Disapprove feedback function

[JTrader]

Ebay has taken a notice of T2W's new policies:

BBC NEWS | Business | EBay to ban negative seller views

Yes i've bought 3 items that i didn't leave + feedback for, 2 required negative feedback, 1 required a neutral (which i should have given as a negative). In each case the seller didn't leave feedback for me. They did post a comment below my none positive feedback, basically making a **** poor excuse though.

 

[JTrader]

Approve feedback function

I've probably overused this to be fair - call it being trigger happy!.....Given it to people without consideration of whether i've ever got any back from that member etc. Not that its a competition, but from now on have decided that i will only consider giving it to those who give it back! Those who never return it, won't be getting more from me. No sir!

 

[trendie]

I've probably overused this to be fair - call it being trigger happy!.....Given it to people without consideration of whether i've ever got any back from that member etc. Not that its a competition, but from now on have decided that i will only consider giving it to those who give it back! Those who never return it, won't be getting more from me. No sir!

if an incredibly experienced trader arrives, with considerable expertise, that persons knowledge/ability would be different (more) than yours, so you would benefit more than they would benefit from your insights.
Logically, they should receive more hits than you would get back.

Otherwise, you're only patting on the back those who are at the same level as yourself.

Best to approve the "post" rather than the poster, even if you mostly disagree with them in general, as the post/knowledge has an intrinsic value not related to who has posted it, or whether you like them or not.

 

[JTrader]

if an incredibly experienced trader arrives, with considerable expertise, that persons knowledge/ability would be different (more) than yours, so you would benefit more than they would benefit from your insights.
Logically, they should receive more hits than you would get back.

Otherwise, you're only patting on the back those who are at the same level as yourself.

Best to approve the "post" rather than the poster, even if you mostly disagree with them in general, as the post/knowledge has an intrinsic value not related to who has posted it, or whether you like them or not.

Also true.
But for me, a small part of me says - i give this person good rep, they never give any back. Maybe they don't even use the rep function. Perhaps I'll stop "wasting my time" in heaping praise on them, regardless of the merits of what they might say!

I'm sure lots of T2W members operate in this way. The only difference is, I'm saying it publically, this is what i intend to do from now on - cut back on the reps, especially to those tight ***** who never give it back being the open/honest type .
Perhaps this will highlight a flaw/limitation in the rep system usage IF my reported new policy reflects how other T2W members operate, which i suspect it probably does, as I don't consider myself as socially tactical as the majority of the people i meet.:innocent:

 

[tune]

I would approve the above post by Trendie, but because I approved a post by Trendie a couple of days back I can not. This seems daft.

 

[firewalker99]

I would approve the above post by Trendie, but because I approved a post by Trendie a couple of days back I can not. This seems daft.

That's basically because some one else first needs to give Trendie a reputation point, before you can do it again. Perhaps there shouldn't be a restriction here, but I suppose it's in place to restrict possible abuses from members who just go around dealing out reps unlimitedly to one and the same buddy for the fun of it ... which would render the whole concept useless ...

 

[JTrader]

That's basically because some one else first needs to give Trendie a reputation point, before you can do it again. Perhaps there shouldn't be a restriction here, but I suppose it's in place to restrict possible abuses from members who just go around dealing out reps unlimitedly to one and the same buddy for the fun of it ... which would render the whole concept useless ...

I thought it meant that tune has to give rep to 3 or 4 more people b4 giving it to trendie again, if trendie was the last person he gave it to.

While i recognise that this rule can stop you giving good rep to your buddies willy nilly, this rule can also lead to people giving it to people they don't feel that strong a need for, just so that they can approve the REALLY good post that they REALLY feel a strong need to approve. So for me, its swings & roundabouts, for every action there is an equal & opposite reaction etc.

 

[tune]

Just looked it up and I gave a rep to Trendie one back and as it happens that one was the first so I'm not in any danger of messing with the system. There has to be some kind of line I guess. Perhaps a limit of more than one and less than whatever might suffice. I can see the point of restrictions, but the one in use is kinda tight.

 

[firewalker99]

I thought it meant that tune has to give rep to 3 or 4 more people b4 giving it to trendie again, if trendie was the last person he gave it to.

Ah, that could be the case too... I always figured I couldn't distribute points to the same person before they received points from somebody else.

Could be wrong though, perhaps somebody from the high order of the T2W Team can clear the air

 

[$spreader]

Didn't realise you could receive ebay style negatives here,I've only left positives on this forum.How could I tell if someone has disapproved of my post and 'negatived' me?I'm sure I've had plenty......

 

[Lightning McQueen]

Didn't realise you could receive ebay style negatives here,I've only left positives on this forum.How could I tell if someone has disapproved of my post and 'negatived' me?I'm sure I've had plenty......

When you view your reps in UserCP they will be marked with a green blob for positive and red for negative

blue blobs are from members that have no rep giving power as yet, so will not move your reputation score, but they can still leave a nice comment ...or not :-0 :whistling

 

[Sharky]

$spreader, please note only positive rep is allowed now.

 

[$spreader]

Thanks Sharky,totally agree with the removal of negative reps - everyone's entitled to their opinion and if someone disagrees with a post surely they should engage in a discussion.Obviously if someone is constantly rude or obscene it's your prerogative to warn or ban them but to be honest this is a friendly forum with a lot of good advice floating about so you don't see much of that anyway.