Super Mario Bros. X Forums

That many downreps for that single post is just asinine. One or two would've been more reasonable, as I said on my comment when I uprepped him, but FIVE downreps? Seriously, people.

Zeldamaster12 wrote:That many downreps for that single post is just asinine. One or two would've been more reasonable, as I said on my comment when I uprepped him, but FIVE downreps? Seriously, people.

Seriously where did you guys get 5 from?
But thanks for the support from my friends for sticking up for me. Even though the rep system may be screwy at times, it does help remind you that there are people on your side...and people who aren't on your side.

this is the most ironic shit ever

first, even if that post didn't deserve that many downreps, it also didn't deserve the ammount of upreps it's getting right now.

inb4 the rebuttal: "but he got downrepped, so it makes this even"

go look at the rules boys

5. Do not uprep a user simply because they were downrepped.

and, yes, the people who downrepped the dude are also breaking another rule, i won't deny that.

5. Do not downrep a user if they've been downrepped multiple times for the same post before. You can't track downreps to the posts they were given for but if you know the user has received downreps for the post, don't downrep them again.

both sides are equally as wrong, now pls don't fuck arround with someone else's rep count.

and also

Kyo wrote:He just got his fifth one. This is why this community is the maturest of all

We are all 110% aware that this community is garbage in one way or another, you don't need to remind us of that shit.

PaperPlayerX wrote:and people who aren't on your side.

You shouldn't think like that. Just because they downrepped you, you shouldn't consider them as foes.

Kyo wrote:

PaperPlayerX wrote:and people who aren't on your side.

You shouldn't think like that. Just because they downrepped you, you shouldn't consider them as foes.

That's not really what I was implying.
I don't consider any of the 4 people who DRed me foes. In fact, I would've accepted having just 1 or 2 downreps from that little conflict.
When I said this:

PaperPlayerX wrote:and people who aren't on your side.

I was referring to people that bully and take advantage of, abuse, or misuse the downrep system. I wouldn't consider my downreppers in the wrong, but I agree that 4 is asinine.

Just a thing, but can the staff can make so you are unable to uprep/downrep an user for a post if that post already got an uprep/downrep? That would make less situation like the one PaperPlayerX had before.

Christian07 wrote:Just a thing, but can the staff can make so you are unable to uprep/downrep an user for a post if that post already got an uprep/downrep? That would make less situation like the one PaperPlayerX had before.

That would make the rules actually be enforced.

Christian07 wrote:Just a thing, but can the staff can make so you are unable to uprep/downrep an user for a post if that post already got an uprep/downrep? That would make less situation like the one PaperPlayerX had before.

It's already in the rules, but only applies for downreps. Would be extremely stupid if it would apply for upreps.

Kyo wrote:

Christian07 wrote:Just a thing, but can the staff can make so you are unable to uprep/downrep an user for a post if that post already got an uprep/downrep? That would make less situation like the one PaperPlayerX had before.

It's already in the rules, but only applies for downreps. Would be extremely stupid if it would apply for upreps.

Yeah, especially if multiple people wanted to uprep someone for a great episode.

But that means nothing. Multiple people would want to downrep somebody regardless of being unfair and against the rules. The same should apply to upreps.

Natsu wrote:But that means nothing. Multiple people would want to downrep somebody regardless of being unfair and against the rules. The same should apply to upreps.

Well, There could actually be some kind of cap then. Like for upreps it could be 5, and downreps it would be 1.

Natsu wrote:But that means nothing. Multiple people would want to downrep somebody regardless of being unfair and against the rules. The same should apply to upreps.

Downrep = Punishment
Uprep = Reward

That's pretty much what the average member thinks about the reputation system. It's even true in a way, if you think about it.

There can be too much punishment, but there can't be too many rewards. If someone was being an asshole, you downrep him once and leave it. He got his punishment. If he continues, he gets the downrep fist again, but not before he did something again to deserve it. He didn't get the chance to improve. That doesn't apply for upreps, simply because you can't get too many upreps. You always have too less, but you never have too much.

What lighthouse64 said was a good point. You create a thread in which you announce or implement something pretty great, and with a project taken as instance, the thread will likely be alive for a long period of time. So why should you only receive one uprep for it?

Kyo wrote:

Natsu wrote:But that means nothing. Multiple people would want to downrep somebody regardless of being unfair and against the rules. The same should apply to upreps.

Downrep = Punishment
Uprep = Reward

That's pretty much what the average member thinks about the reputation system. It's even true in a way, if you think about it.

There can be too much punishment, but there can't be too many rewards. If someone was being an asshole, you downrep him once and leave it. He got his punishment. If he continues, he gets the downrep fist again, but not before he did something again to deserve it. He didn't get the chance to improve. That doesn't apply for upreps, simply because you can't get too many upreps. You always have too less, but you never have too much.

What lighthouse64 said was a good point. You create a thread in which you announce or implement something pretty great, and with a project taken as instance, the thread will likely be alive for a long period of time. So why should you only receive one uprep for it?

There can be to much praise actually. For instance if someone spams uprep on an episode they are a complete fan of. But give people some slack on downrepping, especially if it's only a bit insulting, or rude. Trust me, you have to deal with that in life.


In my eyes:
Uprep = well done, or nice behavior

Downrep(good) = Good advice (like the one from kep )

Downrep(bad) = Wow -_-

Actually, the reputation system doesn't affect anybody, just making a comment on someones profile saying, "You're a dick", "Your posts are useless", or, "leave the forum", or whatever doesn't block you from doing anything other than using the rep system.
I personally don't give a crap about it. I can talk to another user and work with them no matter how far past a -20 rep they are.
I have no idea what it was put in for, but I guess they had some reason. I just think that it's so funny how people abuse it and it turns into a problem.
The comments are not a punishment. They are opinions.
If someone is being stupid on the forums, and causing trouble or spam, you are supposed to report it so the admins can fix the problem, not to gather 40 people to flame someone by downrepping them. It doesn't do anything but cause problems.

If there have been deleted rep comments, such as ones by Knux, there may be an extra page in someone's rep box (ex. zlaker).

So that's why I've seen an instance of this before! I've noticed it, but didn't know if it was anything major or not.

Zeldamaster12 wrote:So that's why I've seen an instance of this before! I've noticed it, but didn't know if it was anything major or not.

I was actually making an educated guess as to why its like that.

If I said this already I'm not sure if I did but check the date before downrepping someone, Because you could probably get a board warning if you downrep someone's post from 2013 at this time.

Is there a reason you cant see some peoples reputations?

Waddle Derp wrote:Is there a reason you cant see some peoples reputations?

This is because there is a setting in the "User Control Panel" that let's it either to view in Puplic or only viewable by themselfes.

User Control Panel < Board preferences < Edit reputation settings