.
    I have an undeserved reputation of 43 mainly due to this.


  • Moderator

    @CantankRus: Hey - every good idea deserves a reputation point for everyone who likes it!



  • @Ayespy said in Reputation Fast Sinking for Newbie:

    @CantankRus: Hey - every good idea deserves a reputation point for everyone who likes it!

    Even those of ill repute? :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:


  • Moderator

    @CantankRus - Even those.



  • @Joel90 AFAIK the reputation on this forum doesn't serve any real purpose. It's just a feature in your profile that one needs to visit in order to find out how many points did you gather. Perhaps there are some settings available for admins to block users with a negative reputation (if they get a certain amount of downvotes) from writing posts or voting, but that's just my guess.

    I like the fact that the reputation is not as strict as the reputation system on Stack Exchange for example (which is terrible for newbies IMO), but on the other hand, the lack of user's reputation showing up next to their avatar or nickname in threads is kind of disappointing. On the previous forum, you could see the number of "Thank you" points in each user's post, though you didn't know who "thanked" you, so it wasn't that good either.

    As for downvoting, there are no rules actually, anyone can downvote your post at any time, as they like. It's hard to determine why exactly did you get downvotes for one post or another. You can only assume that it's due to the view or idea presented in that post being unpopular, but there are usually other reasons too.

    You can always get downvotes easily by showing a negative attitude towards other users or the Vivaldi team or browser for no reason since the majority of us are here to support this project even though it still requires a lot of work. Unconstructive criticism, negative and unsubstantial comments or mere complaints are the most common reasons for receiving downvotes here.

    But you can disagree with someone else and still have a meaningful conversation with them, without downvoting each other's posts. Here's an example of my discussion with another user where we disagreed on some points, but still kept the conversation meaningful. The other day I had a little dispute with another user, who resorted to downvoting a bunch of my posts just because he didn't agree with me and now he's no longer with us - he's account is deleted, though the reasons remain unknown. But it might've been his attitude that led to such an end.

    Anyway, my point is that it's not always your fault that you receive downvotes - but the way you treat others will certainly make a difference. 😉



  • Okay. Tone or attitude is the determining factor in voting up or down and not necessarily view or substance of one's post. I think if I understood correctly, that "should be" the determining factor. I'm not sure I really see any positive purpose to this system as opposed to a 'thankyou' clicked beside someone's name for helping resolve a problem. In fact, someone with trolling instincts could easily spend an hour or two down-voting people for no good reason whatsoever since the person remains anonymous. Would someone do that?

    Anyway, I feel a bit better about my two down votes now. I think it had to do with my attitude about the colored tool bar and the tone I projected in another thread regarding my favorite browser. I'll be more circumspect and closed-mouth in the future. Thank you for the explanation.


  • Moderator

    @Joel90: I encourage active participation. :slight_smile: I also encourage respectfulness and politesse. :smile:



  • @Joel90 said in:

    In fact, someone with trolling instincts could easily spend an hour or two down-voting people for no good reason whatsoever since the person remains anonymous. Would someone do that?

    That's probably a rare occurrence, but what does happen in many places (though not necessarily here) is that people "follow the flock". When they see that a posted item has got several downvotes, they are far more likely to downvote it themselves. One gets more pleasure off punishing others when one is part of a lynch mob.



  • I wonder if anyone has considered that this sort of approach is geared to promoting what is referred to as "group think" in the mental health profession.

    That leads to a debilitating case of "correctness" that then morphs into "elitism" that can be nauseating at times and inherently self-serving which eventually ends in the group (society) committing social suicide.

    A healthy group on the other hand, encourages engagement and through that process, collectively ejecting those who are destructive to the group.



  • @kumiponi said in Reputation Fast Sinking for Newbie:
    "One gets more pleasure off punishing others when one is part of a lynch mob."

    Ugh, what a terrible indictment of the human condition. Whilst i know for sure you are correct [sometimes], it's one part of humans that i'll never be able to comprehend. For those who've read it, this tendency is very "Lord of the Flies". Sad.



  • @Steffie Hard to take the "nature" out of human. Maybe singularity is the solution.



  • @inkcognito -- i look forward to the imminent return of our cockroach overlords.



  • I've always wondered why someone cares about the "reputation" (or should we call it "status"? IMHO that would fit better) that is generated by some clicks or some other esoteric measurement.

    That reputation and upvote, downvote stuff does not even work reliably on Stackoverflow - which is a quite controlled and moderated page - and even less on pages with free discussions. IMHO it is only some ego grooming popularity contest most of the time.

    I can't say that I care much about the "reputation" of a user who posts good material and I don't need a "reputation" value to recognize bad material.

    ... and I especially don't care about my own reputation.



  • @QuHno Your point is well taken. Open discussions/debates need less, rather than more restraints/restrictions. One's so-called reputation/status carries little weight in that environment though it does serve a minor purpose in service of organization.



  • This discussion has been insightful. You've given me much to mull over. Thank you.



  • @inkcognito
    Yes, especially if the "reputation" basically does nothing. I can understand why they use it at systems like e.g. disqus, it is a lazy solution:
    As a site owner you don't need to care much about the contents. If they are "bad" they get downvoted and at a certain point they vanish from sight or maybe even lead to some automatic ban of the user. I personally don't like that because that system can be manipulated way too easy and that is the point when things really go downhill.

    On the other hand:
    Full free discussion where everything is allowed is not what I'd like to see too - simply because some people think that free speech covers hate speech or harassing people or posting outright lies about others for whatever reason they can think about in their sick minds too. Maybe it even does, but it does not force anyone to give them a place to post their view. I don't know what goes through the heads of those people (if anything) but obviously they forget that there are people, also known as fellow humans, on the receiving end.

    But luckily it is always possible to call a moderator if things go haywire, so still no real need for some reputation system.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Vivaldi Forum was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.