Reputations

Thus making the reputations staying negative but now include senseless reasons

Thanks to someone I'm now at -15. Thanks for the good rep.

Don't pick on Wc3player, he's only small! by which I mean he's medically a dwarf.

Anyhow - just make it so that the reps are no longer anonymous - It will be character building.

Your welcome :-)

Anyway, nicely said ,Chump. That gives me another idea (I seem to be full of them). If EVERYONE signs them with their name, then the people that dont are denounced as cowards and shot. (Ok, no shooting). COuld save time by forcing them to auto-sign, though.

Well man, look at it his way, for example:
I gave you a bad per and sinde that it was me. You look at it and think "what a basterd" then you give me bad rep becouse i gave you bad rep and then i give you bad per becouse you gave me bad rep..... and so on
See it will be an unending way of bad rep ^_^

It's nonsense lol (no offense) : who would care to be called a coward if the bad rep he gives is anonymous ? No one would know who the coward is.

the person who gave the rep would know. i often get rep spam, then edit a post to falme the person, i dont know who they are. noone eolse knows who they are. but i still inform them theyre inbred

Yes, he would know, but no one else would. And usually cowards only mind if others know. Like people who don't feel ashamed if they do a bad thing unless they face the rejection of others.

that sounds like me all over ^_^ . well if someones like that i maintane my basic human right to theyre kidneys if i ever meet them in person.
but on a more seriouse note. if someones like that. if someones like that. theres nothing you can do, just hope they have short attention spans and get bord of the site. either that or do the whole rep mod thing, but it seems unlikely to happen

Thanks for the rep, tha_chump :) Anyway, my idea was that the mods would see who the cowards are. That would work if there werent that many cowards.

Edit:
@35263526 - Thanks for the rep! :> True, but I doubt it will come around. This would be a alternative that would work if the rep system didnt force an auto-sign. I know that from now on I'm signing my reps now (I didnt previously)... Who else wants to start?

well, if we auto signed names, and the bad rep was true, then why WOULD you flame back? arent the only people that are retards flameback? i mean if it were true then leave it! you get some - you dont

That's true for some people, but not enough. Unfortunately, rep signing would most likely be both a blessing and a curse. How terrible it is that the internet is ruled by morons...

hmmm....... mods could take out the ole banning boot tho

But now that Vex says it, it seems you cannot give the same person two reps... thus nullifying that. Anyway, only bad reputation with a good reason like "Please stop double/triple posting, there's an edit button, y'know." or something.

But if Vex is wrong, then we're both right. Weird world we live in.

I don't know why you people are getting into defecit over repu. You must be doing something awfully bad. I have some negative repu but I seem to be staying well in the postive.

Whatever your action was it must of have been incredibly severe enough to put you into the defecit. I mean ALOT of people have to smack your repu meter pretty hard...

(I know i'm about to lose rep over this).

Anyway more repu junk for your info. Repu is scaled (getting repu by a very highly reppued person gives you more repu per tick), there was a glitch where you got more repu then you should of per tick. Getting an extremely postive vote may have given upwards of 20 repu a tick before.

My oppinion is if your repu is negative you can't give repu. If you are below 20 repu you can't give negative repu. Repu is better scaled so that getting negative repu from a 20 repu troll, is completely demolished by getting repu from a 120 repu person.