Apology

[Lolleedee]

Thanks for the explaination, Nark.  While I don't have a problem with you not participating in the Karma system, I do have a problem if we all don't have the choice or option to opt out.  If it is something only you can do because you are an admin, then I don't think it is fair to the rest of us.

I personally like even the negative karma.  When someone disagrees with me, through karma or on the board directly, it gives me the opportunity to examine my original position, learn about someone else's perspective and it helps me grow as a person.  I find I learn the most from people who irk me and challenge my status quo!

However this plays out, with the negative karma being removed, or individual opt out, my ONLY concern is everyone has equal access to ALL options.  If not, these little perks that us regular members don't have I could might have a polarizing effect on the board!

[Lolleedee]

I kind of liked the no negative rep on the phile. It might not be meant that way, but it hurts peoples feelings in a "What's wrong with me??" Kind of way apparently.

For a bit I would turn off my rep, but then I would get rep and it popped back on.  Ryan is a whiny bitch or sumwhat.

If it hurts people so much maybe the admins should just remove all the negative rep.  We can have a gentleman's agreement not to neg folks, and just move on until chipper figures out another option.

I saw this after I posted.  That is a good idea, Z!  While I am not sensitive to this kind of thing (the negative karma points), I know there are people who are and I want those people to feel unjudged and comfortable!

[Zoops]

I applaud your honesty Nark, coming out and saying what you did. I'd have probably just resigned my admin position instead, amid whispers of corruption and wrongdoing.

But I completely disagree with your opinion that if you opt out of the karma points system, that you should still be able to give out positive and negative karma points. How in the world do you reach that conclusion? You shouldn't be able to participate in the karma points system, yet be insulated from its effects on yourself.

The positive analogy you made with gift-giving is more apropos to the point you were trying to make, but is still inexact, because why would someone deny someone else the pleasure of giving them a gift? That in and of itself is kind of rude to say the least. And it's unfair. Like seriously, you think it's o.k. to say "hey you CANNOT give me any gifts" absolutely against the rules! But I can give you gifts all day long? That notion smells a bit of superiority as well. As if to say, your gifts are simply not good enough for me to accept in the first place.

But let's take the analogy of negative karma points and "gift-giving." Say you give someone a box full of dogshit, and then make a "rule" that nobody is allowed to give you a box full of dogshit. How is that fair?

But anyways, thanks for coming clean about your dishonest behavior. Takes some guts to do that.

tl/dr - kudos to you Nark for coming clean and being honest about some shady stuff you did. All forgiven.
But if you opt out of the karma system, then you must opt out completely, you don't get to do it only halfway.

- Zoops

[Narkotikon (OP)]

I see what you're saying Zoops and Lolleedee.  I appreciate your critiques.  I'm glad we all can talk about these issues.

Zoops, when I was using the analogy of gift giving, I wasn't thinking of someone saying "you absolutely can't give me a gift, but I can give you one."  That is unfair.  I was thinking of it in a different way.  As in "I'm not comfortable receiving a gift, but I don't mind giving other people gifts."  I know of some people like that.  They really don't feel comfortable receiving, mainly because they think it's embarrassing to receive, but they don't have a problem giving.  But you're right, that analogy doesn't really apply to negative rep / "gifts." 

As for resigning my position, I actually PM'd Chipper about that about two weeks ago, before all that drama went down.  I asked him if anyone had been complaining about me being an admin.  I realize I have detractors that might be upset about it, for a variety of reasons.  I said if that's the case, and he, Nick, and Candy would prefer me to not be an admin, I'd have no problem stepping down.  I wouldn't want to have to be demoted in scandal or disgrace.  Until a voting system is in place, I only addressed them, as they're the ones making decisions.

Lolleedee, I also agree with what you're saying.  I'm currently opting out by deleting my positive and negative points whenever I see people giving me any.  For instance, when I logged off last night I had to delete a positive point that Taytoechip gave me.  Upon logging out I had +0 and -0.  When I logged in just now, I had +2 and -2.  So I had to delete those before I made this post.  It's not a perfect system though.  I can do that b/c admins (and possibly mods, I'm not sure) can alter those points.  Regular members can't do that, and it isn't fair to them.

This is obviously an imperfect system.  I can only say that when Chipper perfects the system, finds a better one, turns off the negative rep, or allows everyone to opt out by turning off their system on a case-by-case basis, this is the best thing I thought of.  Or, like I said, I can just re-add the positive and negative points I altered, and simply endure the system until a permanent solution can be found.  I'm open to whatever a majority of members want regarding this. 

Honestly though, I'm not even sure what the totals would be anymore.  I know I deleted +16 yesterday afternoon, then after I made this thread last night I had another +2 that I deleted, then a +1 from Taytoechip (I know because he said it was from him) before I logged off, then another +2 just now.  As for negative, I think I had -5 when I deleted them last week.  The day after I did that, when people first noticed, someone gave me a -1.  Then I had a -2 upon logging in tonight.  So if people would prefer, I could tally those and re-add them back. 

But then the question becomes what's allowed in the tally, and is my memory absolutely correct.  I'm sure the numbers from yesterday and today are correct, but I can't be sure about the numbers I originally deleted.  I know when mods / admins edit posts, change forum / sub-forum features, move threads, delete threads and posts, those things get logged.  I'm not sure about simple things like changing rep.  I suppose I could find out if it's been logged.  But then if I had to say I couldn't find those logs, would people even believe me, unless Chipper / Nick / Candy confirmed it?  That creates more work for them though.  This is all adding up to be more trouble than it's worth.  I shouldn't have deleted the negative points in the first place, and now that I realize that, I'm sorry.

As for what Riddick said, yes, negative karma points, when used correctly, do allow someone to step back and evaluate things.  That's only true though if the person cares or is the type to evaluate those things.  Some people may not care about positive / negative points.  Also, I do believe some people abuse the negative rep.  They use it to be vindictive, and not only for simple disagreement or badly formulated posts.  I believe that's true b/c I believe I know people's demeanors here pretty well.  Also because it's just a statistical probability that at least one person is doing that.  Plus, not everyone views negativity the same way you do.  Some people are bothered by it.  Some people don't want a constant, visual reminder that other people disagree with them, or think they suck.  It's all dependent on how the negative karma system is used or perceived. 

At the end of the day, the important thing is that we're discussing this.  It's a good case study for how problems with mods / admins can be addressed.  I know that Chipper, Nick, and Candy envisaged this place to be a democracy, and for people to feel comfortable and safe to honestly and openly discus things, especially those things that weren't tolerated or easily discussed before.  And if a majority of members would prefer I deal with this karma / rep issue in a different manner, I'm fine with that.  I'm open to suggestions. 

[Chip]

we do have equal access to what we all share but admins have always been able to do what they want.

Nark made a change, felt it unfair, apologised and moved on.

the rep. system is under review.

if you feel any other polarization then speak up.

[Zoops]

It's certainly an interesting psychological experiment going on here, what with the negative karma points potentially being awarded by fellow forum members. How does one perceive these negative "rep" points? Varies widely depending on whom you ask. Some people (sociopaths) give absolutely no shits about what anyone thinks of them, while others may give more of a shit and others obsess about it constantly (that's pathological too).

But even for someone who lies somewhere in the middle of the road insofar as how they perceive these negative karma points, it IS a constant reminder to them every time they log in that someone, somewhere very close, does not like something that they said, or doesn't like their character as a person (as much as you can gauge someone's character in an online forum where people rarely meet face to face), and that can have more of an impact on even your "psychologically normal" person (who is a fabrication, does not exist) than a passing face to face even screaming disagreement, or even slightly physical altercation would have had on that person. (run-on sentences much , Zoops?)

What I mean is that in real life, disagreements and even confrontations (verbal and physical) often can be forgotten before too long, but with this negative karma stuff, it's there for posterity to remember and remember and remember. And the recipient gets to see those negative points up there displayed on his dashboard right up in his face every time, for how long?

The thing that has not been addressed is: how are negative karma points being mitigated?

Is there some regime in place whereby negative rep points are "worked off" somehow?
(like through gaining positive points?)
And do the negative points somehow affect your positive points in any way whatever?

Has anyone thoroughly thought these issues through?

I hope so, but if not let them begin now. I have no say in how this whole thing plays out.

Thanks for letting me express my concerns in a safe place.

I just read my response up there ^^^ and thought "damn don't they have anything better to do?" But no, we don't, apparently. It's talking about "negative karma points" on an online forum for drug users/addicts fer cryin out loud! C'mon people (you, Zoops) you ain't got nothin' better to do than do complain about how "rep points" are handled on aforementioned online forum for drug users/addicts?

Ignore me, I'm high...spoutin off nonsense as per usual. Just idiot brain tryin to pretend it's smart.

- Zoops

[Morfy]

Just a suggestion since you are reconsidering the Rep System:

Maybe everyone should start off with like, -200 Smite Points, because, let's face it, we are all sinners in the 18 Eyes of a Vengeful, 4 Armed, Multiple-Headed God.

Only through our good works here can we gain enough Brownie Points (positive reps), which will lift our souls out of the miry clay of wyckedness, a set our feet upon the Rock of Redemption.

We need to be reminded of our goodly obligation every time we are here and see our dismal Reputation Status.

It should make us feel meek, so that we may one day inherit all of the poppy fields around the world.

We humbly ask this in thine name, Vatinoso, The Great One,

Amun!

Morfy

[Lolleedee]

I've read all the response and everyone made excellent points.  Even though I am not bothered by the karma system I can see how it could be problem for some members...and because I want this place to, as best as it can, be a comfortable, welcoming place for all, I think we should just do away with the karma thing completely.

If a member has a problem with someone's post or position, then I feel it should be addressed out in the open, in a way that is respectful to ALL parties involved.  Hiding behind "anonymous negative karma" to psycologically "jab" another member is cruel.  I have to agree with Nark here that many (though not all by any means) use the negative rep as a "personal attack or tear-down".

If we want to have an atmosphere of loving acceptance and respect (which includes handling disagreements like adultss instead of whiney, spoiled, entitled children!) then, after considering all points of view, I (and I only speak for myself here) think we should just remove the karma system.  That way everything , positive and negative will be handled in the open....and isn't that what we all wanted from another related site some of us had in common?  Transparency should not only be financial, but should include ALL workings of the board.

[Jega]

I feel like I'm such a safe place i'm wrapped in a blanket.

[Chip]

I simply deduct the negative karma from the positive.

never will everybody agree on some point.

lets see what can be done here.

[Narkotikon (OP)]

I have no say in how this whole thing plays out.

I like and agree with most of what you're saying Zoops.  I especially like the part about working off negative points by good deeds / positive points.

But I have to disagree with the quoted comment.  I think you, like everyone else, does have a say in how this all plays out.  This is a democratic board, and all members' concerns and opinions are taken into account.  That will be even more apparent when the voting system is implemented.  And even now, through discussion, we're all deciding what the best option is.  Your voice DOES matter.  Never feel as though it doesn't!   

@ Morphy:  LOL.  I love the Christian overtones to your reply.  Great mocking!   

@ Lolleedee: I also agree with your points.  I have absolutely no problem with all karma / rep being disabled.  I'd also be happy with just the negative rep option being disabled.  Or also the ability to disable the system on a case-by-case basis.  I actually like the last option the best.  It allows those members who want to participate to be able to, and it allows those who don't to not.  I'm guessing those who opt in don't have as much of a problem with negative rep, or none at all.  Chipper is working on this, so it should be done within the next week or two I'm guessing.

Chipper's correct.  He set up the current system to subtract negative points from the positive.  It's just that the current setup doesn't display the total prominently. 

[Zoops]

Whaa?

Deducting the negative from the positive points? How the hell do you expect any of our dearly stoned forum readers to appreciate the duality of man's true nature? Someone who has a shitload of positive points, and yet at the same time also has a assload of negative points would be a perfect illustration. Of course this person doesn't exist at present but you can imagine. They would come out as close to zero, despite many people having all sorts of strong feelings about them, both positive and negative.

[neighbor]

although, it does serve a bit of a purpose,

im torn between the neg rep system, but Im slightly on the 'do away with it' side.

aint no need for it, ultimately

[Opi-ette]

I'm for doing away with it. When I first joined and saw the feature, I had a bad feeling about it.

Nark I don't think that you should be giving out positive or negative rep if you are choosing to not participate in it yourself. If you are going to be using features that the rest of us don't have access to, it doesn't seem right to dole out points.

[NZniceguy]

I liked the "other" rep system as you could see who its from and the reason for it. If I were to get neg rep here then how would I know what I had done to upset anyone?

[Narkotikon (OP)]

Nark I don't think that you should be giving out positive or negative rep if you are choosing to not participate in it yourself. If you are going to be using features that the rest of us don't have access to, it doesn't seem right to dole out points.

That's fair.  I promise not to give out rep, positive or negative, until this gets resolved permanently.

While I think me not giving out rep when I'm not participating doesn't apply to positive rep, it does to negative.  It would be okay for me to give a positive"gift" while not being comfortable receiving one, but that doesn't apply to negative "gifts" / points.  If I'm not willing to receive negative points, it shouldn't be okay for me to give them out.  I agree.

To keep peace, I won't give out positive or negative points until this gets resolved.