[Forge]

[Danukem]

Fox, on 22 March 2014 - 10:28 AM, said:

I really ought to do that. 4 cats here, much fur, very sneezy.

[Danukem]

The Commander, on 22 March 2014 - 04:36 AM, said:

You must care about it if you bought it up.
Unlike you I wouldn't care if my reputation was -1000.
Hendricks266 can feel free to change it if he wishes.

Also, I will down vote something I do not agree with or quality.

It's fine to downvote posts because you don't like them. But it's abusing the rep system if you downvote posts for no reason or because you don't like the person posting, when there is nothing objectionable about the post itself. Of course, whether there is something objectionable about the post is largely subjective, so it's not easy to say when someone is abusing the system.

However, if it's not obvious why a post is being downvoted, then people will think you are being arbitrary or vindictive unless you explain yourself. For example, you downvoted 3 of my posts last month in the "lightning model" thread, and I have no idea why. I'm pretty sure it wasn't because of what I was posting in that thread, though. It's not a big deal, but, it's best if people understand why their posts are being downvoted.

[The Commander]

Again, who cares about reputation on the internet.
If people only post on this site for reputation then they shouldn't be here or the reputation system removed altogether.

[Danukem]

The Commander, on 22 March 2014 - 11:14 AM, said:

Again, who cares about reputation on the internet.
If people only post on this site for reputation then they shouldn't be here or the reputation system removed altogether.

The forum is a means of communicating and sharing content. The rep system is there for entertainment, but also for communication -- it's a way of telling someone whether you think they are making a positive or negative contribution. If you don't care about the reputation system, that's fine. Personally, I would rather the system be removed, but that's not my call. In any case, if you vote people down without reason, it causes complaints and can make the forum unpleasant for those who do care. It's also confusing sometimes -- people can't tell whether you are voting them down for some reason or just for shits and giggles (see my example in my previous post). So basically what I'm saying is, if you are going to use the system, please use it as intended. I have asked nicely.

[Fox]

Though I think that the negative button should be removed because newbies often freak out about it. As if Duke4.net isn't xenophobic enough...

[ReaperMan]

Remove the positive button.... problem solved.

[Gambini]

Remove the negative button and don´t make users gain "rep" by positive votes accumulation, but rather make posts that get lot of "likes" to be somehow more visible (like a See most liked posts of the week/day button). I don´t care too much about the reputation because one simple reason: There´s no direct connection between respectable members and their rep points, it seems to be more related to either flattery or amount of posts. However I sometimes refrain to post something just because I know it can trigger a cascade of downvotes which will fuel on me the need of arguing about it. There´s also a lot of retaliation for loose downvotes and circle jerking of upvotes which for me feels quite highschool-like.

[Mark]

Kathy said :Your revenge downvoting is pathetic. I don't care about my reputation, but I do care about you being petty and pathetic. At least have the courtesy of downvoting based on an actual post and not because I downvoted you.
-------------------------------------------------

I'm going to be a rebel and not go along with the automatic downvote when someone complains about their downvote.

[High Treason]

Meh, I ignore the rep anyway, it's there for those who want to make use of it (either voting, viewing or playing) - I'm mostly neutral.

Main reason I am here is that I'm rather happy with myself. I have a stack of old cameras, every one I have ever used, they're pretty rubbish. I was bored though and had a couple of power-line Ethernet adapters given to me as well as having a rather weak old computer around that wasn't short on USB ports, that now lives in a disused room wired to these cameras which are placed looking out of my house, a bit of motion detecting and routing over the network later and I have CCTV for nothing more than the 50 Watts of electricity the whole setup uses.

[Forge]

remove the rep given number next to the positive & negative buttons

won't know who voted which way or even what post was voted on

reduce retaliation down-voting & "group-click" upvotes


or just leave it the way it is and let members keep getting additional downvotes when asking someone why one of their posts was downvoted without an explanation
-that'll teach 'em not to use the PM system

[Hank]

The Commander, on 22 March 2014 - 11:14 AM, said:

Again, who cares about reputation on the internet.
If people only post on this site for reputation then they shouldn't be here or the reputation system removed altogether.

On one hand you claim not to care about the rep system but make use it. If it does not matter, why bother to up/downvote? Some people do worry about their reputation in this forum, and those mystery downvotes.

[Forge]

Hank, on 22 March 2014 - 04:40 PM, said:

On one hand you claim not to care about the rep system but make use it. If it does not matter, why bother to up/downvote?

really?

the obvious of course. to irritate someone.

not caring does not mean that it can't be used as a method of annoyance

and yes. upvotes can be used the same way. just keep upvoting someone who's irritating the person that annoys you

[Hank]

Forge, on 22 March 2014 - 04:43 PM, said:

really?

the obvious of course. to irritate someone.

not caring does not mean that it can't be used as a method of annoyance

and yes. upvotes can be used the same way. just keep upvoting someone who's irritating the person that annoys you

This is so complicated my head hurts .... so should I dowvote the post because you wrote way over my head or upvote you in the hope someone may get annoyed?

[Zaxtor]

[The Commander]

I don't get it.

[Gambini]

The first two are from movies of my childhood and i have a nice memory of them.

[The Commander]

I know most of the movies, I just thought there was something about the head shots of them that is supposed to mean something.

[Kathy]

The Commander, on 22 March 2014 - 05:42 AM, said:

You bought it up.

What does it mean? My english is having a hard time understanding. Did you mean I brought it up?

Forge, on 22 March 2014 - 06:50 AM, said:

to me "full knowledge" is basically a person made aware that there is a god, either by spiritual enlightenment or by word of mouth. what they chose to do with that information is entirely on them (free will).continue seeking for more information or just throw it out as bunk.

But would it contribute to person rejecting god in full knowledge and bearing consequences of their choice by going to hell?

ReaperMan, on 22 March 2014 - 08:40 AM, said:

"I don't care about my rep".... complains about it any way.

I 'complain' about the reasons of downvoting when I don't see any other than 'revenge'. My main concern is the reasons of person doing it and if the only reason was to somehow get back at me, then I'm bothered by the pettiness.
The whole score doesn't bother me because, well, I have enough of it to not really care.

[Forge]

Kathy, on 23 March 2014 - 11:32 AM, said:

But would it contribute to person rejecting god in full knowledge and bearing consequences of their choice by going to hell?

not sure what you mean.

if a person is made aware that there could be a god, but chooses to disregard it as fantasy, then they don't believe in a hell anyway.

course if they're wrong then they have to face the consequences, whatever that may be. multiple religions - so multiple interpretations of what might happen. i haven't died and came back to life so i'm not qualified to make an accurate report.

[Kathy]

I'm asking about rejecting something in "full knowledge", which isn't defined. Cause quite a popular opinion is, if you were preached about it and rejected, then you'll bear the consequences after death. On the other hand Slim Flibble said about rejecting it in a meeting with a real god right after death. Of course it's not an exact science(and not a science at all), but isn't there a more 'proper' understanding about how this works?

[Danukem]

If God exists then he's obviously a sick fuck so I'm screwed whether I believe in him or not.

[Forge]

Trooper Dan, on 23 March 2014 - 12:14 PM, said:

If God exists then he's obviously a sick fuck so I'm screwed whether I believe in him or not.

actually i hope he's a sick fuck so maybe he'll think some of the shit i've pulled is at least amusing. if not, then i'm screwed too.

Kathy, on 23 March 2014 - 12:12 PM, said:

I'm asking about rejecting something in "full knowledge", which isn't defined.

full knowledge has almost as many interpretations as there are religions, but most are of the perception that full knowledge is an earthly matter - meaning that it has to do with while you're alive. After you die and meet God it's to late to acknowledge his existence without paying the consequences first.

[Gambini]

If he´s a sick fuck he will sure emphatize with you

[Zaxtor]

Gambini, on 23 March 2014 - 08:26 AM, said:

The first two are from movies of my childhood and i have a nice memory of them.

Neverending story (1984)
Such a great movie, had beautiful colors etc.

Also they're talking about remaking it according to rumors.. It may not be certain.
http://ca.ign.com/ar...tory-never-ends (news is close to 5 years tho)


I hope they will use the musics of the 1984 classic.


Maybe we will see Gmork more. we never know.

[MrBlackCat]

If I were a god as I was taught was the creator, I would reject those who were capable of, or comfortable with, blind faith. While not saying I would damn those who chose to believe what they do based on their own capacity trying to understand my god-perspective. As a being which could create all that we know, I would never expect my creations to understand my motivations any more than I would expect ants to choose anything I believed they should or that I indirectly encouraged them to.

That is just an idea of mine of course. My hang-up is that something capable of creating our existence would be so far beyond us, that any need for being appreciated or even more, worshiped, would seem absurd. The fact that those are things HUMANS often desire for their works and efforts is kind of suspect to begin with. I would hope a god wouldn't be so "5th Grade" so to speak. Again this is based on my "tiny" perspective as a mere human.

Other than that, I would never allow my creations to suffer in a place like Christian (and other) described hell... and personally, as a human, I would never admire, bow to, or worship anything or anyone that would allow, condone, or punish us by burning us forever. (or even a couple of minutes)

I seriously doubt something didn't create all of this, but to pretend this thing would need or want anything directly from us, is to me, absurd. This theoretical need to be believed in, worshiped and so on, is also historically and typically as human as the belief the earth revolves around the sun and we are the center of "everything". It is my belief we are far from the center of anything relative to purpose of existence in the universe, and I am very comfortable with that.

MrBlackCat

[Lunick]

[Gambini]

I imagine her taking it out and the pet fucking her with his hairly green tool with all the public clapping

[Jeff]

Seems the cause of my vacuum issues was that the upper filter was clogged with tons of cat hair. It works fine now.

[Lunick]

You shouldn't put your cat in the vacuum cleaner.